Hey there friends. Thanks for checking in today. We're looking at the new Ruger S-Far Short-frame auto rifle now by looking at this It looks like the size of any modern sporting rifle chambered in 556 however This is chambered in 308 and the only noticeable difference is the size of the mag and the size of the mag Well, other than that it is very small very compact very lightweight just over Six pounds with the S-Far cool rifle We're going to get into it. So let's go ahead and do that Here's a closer look at the Ruger S-Far short-frame auto rifle chambered in 308 Most 308 rifles are quite a bit larger. Now. This is a 16 inch barrel. It's also available with a 20 inch barrel This has a mid-length gas system the 20 inch barrel has a full length gas system rifle length But over here. We've got a mag pull SL stock it ships with nice stock It can be switched out with anything else a mag pull grip and right underneath it has a Slot there with a hex wrench. I'm going to explain that a four and a half pound trigger pull Two-stage trigger works great 20 round mag pull 308 magazine has an aluminum 15 inch Handguard with M lock slots at 3 6 and 9 o'clock so you could add any accessories you want on there There's a rail for a front sight and Ruger calls this two port break a boomer break So we reduce the recoil by shifting off those gases in various directions Very nice rifle. I've had it at the range on several occasions. It's performed very well Happy with it. Ruger has that reputation with rifles people love the rifles and this one's no different Offers quite a bit for a short frame 308 rifle the optic I have on here is made by Righton. Let's take a closer look at that. This is a right on five tactics one to six magnification by 24 millimeter objective lens perfect for Anywhere from 20 to 350 yard range Works great with a 308 where you want to stretch it out a little bit, you know A three times magnifier may not be enough very nice optic now. Here's a look at The reticle I'll zoom in on this The right time five tactics is an LPV a low power variable optic I currently have it at three, but this throw lever here Just move it over. There's five and a half wherever you want it Makes it nice and easy flip up caps here With the 24 millimeter objective lens right there. It's also illuminated with the green illumination This dial here will brighten up the intensity or dim it down Cap turrets one half MOA adjustments. There's your elevation and your windage They call this the thunder ranch Which is a suiting name. I like the cantilever mount makes it nice and easy With the quick detach mounts right here It's got that serrated lever move it in tighten it onto the rail You can even move it up a little bit which I did to give a little more room to Charge the rifle Three and a half inches eye relief which would suits This optic and the s far very nicely. I think it's a fine optic and it complements the Ruger s far in 308 I mentioned the bottom of the grip was a little bit different and this is why I've got it sticking out there But there's a hex wrench the reason There is a hex wrench on the bottom of the grip is because it has a regulated gas port Right there and that can be adjusted now It ships on setting number three, which is fine for most ammunitions I've shot steel case brass case through it and it is performed With no issues, but once it's broken in you want to move that to setting number two And if you shoot it suppressed you want to put it on setting number three You could use that hex wrench But it also has little slots in there where you could take a screwdriver and move it to whatever setting you want to use Pretty simple design But I think it's pretty cool the way they did that and suppressed shooting has become so popular with both rifles and handguns with more states permitting it I should say the manufacturers have adjusted Very well by creating something like this a regulated gas port just for adjustments So I know what you're thinking how much is the Ruger s far Well, let's first understand that rifles chambered in 308 are pretty expensive Ruger has this fairly priced at $1329, whether it's the 16 inch or the 20 inch s far But there it is made by Ruger to newer release A couple months ago happy to have it's performed great at the range and I hope to do quite a bit more with it If you like videos like this, please subscribe and share I always appreciate the thumbs up button Thanks for watching and you guys be safe


Yes, we're just announced our new brand new processor Ryzen. It's an 8-core 16 thread CPU It's got full SoC, it has all kinds of great details on there as well as CPU cores We've got USB, SATA, as well as PCI Express Gen 3 and GDR4 memory controller Yeah, absolutely full connectivity straight from the socket and our new chipset is going to expand those infrastructure options even more Great question, so we're going to have the industry's biggest Generational leap in performance with Ryzen, so we're increasing our IPC our instructions per clock by over 40% Versus our previous generation So it's going to be going up in performance for the same time. We're not increasing power It's going to keep that same low power Yes, it's new 14 nanometer technology So that helps, right? Absolutely, it's a strong part of what we're doing So a new 14 nanometer technology and our great design teams learning how to make the most of those transistors So here you can see This is So what are you looking at here is Star Wars Battlefront with the Rogue One DLC And we're playing a 4k resolution with ultra HD preset 60 frames per second locked Fast as it can want to go it can do it. It's a beautiful game And what we're seeing here is powering our new Vega graphics card So what's this new graphics that you have? Yeah, so Vega's our new graphics architecture And the Vega graphics architecture is designed for high performance computing and gaming And we're going to have a great launch this year with this new product. So this is the latest ATI Yeah Yeah, the new fast-radiant 14 nanometer as well We've got support for all the great new technologies and support standards And we're showing off today the two new technologies coming together AMD's new high-performance PC This is going to be the most desirable gaming PC for 2017 So is this the fastest PC at the fastest GPU in the world? Well, it's too early to say yet once we launch this in the market We'll see what the consumers think. Hopefully you guys will say yes This is better than Intel and better than video That's what we're aiming for is to be the best so we can be offered great experience and redefine some performance But it's also about price right? So what's going to be the price? Well, we don't know yet. We haven't disclosed the pricing just yet We'll be happy to let that know when we go to market But for right now we've shown demos where our CPU is outperforming the competition's $1,000 CPU so my question to you is now that you know there can be a thousand-dollar CPU. How much should we charge I? Think 129. It's good price So then there's this is a desktop platform. Are you doing this for laptops also? Yeah, the Zen architecture will go into every business that we have today So you'll see it in notebooks. You'll see it in semi-custom You see an enterprise and server high-performance compute that Zen is going to go everywhere and everywhere will bring those same great benefits All right, so how soon are people buying this be Q1 Q1 is at the latest in March, right? That's right


Welcome to the Waldoch Way. My name is Emily. Today's video is our Greek mythology morning basket. For Mad Libs and trivia, we have National Geographic Kids, Bunny Fillin, My Greek Mythology Adventure. It's very similar to a Mad Libs. You fill out the little story with different parts of speech. There are also fun facts on each page as well. Then we have Weird But True, Know It All Greek Mythology. And last, I threw in these Would You Rather cards that are part of our new Greek Heroes and Myths study because I thought they would be a really fun way to kick off our morning basket each morning. So would you rather be called Aphrodite or Venus? Would you rather be gifted lightning bolts or a trident? Would you rather be able to make plants grow on earth or make sharp star shapes appear in the heavens? So just a fun way to kind of start our morning time with some conversation. We haven't done poetry in our morning basket in a while, but when I found this book, I knew I was adding it in because it is reversal poems about Greek mythology. So it's Echo Echo, and I think this is going to be so much fun in case you don't know what a reversal poem is. It's basically the poem is written and then it is the opposite. So when the world was young is the last sentence here and it is the first sentence here. So this whole book is poems that are reversed like that, that all have to do with Greek mythology. For read alouds, we have the Percy Jackson and the Olympians series. We'll be reading all five of these, the Lightning Thief, the Sea of Monsters, the Titans Curse, the Battle of the Labyrinth, and the Last Olympian. We also have a ton of options for Greek mythology to read about the different myths. I am 100% sure we will not read all of these in their entirety, but I have them all in our basket so that we can explore the different myths in multiple different ways from multiple different books. So we will be reading pieces and parts from most of these, but we will not read them in their entirety. So please note that now. We have the Ancient Myths Collection. These four are Roman myths, so we will not be reading those four, