Hello, I'm Charles Vaught. Roof Falls are the number one immediate killer of coal miners today. When a roof fall kills a miner, however, it affects not only him or her, but the people who witness the accident and also the people that personally is behind in his or her family. I have Dave Muron with me today.  He'll tell us step by step, minute by minute, what happened, what he thought about, and what the aftermath was like. Dave? It was a Friday morning in October. I just wanted to work that day like any other day, and I was getting dressed, talking to a friend of mine, Rocky, dressed next to me. And I went in to get orders where I was going to go, and that time of year there were a lot of people off because of fishing and hunting and whatever. So just so happened I was a shuttle car operator in Rocky's section that day. And we went into what we call P-12 cut-through. We're cutting line rooms from P-12 to P-14. There already, like line room two and three were already cut through, and we were in line room one. We had about 30 feet to go, so for the whole shift we set 30 feet of colder cut. We went in and we took one lift, got the whole lift out, and we needed to set wooden bars, and we set the wooden bars and then we could advance again. After we had that lift out, we set the wooden bars in normal progression. After we were done with that, checked the cable and realized that the shuttle car wasn't going to make it through for the rest of the lift. So we went back and took lunch, and they added cable to the buggy. And when we were finished, we only had about 8, 10 feet to go, and when we spent time there talking to Rocky and telling him about my experiences, I had that summer vacation. For some reason I remember that day giving him some candy that I had from a European country. And after that, we just headed back to the minor and we took the canvas side out. Once we did that, we cleaned up, set the timber, put the canvas up, and we got ready to start the other side. And Rocky's minor helper had to leave. He had to go out for a meeting. He was on the safety committee. And so the boulders were finished, so we had the boulders come over. And Frank became minor helper at that time. He was the boulder helper. And so he helped Rocky on the minor. And we took the other side out, and the boulder operator came over at that time. So they said, just have me bring up the plank that we needed to support the roof.  So as I went around the corner, they were starting to set plank. And what I didn't know at that time was they went in and they started to set the plank. The furthest from in by, Afri cut through and worked her way out by, which really wasn't normal procedure. But it wasn't very long after I made the corner. I heard a loud bang. And I heard somebody yelling, and so I came back around and he said, Rocky had been pinned. And when I got around there, there was a large piece of rock that fell from the rib towards the center of the entry. And I couldn't see Rocky at that point. But Frank was working right beside him and crawled from underneath the rock. And we were all excited. We didn't know what to do, and we didn't know whether to go call someone or what to do. And I remember climbing up on the miner, and the roof still unsupported. And all I wanted to do was get him out of there.  And I remember being able to look under and seeing his head and his neck was pinned, and it was just, I knew immediately he was already dead. I remember being very shook up and just couldn't think straight. Well, we couldn't get the rock off for some reason. We were trying to jack it and the rock would break. But we were still frantic. We were still thinking maybe there was still a chance, even though I knew he was dead and still see his blue face. And at that time, the roof started chipping again. And we all backed up, and we weren't even thinking about supporting anything. So at that point, we realized that we had to take our time and support the roof when we set extra timber. And we went up and we got a couple different jacks. And in the meantime, one of the mine former came in and everybody was checked around to see what they could do. But at that point, everybody accepted he was dead. And when they went in and finally lifted the rock, I remember being there and his body dropping to the mine floor. And we put him on a stretcher. And I really remember the ride out, I think, more than anything. It was different. There was something different about the mine going out. It was real quiet. And as the rails, when we hit the joints and the rails, remember the blanket shaking and getting outside just everything just seemed different from that point. And when we got outside, we let him in the ambulance, and we're putting my, last thing I remember, just putting my light away for some reason that day. It was just another picture I could see in my mind. And from that point on, working in the mines was totally different. When I went in, I would think about what happened. The peer pressure was totally different. I could, if people wanted to go under on Supported Roof, then I had a little more caution to stand up to him, I guess, and stand up for myself and know that was wrong.  And I remember the funeral home seeing his wife and children there. And that hurt was completely different than anything I've ever experienced. Looking back, what was the reason that these guys were abandoning the regular procedure and working out from under the pins and back toward the pins? I really don't know. It just seemed to me just convenience when I left the minerhead. We were coming close to the last plank that was set, and we didn't bolt those planks. We just set the plank, and they didn't center bolt them or anything. And it was easier for him to operate the miner and to put the plank up. So it was just, I guess, they thought it was easier. Do you know what happened to his wife and children later? No, I don't. But I think one of the things that came up to me that, over time, that we tended to forget about them and really lose contact with them. But I'm probably not sure what went on after that. And you say that after this happened, people were a little more conscious of what they were doing. I think, for me personally, I can say that for everybody generally, for the first two weeks to a month, I think they did. And they had a tendency to forget about it after that. But when you actually see someone you know and just see the life God had brought in a place like that, it just leaves something with you. I just, that day I thought, this isn't a place I want to die.  I don't want to do that.


Hi, this is your host in Bhartya today. We have with us once again David Aviler director of open source supplies change security at the Linux Foundation. David is great to have you back on the show Thank you so very much. It's really great to have you back on the show because the kind of you know Word view if I can use the word you have when it comes to security that's incredible So I want to hear from you if you look at you know modern word You can also compare it with the legacy or you can say traditional IT word How have you seen? Security evolve from those days to today's multi-cloud hybrid cloud cloud center cloud edward I've wide variety of changes have taken place some good some well not so good I think one of the big positive changes is that more and more Developers are taking security seriously and that in my mind is probably the most positive viewpoint because Much of the information about how to develop secure software It exists, but the first step is for someone to say oh, I need to look for that and learn from that I think that's by far and away the most important step and There's more and more information. That's more easily available I'm sure we'll talk about more but for example the open SSF We have a free course on how online course on how to help secure software and So to the you know people are interested the information is becoming more easily accessible There are more tools. I think tools are big help. They're not you know Tools will miss things to you know tools sometimes have false positives in general So tools are not the end of the story, but they are a helpful part of the toolbox Probably the big negative is the increasing monetization of Security attacks it's not like that hasn't happened before but more and more attackers have found that either because they're part of criminal Ecosystems or because they work for or with governments which desire attacks Has basically meant that the attacks have become much harsher more serious And so that's a probably a negative side of the story But I think overall the good news is that yes You know the attackers are upping their game But the good news is that a lot of the defenders have realized that there is a game and they have to play What is the ground reality that you're seeing because we're also seeing a lot of attacks You know every week we see something new attack and these are not mom-and-pop shops with their well established tech companies Who are getting compromised so between something is wrong there and security is not an easy thing It's complicated. So I understand that what is the ground reality that you're seeing that just Developers are putting effort companies wanted, but there are some big gaps as well like many such things the The the reality on the ground is complicated Okay, let me be that's the best way to start. I agree with you that You know if the only goal is hey developers deliver some security I don't even know what that means because security is an emergent attribute. It's not you know You deliver functionality and it has to have these qualities including reliability including security So that that said I actually don't agree that it's always harder That's oh, you know indeed many of the mechanisms for countering attacks are Doing things in ways that once you know how to do them make many things easier You know for example sequel injections are very very well known attack It's it's one of the top attacks against web applications And yet the mechanisms for countering that you know if the solution is hey never make a mistake Boy, that's that's kind of a rough. I don't know how to solve that one but on the other hand there are certain interfaces like prepared statements and similar tech techniques which if they're used they Immediately counter that kind of attack full stop They're also once you learn how to use them in general easier to use easier understand often faster in performance And and so you know for many many these things. It's simply knowing don't do x do y It performs the same task and oh by the way, it's far more secure now. There are areas where it's much harder You know if you're writing in C It's very very challenging to write software that doesn't have undefined behavior things like in particular memory safety problems things like buffer overflows You know that is a challenge Frankly the simplest solution in many many cases is maybe that's not the language you should write new programs in Because 70% of the vulnerabilities are going to have in those kinds of applications on average I mean there's there's are going to be memory safety problems because your language doesn't protect you Maybe you should look at alternatives now some places that doesn't make sense and if you've got existing software You may not have billions of dollars of effort available to just instantly switch and often there are reasons that people use those but in many many cases there are alternatives where you can make a decision to Eliminate entire classes of problems and make them far far less likely to succeed What kind of new patterns you are seeing there which you are like hey, these are the concerns These are the things that we should address. I have to admit There's a whole lot of the everything old is new again. You know people want to talk about oh, it's new It's new like it was the first time we saw this was the 1970s. Wait, this isn't very new All these a lot of these quote new attacks are just you know They're relabelings of old practices that we've seen many many times before Certainly people are taking steps to try to insert malicious code into open-source software for example It's not that that's new per se. There's just more efforts doing this But I mean the good news is in part people are trying to do that because increasingly some of the other methods are becoming less effective and Indeed although everybody's all very very worried about you know, it's malicious insertion into the open source It's widely used right now. That's by far the minority kinds of attacks by far and away The most common kinds of attacks are when people are downloading the wrong software It doesn't matter how good a developer does in their development if you don't don't download their software But someone else's software So this involves things like typosquadding dependency confusion where attackers basically trick people into downloading the wrong things And for that frankly Although there are efforts to try to counter these and the various repos and I think we're going to see more of that The number one most effective technique frankly is a little village vigilance Before you say I'm going to add this new software as a dependency to my system Double check. Is that what you actually wanted and make sure you're getting it from the right repository many many systems by the way Have mechanisms to say it must be from this repo. It must not be from that one And you know double check that mean if you're using this I've used this program before It's really widely used and you do a double check and hey, it just appeared last week That's not the one you want Okay, and and so really just a little bit of double checking Frankly whole lot like when we're countering social engineering attacks Hey, when somebody calls me up and says I won the lottery because and there are prints or they send me You know it sent me some emails I'm probably going to double check that before I just assume Whatever i'm being told on the phone or an email is true and I think the same You know not that you have to be paranoid, but just kind of the the due diligence Let's do a double check of that Eliminates a vast number of these problems right from the get go Security as much as as you were earlier talking about is about tools But it's also about processes and people What kind of cultural changes you are seeing in organizations today that not only encourages You know kind of organization wide because security is everybody's problem Kind of organization wide approach to security, but also kind of build a culture Where it's like either it's developer or operators team that security first is their strategy or policy Uh, well several different things.  Oh, that's new. No, this is old stuff It's a new name for an old practice that you should have already been doing but you work So um at the very very least I think the increasing you mentioned process the increasing embedding of many many tools to analyze the software the dependencies and so on Um at every change and as and doing things like automatic reporting of wait a minute The dependency you've got is old. It's got a known security vulnerability. Here's the push this button to update that component I think is very very much In line with with all that and I think What's you mentioned changes over time? One thing that's changed over time is the decreasing costs of cpus Where you know, unless you're using an incredible amount of cpu, but cpu bandwidth is essentially free And so, you know all the historical efforts of wow We want to minimize the number of tests because it costs, you know, you know, it takes so long to run a test That doesn't make any sense. Oh, oh my goodness, you know, we're going to run a security tool but we'll only run it every once in a great while because um, you know, it you know, we may have to take an incredible long time You can run a lot of these tools, you know, either ever commit or most once a day and as a result Again, you have to be careful here tools don't solve all problems, but tools are absolutely a critical part Of that and there's no reason why not to run the run, you know Traditional tests many other kinds of verification techniques like sass tools, dash tools and so on because they can help detect problems before They get out the door And you know the whole notion of you know having ops completely isolated and never talking to the development never made sense um And so having that feedback of here's what we're seeing out in the real world Here are the problems here are the attacks. Let's update our systems so that you know during development, they're developed for use in real operations Uh based on the lessons learned from real operations is a critical part of it Um, and you could have said that years ago, but it is easier now Uh because of the various things I've just talked about to make that a reality Do you also see that when we do talk about cultural change? A lot of organizations still have the same mindset of hey security is someone else's problem Security is you know, uh an afterthought Or do you think that those cultural changes are already in place? It's just you know That security is you know, it's always a cat and mouse game. So that will always there Uh, let me separate that to a separate question It's here so I can answer them one at a time. Uh, first of all as far as organizations go I think the reality is that organizations are all over You'll see organizations that are essentially doing the same thing. They've been doing for decades with general failures And you know, they'll repeat the failures Uh again, um, I think a lot of organizations have at least made uh lip service And some really have drawn closer towards that If not a full devs dev sec ops at least trying to make sure that the ops and devs are not so disconnected Um, so on the one hand, I think that there is progress towards more connection On the other hand, we have we have the pressure of scale Um, historically you people You know, if you follow the amount of code in systems today, um, you know, the best estimates basically go off the charts Now there's um, now many ways, of course, this is great for the end users because they're getting far more capable functionality than they had before Now, how do we doing that? Well, one of the main ways we're doing that now is by dividing up the work Um, and in particular using a vast amount of open source offer components Um, you know, uh, the latest numbers I have is anywhere from 78 to 90 percent on average of all the code in a system It's actually open source offer components. That's for the and that includes the proprietary systems You know, when you open them up, it's almost all open source components. That's a good thing. That's enabled things to scale um, the the side effect however, though is that we're far more dependent on far more software um, and that can be more of a challenge to uh, secure and Because it's much more efficient for different organizations to specialize on this component versus that component Once again, they may not be aware of how it's being used in operations because in fact They are they're in charge of building this narrow component Which is brought in by a bigger component, which is brought you'll brought a bigger component and suddenly you have many many many tiers and so um, this has been helpful in terms of it enables the scale and capability of systems that we see today The challenge is reporting back to these to the developers of those individual components Hey, wait a minute. You're using situations. You may not be aware of Here's some feedback The solution to meet my mind by the way is increasing feedback from the developer and operations Back to the those that they're bringing in as supply. I do see a little bit of that. I think we need more of that Because I don't think we're going to go to you know, one organization builds all the software. That's just not a sensible approach And so you need to have different organizations interacting And that's why by the way out the open source security foundation, which I support I'm supporting with you We're very much focused on helping various open source software projects, which know that they are important But not necessarily knowing exactly what they're being used Helping them up their game get information look for vulnerabilities fix them ahead of time So that they're not um, so that there are far fewer problems out in operations What advice you have for organizations to improve Their security posture and once again, I'll throw two questions as you Bundle together one would be just to improve their security posture Which actually we touched upon a lot in this discussion today But second as the open short adoption is growing as you're talking earlier also So that they also become open source cities and not necessarily not everybody has resources to contribute back to open source But at least they can do a bit minimum so that they can help You know improve the code that they're also using in their products and services Sure. I love those questions. I'm I'm looking forward to trying to answer them. So, uh, first of all, how do I you know How do I develop more secure software? There's no grand mystery Unfortunately, the biggest problem I view is that most software developers have never been told how to develop secure software I don't know why we should expect anything different. What I tell people is we get more secure software than we deserve Because of that this problem. So how do we fix that? Uh step one education if you're if you're developing software Go take a course and how to develop secure software with the open ssf We've got a free course takes about two days online to go through Um, and uh, it'll tell you a whole lot about the basics about how to do that tooling Get tools into your pipeline get them to look for vulnerabilities Get tests, uh, you know, so that you know when you know to make sure that the software is doing what's supposed to do You know automated tests automated tests if you're depending on manual testing to tell you anything about your software You're already in trouble. You're already getting left behind that that's this does not and more generally if you're going to depend on Software use package managers, which are the way of automatically managing your dependencies um When you bring in new dependencies double check before you bring in something there's probably options Check and see there's uh open ssf has a guide on how to evaluate uh software before you bring it in um, take a quick check because that can turn out to avoid some problems like typo squatting as well as just Encourage you to move towards the software that's more likely to be fit for purpose more secure um, okay And so there's there's a whole lot to unpack there, but at least I think that gets it gets you going a little bit there And you know what um, I think to me this may seem strange, but self-interest can be a really helpful guiding principle here um If you were building let me let me give an analogy because maybe this will help if you are building a car And you just buy random engines and random other parts and hope for the best from your suppliers You're probably not going to produce a good product Even if you don't build all the parts you are probably going to try to figure out one of the most important components And the suppliers of those and I'm going to go back and work with them Because it is in my interest to make sure that the components i'm bringing in Are really going to work in my system and that doesn't mean they have to do everything exactly just for yours Your purpose but more than likely they can make changes that will be better not just for you But for everyone else and this gets us actually back to the question you asked earlier about how do we feedback Operational information to organizations outside yourself and the answer is really communication But I'm including communication in a very broad way that can include anything like hey, I'm using in this way Here's a bug. I see here's the bug all the way to I'm going to sit down and collaborate and work with you because What you have is is mostly great But I need some additional capabilities or I need to have a security review to make sure that's fit for my purpose The OpenSSF has already funded a number of for example security evaluations Where we go out and look at the software and look for vulnerabilities and get them fixed And organizations can do the same for the components that they most depend on And if you say man, I bet there's lots of other organizations who do that great They're you know Sounds like a good opportunity for collaboration and actually that's what the OpenSSF is for is to enable organizations to work together To figure out hey, wait a minute. These are the same kinds of problems We're seeing over and over again instead of funding something once won't we pool our resources be it people or dollars or euros or anything else and Pull it together to make things better Not just for themselves and not just for their customers, but also for the world more generally I would love to have you back on the show. Thank you. Thank you very very much


The first OER I ever made or used was an OER that I created with students called the open anthology of early American literature. I was really lucky to be in a field where almost everything was public domain texts. So we made this anthology. It was digital and it was kind of okay. You know it didn't have a lot of things that the paid version had in terms of like footnotes and notes and so students weren't actually loving it. And that kind of changed when I layered in hypothesis to this open textbook that we had made. And I put in the chat the sort of origin stories of this project and you can take a look at it a little. But hypothesis was new when I was doing this. And somehow, you know they were so new and so small that they would like talk to me every day about like how's it going over in your class. And they would watch, they would watch my class like do a kind of beta thing. So it was this really cool thing because I was not a techie so I really felt like they were watching actual students to develop the tool which was cool. And then my students love the idea of like being in on the ground floor or something but the textbook itself really took off when I put hypothesis in there. And you can see from the little write up I shared that I think hypothesis was the reason that this we are became a living organic place, rather than a replacement for a textbook it was replacing the heat anthology. And that was kind of a game changer for me so in some ways I think hypothesis is what pulled me into open pedagogy. This idea that using open resources, allowed for my students to have a different relationship to learning materials than they had before. So that was like, pretty transformative for me and again at the time I was new and open I was new and everything. I was just, I felt really lucky to be hooked in with a community of people that was discovering the potential of using an open license, making no we are using social annotation, all this kind of one posse and I think it's hard for me to separate out right now the we are from the social annotations so all the stuff I've done since, mostly through rebus has had hypothesis, you know, plugged into it and I think it's been, it's been pretty cool.


This is lecture seven of social psychology in this lecture. We'll be talking about attitudes and In the first part of this lecture, we're gonna talk about the nature of attitudes. So what are attitudes? Let me interstate by this by by showing you some pictures here. You see an iPhone This is coriander Well, this guy. I think you are all you all know him Vladimir Putin and these are very famous French fries So my guess is that at least with one of these pictures or maybe even with all of these pictures You immediately have this sense of like or dislike. You immediately know what how we feel about it Whether you like the iPhone. Yes or no, whether you like the taste of coriander. Yes or no Well, our feelings about this guy here in the picture are I think pretty straightforward And whether you like going to McDonald's or not So these are all objects objects that we can feel a certain way towards and the way we feel towards these objects are called attitudes so attitudes are basically our General evaluation of an attitude object and an attitude object can be anything it can be a person it can be An object it can be an idea or even a theory So you can also have an attitude towards social psychology towards the lectures that I'm giving maybe you like them maybe you don't like them so you can have an attitude towards them and Attitude is actually a topic that we've been discussing in previous lectures, but I never really explicitly mentioned the word attitude So we discussed attitudes in the previous lecture when we talked about cognitive dissonance So if we have a certain attitudes towards for example climate change and our behaviors are not in line with that Then we experienced the feeling of dissonance. So and also we talked about the self, right? We talked about how we feel about ourselves our general evaluation of ourselves Which is captured in our self-esteem and our self-esteem is actually also an attitude It's the attitude we have towards us towards the the person you see when you look in the mirror so attitudes are studied a lot and and they are studied because We as psychologists, but also as laypeople we have an idea that our attitudes are a strong predictor of our behavior So if we know how people feel about something We also know how they will behave and this is a topic that we'll be talking a lot about in this lecture But first let me dive into the theory of attitudes a little bit more So our attitudes are a general evaluation, but they consist of several parts There's a part of cognition and the cognitive part of an attitude basically means what knowledge do you have about it? How much do you know about something? But we also have feelings so we also have an effective response and that is do you feel positive or negative about it? And finally we also have behavior So do you tend to approach this object or person or do you tend to avoid it? So these are the three different components as you wish of attitudes And it's also important to know that for some attitudes, they are more cognitively based So for example a certain type of vacuum cleaner You may not have very strong feelings towards your vacuum cleaner, but you know it when you buy one You know something about it So you can start looking up information and read reviews on a vacuum cleaner But this is a vacuum cleaner is pretty much a cognitive base. So it's a cognitive based condition But some topics are more affect based they give you very strong feelings strong feelings of like or dislikes And that's probably for the pictures I showed you earlier on probably immediately have this sense of oh I like this or I don't like it or I hate it even So some topics are more affect based and if it's more affect based it often has to do something with our morals So for example, if we see Vladimir Putin, we may have a very strong feeling of dislike Maybe even hate because we really this descent, you know, we feel like what he's doing Or and how he's treating people and how he's treating his own people in Russia and people from Ukraine We have very strong feelings about that. So this is a more an affect based cognition And then finally some attitudes are more behavioral based. We don't really think about it We just do it for example hiking you might be hiking quite a lot and this is behavior You show maybe you don't really think about doing this is just something you do So this is more a behaviorally based attitude But all attitudes consist of these three different components a question that you may have is where do these attitudes come from? Well, there's actually several different sources of our attitudes and I will discuss them with you now So first of all genetics. That's an interesting first First component of where attitudes come from. So there's some evidence that that How we feel about some things our attitudes are partly genetic and this has been shown for example in research With identical twins that don't grow up together. So they they they live in separate houses. They don't interact, but they still Have some sort of similarity in the things they like and dislike So these two girls well, they know each other clearly But if they won't wouldn't be able to grow up together They grow up in different households.  So for example, if you are a very enthusiastic person you're very Extroverted then you might also really like to go out and you have a very positive attitudes towards going out and visiting bars Well, if you're more introverted you may dislike this So part of how what our attitudes are is captured in our genes but secondly Maybe even more importantly Social learning so we talked in the very first lecture about what social learning is social learning is the many ways in which We learn about ourselves in the world around us through our role models and Mostly our parents are very strong strong role models for us and the attitudes that your parents have they pass it on to you That's really likely So if your parents are for example religious and you have a very strong attitudes towards a positive attitudes towards going to church There's quite a high likelihood that you will also grow up to be a religious person yourself or and you see this Here very clearly so if your parents are for example farmers and even feel a very strong way about certain Decisions made by politicians, then they also pass this on to their children Basically putting their attitudes up on their children So we learn our own attitudes from watching our role models and our role models are Instructing us about their own attitudes, but it's also more subtle So it's not only if your parents tell you to go to church For example that you develop an attitude towards going to church But it's also by watching your parents and this is also called modeling So for example, if you have a mother that is really fun of yoga and does this yoga exercises every day Even if she's not putting it on you So even if she's not stimulating you to do yoga just by watching her there's quite a high likelihood that you will also End up being enthusiastic about doing yoga yourself Because we learn through imitation we watch our caregivers and we do what they do We copy them. That's basically how our children are raised more so than by the explicit instructions We give them is more by showing them behavior that they will later on copy. So genetic social learning But there's also that's this is all basically captured in either your genes or or what your parents put on you But also your own experience apart from your parents also have an impact on your attitude So your own behavior for example, this is something we discussed in lecture five when we talked about self perception theory You remember so if we are uncertain about what we feel about something we can look at our own behavior and Then estimate how we feel about something. So this is primarily the case for more behaviorally based attitudes So if someone asks you how do you feel about hiking you think about the times that you went out and went hiking? I think oh, I really enjoyed being in nature, and I really enjoyed it. Yeah, and I guess I do it quite often Yes, I like hiking so our own behavior gives us information about our attitude something we saw before But also our experiences When interacting with with certain attitude objects can give us can sort of form and shape our attitudes and this can happen in multiple ways first of all through classical conditioning and With classical condition and we've referred to if something happens something that is in itself neutral But it's paired with an emotional response Then after a while you can start to develop an attitudes towards this neutral stimulus as well So let me illustrate this with with an example if you go to the dentist There's oftentimes this very specific smell. It smells really clean, but also like maybe a bit artificial But there's a very pronounced smell when you go to the dentist I think you can all you know remember this this smell right the smell in and of itself is maybe not really bad It can be you know interpreted as a neutral smell in the beginning But after a while you start linking this this smell the smell of cleaning products dental cleaning products with The treatments that you get while you are at the dentist and sometimes these treatments are of course not pleasurable at all Oftentimes they are even hurting you and after a while just smelling this very specific dental product smell Can immediately give you this this negative feeling because of the experience of classical conditioning So the neutral stimulus the smell the dentist is sort of combined With the experience of going to the dentist and after a while you start hating the smell Even if you don't have to go to the dentist yourself So this is learning through classical conditioning The second way of learning is through operant conditioning and operant conditioning is if you perform a certain behavior Which is later either rewarded or punished then you learn that some behavior is Behavior that is positive and that you should show and other behavior is behavior that is negative So there's some sort of reinforcement later by a third party often times again your parents or your teachers that for example reward you or punish you while you show certain behavior and so for example for this kid he knows that if he Goes to visit his family all day, which is maybe sometimes a bit boring for him But then he comes home and he gets this this delicious lollipop because he's been such a good boy So this is rewarding a kid for showing certain behavior Then he will develop a more positive attitudes towards this behavior So we learned through classical conditioning and operant conditioning But there's a third way this that is actually not in the book chapter But I think it's important for you to know and that is that we also learned through mere exposure Merely being exposed to a certain attitude object changes our attitudes and I will show you this by the By explaining the following study that has been done on the mere exposure effect In this study participants came into the lab They were placed behind a computer screen and they were watching neutral objects that are displayed in the screen These objects didn't mean anything for them These were either for example Chinese characters and these these participants were not Chinese So they couldn't breathe these characters or maybe Turkish words So some things that they were meaningless to them and some of the words or characters were displayed Many times and others were displayed just once or twice So the frequency with which these objects were displayed differed Some were displayed a lot and others not and then at the very end of the study each of these objects were shown on the screen one by one And participants were asked to rate What they felt about the object and again all these objects look pretty much the same They were really neutral so maybe you wouldn't expect that to be any difference at all But there was a difference and what this research showed was for the objects that were shown many times They were rated more positively than the objects that were rated that were showed less Frequently so the more we see something the more we start liking it and this is what the mere exposure effect Means it means that we are liking for something increases to the extent that we have seen it more often And this is also something we can experience in in daily life for example Let's take me I am a huge Beyonce fan and she just when she drops a new album every time I listen to it and the very first time I listen to the album. I'm oftentimes not super excited to begin with I'm like I listen to the album. I'm like, okay. Yeah, this is okay I like this song maybe not really like this song and then I repeat it because I'm a fan So I just continue listening to the album and after a few times. I'm like, yeah, I really like this I like it more and then after repeating it over and over again. I'm like, this is my favorite album This is the best album she ever, you know brought out So the more often you listen to a song the more you start liking it And I think this is also something that we can Recognize ourselves when you hear a song on the radio for the first time Then you may not have very strong feelings towards it But if you if it's repeated then you start liking it more and more up to a certain point Up to a certain point because if it's too much like I have with this wonderful song happy by Pharrell Williams I really like the song but not anymore. It's been too much shown. This is called overexposure So in the beginning there's sort of a steep line that we start liking something more up to a certain point If it's overexposed then we start liking it less again Something to keep in mind by the way for the the mere exposure effect It only works if it's either the object is neutral or it is already a little bit positive to begin with So for example with the Chinese characters or the Turkish words, they were completely neutral You didn't feel any way about it. You don't know what they mean for the Beyonce album I'm already a little bit positive because I'm a Beyonce fan But if you immediately dislike something the mere exposure effect doesn't work Okay, so if you immediately hate a song repeating it probably won't really help you liking it more Okay, so these are the three different ways in which we learn through experience And now we know we have a sense of how our attitudes are developed But now we want to measure them and as psychologists as scientists We of course are very interested in measuring people's attitudes and we can do so in multiple ways first of all We can measure explicit attitudes through questionnaires and let me first explain to you what an explicit attitude is an explicit attitude Means an attitude that we consciously endorse and can easily report. So something that I'm very Articulated on I know how I feel about it. I can explain it and I can also report it So if I want to know how a person feels about something I can simply ask them straightforward, right? So for example, I could ask you To agree or disagree with the following statements I think Mark Rutter is a good prime minister then you can either Strongly disagree you can say undecided. I don't know or you can strongly agree So you can report your explicit attitudes on a questionnaire like this But interestingly, we don't only have explicit attitudes We also have implicit attitudes and implicit attitudes are attitudes that exists pretty much outside of awareness We don't really know it we feel it in our body But we don't really we had don't we cannot consciously report this and we'll be talking more about implicit attitudes later But for now just keep in mind that you have to measure them differently So implicit attitudes cannot be measured through questionnaires because they're not conscious They are subconscious is sort of a general more effect based experience and we can measure them for example by using Physiological measures like measuring skin conductance and which you can do then for example if I want to know some someone's implicit attitudes about Spiders what I can then do is then hook them up on this skin conductance measurements And I can show them spiders and I can see how their body responds So if a person really dislikes spiders and have this tendency to avoid spiders or have spider phobia Then we can we know that their palms will get more sweaty And this is an indication of having a strong attitudes implicit attitudes towards something an attitude of dislike in this case So we can use physiological measures or we can use an implicit association test and this is something I'll come back to in lecture 13, but just keep in mind that this is a way of measuring implicit attitudes So when we talk about attitudes, it's important to keep in mind that not all attitudes are as important to us So this depends on how accessible this attitude is and this is again something we talked about before for some topics or some You know Attitude objects are not so important to you So you don't feel a very strong way about it other topics We have very strong feelings about and research are also often interested in knowing how Accessible a certain attitude is so how strongly people feel about it So for example, if I want to know how strongly people feel about our prime minister over here Then you can say Margaret is a good prime minister and then you can you know you you're interested in the answer But you're also interested in how quickly people respond. So You see this in the screen. You have to respond as quickly as possible by saying yes or no So we measure the reaction times and we know if a person says for example, yes in half a second That's an indication for a stronger attitude than if a person says yes in let's say two seconds So this the faster person Response the stronger this person feels about a certain attitude object in this case mark rhythm So and of course the idea is if we have a stronger a feeling about something or someone This will be a better indication of our behavior and this is also the case So for the people that really feel very strongly about mark Rütte have a very strong association That will probably influence their voting behavior And if we have a weaker attitudes then our attitude is oftentimes not a very good predictor of our behavior So in the next part of this lecture, we'll be talking more about the complicated relationship between our attitudes and our behavior That's it for now


From Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. Covering VMworld 2018. Brought to you by VMware and its ecosystem partners. Okay, welcome back everyone. This is theCUBE's live coverage in Las Vegas, Nevada in the broadcast booth in the VM Village at VMworld 2018. This is theCUBE's ninth year covering VMworld. Nine years theCUBE has been in existence. We've been at VMworld every consecutive year. It gets better and better. I'm John Furrier, your host with my co-host Dave Vellante. Our next guest is CUBE alum, that bass guy here, who's the general manager of Edge IOC product line within VMware and also the CIO for VMware. Welcome to theCUBE. Because you didn't have enough to do. Like I told you, my assistant always- Keep getting promoted, it's all these CUBE videos. I don't know if it's promoted. I'd be getting more jobs and my assistant says, I should stop smiling because if you smile, people think you're not busy. They give you more to do. So you're a CIO, not that that's a hard enough job and full time. You're also running the product line profit loss for Dell Technologies IoT Edge. That's right. Across all Dell portfolios. That's right. All right, so what's the update? Why is that a product line now? We saw a little bit of taste of Edge, not that impressive. That was clear and transparent. We're still connecting stuff. Intelligence is coming later. Is that where we're at? I think the Edge wave is coming. That people are starting to see when is that wave coming? Right now we're just hooking up things, right? We had a lot of sensors. At home you've done this. You hooked up your Ring computer, Nest, whatever. But these things are just sending you information. It's not doing intelligent things. The processing is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger at the Edge, and in an enterprise especially. And so it's a good time to be thoughtful about how do you bring all the things that VMware does and Dell does and give a managed appliance at the Edge, if you will. And it's also good for the CIOs and IT guys to get ahead of it. Because you know it's coming. This place is going to have, it's already have thousands of sensors and gateways. How do you manage it? How do you update it? How do you run it? So it's an interesting time to look at it across the board. The power of Dell and VMware is we can do it both ways. You can give it better together. So hardware, software, everything, put it up there. Or some people choose to assemble it themselves. I want to buy my own hardware vendor. I want to get the VMware software. You can choose it that way as well. So we're going to give you a simple way to say buy an appliance, completely manage from us, manage all the Edge, set up an architecture in place, so I can get ready for the Edge computing revolution.  Now what was that like? What did you learn? Did you become a supply chain guru? Were you doing digital transformation? What was going on there? It's a Jekyll and Hyde kind of a feeling because it's two different companies, even though people believe it's within the family, VMware is independent as you know. And VMware has got all software, hardly any supply chain, no manufacturing. Dell is the other side, 120,000 people, you know, a real enterprise company with supply chain, et cetera. So it's two different jobs, two different audit committees. And each audit committee would ask me if I was spending 100% of my time in their companies. And I had to tell them I'm spending 37.5 hours on your company. And that was the truth, but it is two jobs. It was fun because, you know, you were also dog food to a lot of their stuff, which makes it harder. That's right, not more challenging. That's right. You got to be on top of it. It is. The thing with VMware was we have done the transformation a little earlier. So initially I thought I'll cut and paste that in Dell. That was a dream. But every company is different. Every culture is different. So first six months, I didn't make much progress in Dell. Then I had to get back to basics, the people, process, and then technology. So culture always trumps all of this, right? So you have to say, I don't have good technical people. I don't have interest in technology. We need to hire new people and we need to value people who are technical. And then we did a process change. We created something called the Dell Digital Way, which is, think of it as lean Six Sigma kind of, but for digital, where you train people that this is a new way of operating, et cetera. And surprisingly, the technology was the easier part. I mean, it's a hybrid cloud, mobile computing, AI, IoT. But if you don't have the people, you can do much. And most companies, as you know, have outsourced, off-shared. They've gotten so far away from tech that you had to hire the people. You had to put value. So how are you managing your time now with the P&L, which is a business unit, basically, and CIO, which is pretty much whitewater rapids in and of itself.  So I think the edge IoT job is a lot more listening job. So I'm spending a lot more time with fellow CIOs and CTOs and CISOs and the OT guys, the manufacturing guys, on what would make sense at the IoT, what would make sense at the edge. So it's a lot of listening, getting the strategy, rather than say, here's a solution. In the CIO job, it is both blocking and stackling. And also strategically, I want to show that edge computing and IoT works in Dell and VMware. Otherwise, you don't have credibility. So we're putting a lot of use cases in production. The third thing, the nice thing about it is I already spent a lot of time with customers as a CIO for VMware and for Dell. So in fact, we are hosting a session tomorrow with all the CIO friends. They're just interested more in what is really happening in Edge, what is happening in IoT, it's a nice crossover. So that's the logic, is you're going to, sort of, as John said before, dog food it, inside, and then bring a solution to market eventually. That's right. Make some mistakes, fail fast. I would rather make mistakes on our end, the customer. The good news for us is with the portfolio projects you have, and you saw the announcements, we got a ton of stuff to offer on the Edge and on IoT. But we don't want to just overpower the customers. There was a lot of announcement even today that is mind-boggling to people. So you need to package it into a solution to say, if you do building automation, this is what you do. If you do robotics, this is what you do. If you do smart cities, this is what you do. So package that into a solution that's meaningful. Yes, talk about the IQ levels of the current enterprises around IoT and Edge, because certainly the Edge is not the amount of handle it, they haven't had enough reps in the game yet. So where are they, are they just kicking the toe on the water, are they actually deploying? Because you have OT, which is more mature market, sensors, et cetera, we know that. VMware's a software company, and most hardware companies aren't becoming software companies. IoT has to be rendered into software, yet you got the OT. How is the CIOs and the CXOs dealing with this? Where are they level-wise, progress-wise, early? I think 50-50, I mean, the enterprise IT, as you know, is a little slow to the game, the consumer gets ahead of it, and it is going to come through OT and other kind of places. So we did that in mobile, right? I mean, the enterprise IT didn't jump on mobile. People started bringing their own phones, and they started doing things with their blackberries and iPhones, and then we had to come up with the MDM and other ways to get in. I'm hoping that's not the case in the IoT and Edge, but it's likely. So I'm telling my counterparts, to bring their sensors to the table, kind of thing. This could have thousands of sensors and gateways for all you know, and the IT guys may not know about it. So the next hacking you're going to get is through gateways here, not necessarily through a phishing attack. So unfortunately, the skeptic in me says that that's how people are going to come screaming into it, but the evangelist in me is saying, get ahead of it. There's an opportunity for you to look like a hero, and the security side certainly is a big one. Yeah, don't wait for it. Now, look at the number of devices that's been put on. And it's not being done by IT. They're going to have open passwords. They're going to have different versions. It's not going to be upgraded, updated, patched up. So I'm trying to educate, you know, fellow CIOs, there's a good 30, 40% of the people who are ahead. There's a good 70% who are going to wait till it happens. So what about your ecosystem? You talk about that, what you're doing specifically. I mean, you got AWS, there's an edge play there. You got tons of Dell stuff, as you said. And you got a sort of ecosystem of both traditional partners slash competitors of Dell.  So what are you doing to put together that ecosystem? So actually the traditional IT partnership, you know, you're going to rely on its strength with VMware. I mean, the same thing on how do you connect private cloud to the edge? Same VMC software that we released that works with Amazon. So that one works well, and those people know us. When you go to the other side, the OT side, the Honeywells, the Siemens, the GEs, the Johnson Controls, those become important partners. We do not want to claim that we know that industrial control is better than them. We need to establish partners with partnership with them. The interest that comes is when the OT folks get to a stage where there's a lot of information and traffic, then the IT guys come into play. We've been credibility to the IT side. You know, we know CIOs and CISOs well. So when you assure them that this box that is running your factory is really a VMware software running Dell, there's a lot more credibility. So I think there's a partnership. In fact, when I talk last to the industrial vendors, they want us to bring this cloud in a box. They say, we don't understand all these things that we have to put together on how do you manage private cloud, public cloud, et cetera. We expect you to bring that expertise together. So that ecosystem partnership has to be developed.   Those are important. All of a sudden you're looking, oh, it's a computer on wheels, and it's more than an internal combustion engine. So all those folks want partners and they want a partner credible like Dell technology. This is where the partnership of Dell tech, not just VMware, comes in pretty handy. They want a partner end to end, you know. And it's interesting, we had Andy Petrescindern earlier talking about Ares' relationship to VMware and he said, quote on theCUBE, you mean a great testimonial, especially coming from a guy like him. NSX is perfectly positioned with the security model around closest to the app. That allows the decoupling of security teams for the security team here and his networking team. There's no cross-pollination, there's no problem there.  That's why we only talked about this. Exactly, so it's going to start on the OT. So my head of facilities is going to bring a building management solutions.  I wouldn't even know, I would be signing it without knowing it's a computer system. But sooner or later you look and say, that's a massive computer system. What version of Linux does it run? How do I manage it? How do I patch it?  You need a computer on wheels, you need to have it. Yeah, well you heard of the Tesla, I need one. Please tell Michael Dell now that I need a Tesla, both models and then you will. I'll put it a good word for it, Michael. All right, take a step back. And you've got a great reputation as a great leader within VMware and Dell Technologies. Take us through the day and the life of what you do. You say you talk to a lot of customers. You know, how are you organizing your teams? Obviously you've got a very emerging and no doubt relevant edge piece to it. IoT obviously, we know what IoT is, but the edge is coming really fast. 5G, Pat kind of referenced it again, the keynote, telco opportunities massive. He wanted to tease that out further, but there's not enough time it seemed like.  It's going to go up crazy. How are you running the team? What's your management style? Take us through some of the day-to-day life of it. This is what helped me, even managing Dell and VMware, is you need to have an empowered team, but you should empower, but not abdicate. You know, they need to know that you're there. You can't just dump it on them, but they run fairly empowered way. And in IT, you know, my batting average would be 80, right? Because I've done it for a long time. So if you ask me what firewall to pick, I can tell you what network to pick and I'll be 80% correct. So it's almost resisting the temptation to give the answers, let the team come back with a decision. So VMware acted fairly independently, but they need to know you're there to back them up. You know, especially political issues and other things you have to fight. So it's a similar model of empowering the teams. The only thing in IoT is, you got to bring Dell and VMware together. And even though they are family of companies, you know, sometimes it's difficult within the families to raise relationships. Luckily, I worked on both sides. I've been a leadership team member on both sides. So part of my job is to make sure people understand. You get along with everybody. I get along. As I get older, I believe that with a beer, you can solve every problem. All right, so I asked you the same question I asked Andy Peschistine. What is the one enabling technology that you see coming in this new era that's upon us with cloud? That will have the same kind of impact that TCPIP did on networking, which created massive amount of interoperability, created massive internet working boom. It created a ton of value that became what we are today. What's the one thing in the cloud that people? I think I'm going to give two things, sorry, because sometimes we miss the combination when you pick one thing. When you do internet of things, when you're just hooking up the sensors, that's interesting. But when you pick AI and machine learning with it, then it becomes really useful. Right now, we are kind of sensor enabling everything. So the thermostat is telling you what it's doing.  After a while, it's just a lot of false negatives, right?  But if the house comes and tells you there's an FBA most wanted person outside your home, I've already notified FBI, don't go home. This is just for information. That's powerful. That's like magic. So I think the combination of the sensor enabling IoT and AI, I think those two are fabulous. Then you throw a block chain on top of it, whereas you don't have to really govern it. I think those combination of things that we are getting right now is just fascinating. That's where I see gold miners. People are going to IoT, people are going to AI. When you look at a combination, I mean, things cannot be managed with people. Things have to be managed with intelligence. I highlight that point on the IoT if you think about notifications. If all the alarms are coming, it's like a hospital, what do you pay attention to? You got to have some AI. Assisting you to understand what's important in context at the moment. That's right. All these alarms going off. What do you do?  So you got the substrate, which is the IoT and the instrumentation, and then you've got the AI, ML and blockchain layer. That's about automation. What you described was, I don't have to go do anything. It's telling me what to do or what not to do.  I want things to do, things for me. I don't want things to tell me what to do. I don't want anything to tell me what to do. I want the things to do the job, right? We're not there yet. We're installing all these software and gadgets. It is telling me too many things to do.  I don't want to even know how. Just say yes. Push this button, right? Push this button, yes, right? I think you're getting to a stage where these things can be intelligently put together, where you can actually do useful things, right? So I believe that the mundane has to be automated and still not being done. I found a better route six minutes faster. Don't even tell me, just go. I'm going to automate the queue. Send us the best guest please, yes. Yeah, I know. I know. Bas, I want to ask you one final question. I know you're tight on time. I want to wrap up, but I've got to get this out of your head is that you talk to a lot of CIOs in this digital transformation journey with the cloud, some things that are going on. You're starting to see visibility in what multi-cloud looks like, what hybrid cloud is. Yeah, it's pretty obvious. Then you've got the edge which you're managing. What is that? What's the top couple of things that are ranked up on the order, the patterns that emerge. Top order conversations you're involved in with CIOs. What are the biggest challenges and opportunities? Most CIOs, the CEOs and the board is asking them about digital transformation. Sometimes they don't even know what that means, but they're asking that question. So the CIOs have to be clever enough to answer, how do you do digital transformation? It's not all about technology, business change, business agility and so on. Unfortunately, the press always says the CIO role is dead. It is true, every year the job is dead because there's a new role that is getting stated. It's supposed to be dead 10 years ago, right? It never dies. It never dies, but you have to reinvent yourself, right? So the next reinvention is you have to be the digital transformation person for the company. So a lot of people we all want to learn on, you know, what does it mean, how do you do it, where do you get the people. You see a lot of reversing of trend, outsourcing, offshoring.  And also, several jobs, there's a chief digital officer, chief information security officer, chief data officer. A CEO doesn't want to have five different people managing information assets. So the role of the CIO is going to evolve even further to be you got to manage the whole thing for me, right? For the new P&L job, what's the one thing that keeps you up at night? I got to make money.  That'll make you business savvy. That's right. There you go, hit it. One of my colleagues, Raghu, said, you know, revenue is very strategic, so I'm very focused on revenue. And also, Raghu, when you learn in the startup business, if you want to have success with this, don't run out of money. That's right. That is my goal. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. Really appreciate it. theCUBE live here at VMworld 2018. I'm John Furrier. Stay with us. Live coverage continues three days. We're in day one. We'll be right back. Stay with us.


The margin of victory in tomorrow's battle could be exactly the distance between the jeeps and the helicopters. Copters don't have to follow road maps. Don't need bridges to cross rivers. But do move troops more swiftly than ground carriers. In an age of nuclear firepower, mobility is a good defense, but the best defense is a good offense. It is both hard to hit and hard hitting. Tomorrow's battle lines will be fluid. Tomorrow's battlefield a crazy quilt of friendly and enemy forces. It can concentrate, hit, dig in, punch men and equipment into the breakthrough will be the irresistible force. To provide the means for such a force is the goal of Army Aviation. The United States Army presents the Big Picture, an official report produced for the armed forces and the American people. Now to show you part of the Big Picture, here is Sergeant Stuart Queen. Army Aviation is not a branch, not as it once was a corps, not a specialized unit, nor is it simply an adjunct to the artillerymen. Certainly it is not a second air force. Army Aviation is a way, a means. If you ask what is its purpose, then you must also ask what is the mission of the Army. The purpose of Army Aviation is to help the Army achieve its mission. Army Aviation is a way of moving men and removing casualties, of funneling supplies forward and information back, of bypassing enemy troops and overpassing adverse terrain. In short, it represents an entirely new, still evolving concept of fighting. The concept's goal is full exploitation of the sheath of air closest to the ground, the rapid unhampered delivery of an attacking or reconnaissance force concealed in the wrinkles of earth or behind the nearby horizon. This film speaks for the men and aircraft chosen to do this job. The men are the highly skilled Army Aviators. The aircraft are the specialized vehicles designed to accomplish the Army Aviation mission. The story of modern Army Aviation begins at Fort Rucker, Alabama, the program's training center. The most significant thing about Fort Rucker is how it has changed. A few years ago, it was an abandoned infantry post, a remnant of World War II. Today it is one of the most rapidly expanding units in the nation. A new community of homes has appeared in the sunny Alabama countryside, next to a new complex of airfields. A unique family of aircraft uses the airstrips. Each one is a specialist. Each a winner of the stiffest competition, finally selected after years of research, development and testing. The Army now has more than 5,000 fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft. Instead of referring to the helicopters as a family, we might call them tribes. For their names are Sue, Iroquois, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Shawnee, Mojave. In some ways, all these copters and airplanes are alike. Since they must operate right at the front lines, not from some asphalt base, they all possess the two Rs of Army Aviation. They are rugged and reliable. The World War II observation plane was the forerunner of today's Army Aviation. The aerial observers spotted the target and told the artillery. The bird dog is a direct descendant of that World War II plane with the same mission, fire-controlled. But the L-19, L for liaison, can do other jobs such as dropping supplies. The bird dog will settle for and on the minimum landing patch. This road might give your teeth a jarring if you went over it on a bicycle or jeep. The L-19 lands in the length of two football fields. Very important when you must use areas not of your own choosing. The speedy Mohawk is much bigger than the bird dog but doesn't need much more space to operate. This is the new AO-1, Airplane Observation 1. The bug-eye canopy permits a good look all around. The lines of sight of pilot and observer can meet just 36 feet below the plane. The wide-ranging Mohawk can see with all weather radar and bring back film from cameras in the fuselage. If the Army has to move small teams a great distance within the battle area, it turns to the L-20 Beaver. An hour from now, this unit can be on a job a hundred miles away. The ruggedness of the versatile craft can be testified to by bush pilots who fly at the year-round in Alaska and Northern Canada. Ever-increasing demands for quick movement mean that more and more men of a ground army must move through the air. The beaver gives the Army dependable transportation. The otter is the beaver's big brother. It may not look like a big plane but eight troops with all their combat gear can fit into the otter's belly. The otter is small and rugged enough to fit into tight, uninviting fields. Note the type of land from which these otters are taking off. The latest word in Army transport is caribou. The AC-1C Porcarco carries three tons of materiel or 32 troops. Whether moving troops forward or litter patients rearward, the caribou is a key to the Army's quest for large-scale movement by air. Although this is the Army's biggest plane, it takes off in less space than the otter. The appearance of the caribou in the air announces a new era for the Army in moving masses of men within the battle area. When a commander and his staff must get places in a hurry, they use the Seminole. In addition to fast transport service, the L-23 is excellent for inspecting combat areas and installations or observing troop columns. This commander will be sitting down to problems that have posed a hundred miles away in the time it takes a commuter to get to work. But it's the helicopter that gives Army aviation its distinctive character. The chopper, as Army aviators call it, can get in and out of places inaccessible to airplanes. Invaluable for reconnaissance and a host of other duties as military men began to realize during the Korean War. An observation vehicle such as the H-23 Raven can hover, change directions quickly, fly extremely low, take full advantage of terrain. To see and not be seen is an ever more difficult military mission, but with the low-flying copter, it can be accomplished. The Su is the other half of the Army's light copter twins. The Su served in the Korean War and earned a reputation as a lifesaver. A major element in mortality rates all through history was that badly wounded soldiers often could not be removed from the battlefield in time. That changed with the helicopter. 20,000 casualties were evacuated by copter during the Korean War, and the ratio of wounded who lived jumped dramatically from that of World War II. Pilots reassure an injured man for a flight in the litter of a helicopter is a strange experience. If need be, the Army aviator will give medical first aid on the spot, one of many specialties he must know. The Su can carry one litter on each landing skid and a walking wounded in the co-pilot's seat. Army copters have proved to civilians in peacetime emergencies as well as soldiers in combat. When you're in a tight spot, there is a way out. Sailing into our picture now, the Iroquois, the Army's first helicopter powered by gas turbine engine. Designated H-U-1, H-U for helicopter utility, the Iroquois is a cracker jack of all trades, frequently serving as an air ambulance for the medical service corps. For the casualties, the ride back is the shortest possible. The Iroquois, sometimes called an aerial hot rod, has just set seven international speed and climb records. This modern helicopter actually climbs faster than some World War II fighter planes. The Chickasaw can pick up and go with 10 soldiers, whisking this artillery survey team to a new fire control point. As copters get bigger, they need longer rotor blades to bite the air. The Chickasaws measure 53 feet. All Army copters have a vertical tail rotor for stability and for turning. All that is except the Shawnee, the only one with two rotors. Those who go by appearances call it the flying banana. Those who know what it does call it the workhorse. Without a copter, it would be virtually impossible to remove this damaged bird dog. But now the plane will fly again another day on its own. When large numbers of troops are involved, the Army relies on the veteran Choctaw. Each Choctaw carries 18 combat-equipped soldiers. H-34 also can ferry a jeep or howitzer with its sling. Our combat scenes never acted in any war that has been fought. Here is a new capability to thrust battle units into action. The possibilities are limitless. Troops balding ahead to exploit the effects of nuclear weapons. Enforcements leapfrogging in to bolster a surrounded unit. Attackers materializing where the enemy least expects. The giant Mojave acts in concert. This Goliath can disgorge three jeeps or 23 combat troops. The Mojave can move with the fastest helicopters, driven by two engines outside the fuselage. This then is our cast of vehicles to give the Army unprecedented mobility through the air. For a different look at aerial mobility and maneuverability, let's tune up the fiddles and gather around these Sioux at a square dance. Swing your partner. This was for fun and demonstration. But to make the Whirly Bird dance takes the touch of a droid master. Who are they? Army aviators are specially trained officers and warrant officers in infantry, artillery, armor, signal corps, corps of engineers, transportation corps, and medical service corps. Officers from other branches of the Army must request a transfer to one of these seven branches before they can be considered for flight training. For aviation is part of all but only these seven branches of the Army. Flight proficiency in fixed or rotary wing craft, or both, earns the Army aviators badge. On completing flight training, aviators may go back to their respective branches to resume regular duties, but they commonly are assigned to what is called branch immaterial. That is performing one of their flying specialties such as casualty evacuation, wire laying, resupply, road reconnaissance, artillery control. Army aviators then are, first of all, Army officers. They must be able at all times to carry out the duties of their rank and branch of Army, and they must be ready to handle a variety of air assignments. Put another way, much is expected of them, of them and their aircraft. The Hardy Bird Dock, Speedy Seminole, Sturdy Beaver, The Otter, and its companion Raven. Fast Climbing Iroquois, The Troop Carriers, Chickasaw, Chuck-Taw, The Shawnee and Huge Mojave, this is today's lineup.  The next helicopter to join the Army will be the Chinook, the HC-1, HC-4 helicopter cargo. Here is an earlier, smaller version. Even so, its value is readily apparent. A little John missile is quickly rolled out and set up. All it takes is 12 minutes from touchdown to deliver from close range a devastating Sunday punch. This is the later model Chinook, designed to carry up to 33 troops. In addition to carrying more troops, the Chinook will fly farther and faster than any copter the Army now has. The ramp door closes like an enormous whale's mouth. The Chinook will team with the big caribou plane to do the Army's heavy-duty moving. In the field of surveillance, the Army is aiming for a craft that can pick up and relay information in one operation. The plane's probing radar finds the enemy target. The exact positional information is channeled to the artillery, and in moments, a missile is on its way. The Army now is working on unmanned surveillance systems. More sophisticated models than this Fire-B target drone will penetrate enemy territory, take pictures by electronic command, then return the film report by parachute. An ideal vehicle from the Army's point of view is one that performs like a helicopter, yet flies like a high-speed airplane. In order to find this hybrid creature, the Army experiments and keeps an open mind. In this craft, ducted air screws act one minute as rotors, the next as propellers. If you're undecided just where to set down, why, there's no rush. This aircraft is classified VTOL for vertical takeoff and landing. Other approach to the same problem, tilt the whole wing instead of just the air screws. There is an in-between choice on this craft to set the wings at an angle for short takeoff and landing with a heavier load. Short takeoff and landing are known as STOL. The demands for mobility seem endless. The solution's unlimited. The AeroCycle is one proposal for moving the individual soldier on missions such as reconnaissance, for example. A courier needs something light, maneuverable, and cumbersome. This was one manufacturer's answer, and certainly a dream for anyone who delights in carnival rides. On the other hand, the Army has explored the feasibility of using the helicopter as a flying crane. A cardinal principle in the quest for mobility is that anything goes until proven otherwise. Take this convertible, not exactly light as a feather, but it travels on air. It is one of a whole series of so-called ground effect machines. Experimental vehicles that generate and glide on a cushion of air. Air cushion vehicles come in all sizes and shapes. But in principle, they all operate like a vacuum cleaner in reverse. This one you probably guessed is nicknamed Flying Donut. A more compact model, tested at Princeton's Forestal Research Center. Like the others, it is limited to the layer of air a few inches above the surface. This one is called the Flying Scooter. And what boy wouldn't like to have this magic scooter parked beside his house? Air car is another ground effect machine the Army has shown an interest in. It can go 60 miles an hour over land or water, ice or snow. All it requires is that the surface be clear and fairly level. The air car is held up by one-tenth of a pound of air pressure per square inch. It is driven and steered by air jetted through side vents. If this avenue of research proves fruitful, we may someday have a tank that doesn't rumble. New vehicles, new weapons combinations need new tactics. The Army now is embodying a new concept, an air task force, completely independent of ground. An entire unit of air-mounted vehicles firing everything from machine guns to missiles. Much remains to perfect this newest method of getting their firstest with the mostest. But it is exactly here that we see the page turning from yesterday to tomorrow. What all this is pointing to someday is a weapon and vehicle designed as one. A device that will fly extremely fast, low, quietly, be highly maneuverable and fire the ultimate weapon. This isn't fantasy, nor is it necessarily a faithful look at the future for the future. For new discoveries may alter our course. But it is the province of the Army, where the Army must think on three time levels. Now, the immediate future and the distant future, in order to fulfill its task of protecting us. To put these things in greater perspective is Brigadier General Clifton Von Kahn, Director of Army Aviation. At the beginning of this century, combat soldiers had machine guns and rifles. At the end of the century, combat soldiers had machine guns and fast-firing artillery. Yet they walked into battle just as the Roman legions had done. And there was one defense against the predominance of firepower to dig in. And World War I was four years of trench warfare. Now, under the Germans in World War II, tanks, fighter bombers, mobilized and airborne troops converted the same basic armaments into the Blitzkrieg. And World War II was a mobile war. Since then, with the atomic bomb and the thermonuclear warhead, firepower has once again gained the ascendancy in military thinking. The counter-response has been for soldiers to disperse and again to dig in. Yet we must remember that our military doctrine and our history has always emphasized that wars can be won only by taking the offensive. Now the challenge to Army Aviation is to provide our commanders with the capability for their forces to fight here this morning and a hundred miles off this afternoon. And this might be a hundred miles in a variety of directions. This challenge means an around-the-clock readiness without being anchored to a stationary supply base. It means air vehicles as rugged and reliable as the jeep. These aircraft must skim through the nap of the earth to avoid the eyes of enemy soldiers and radar. Our flying soldiers must be able to move three-dimensionally and at a moment's notice and at great speeds in order to give new dimensions to combat. The commander and his men are armed with new options, surprise and threat, as well as attack. The Army Ground Commander no longer shackled the earth as limited only by his imagination. As General Hamilton Howe's put it, it's hard to be audacious at the bottom of a fox hole, but in the air, just above the treetops, there lies one of our greatest hopes for victory on the ground. The big picture is an official report for the armed forces and the American people. Produced by the Army Pictorial Center. Presented by the Department of the Army in cooperation with the state.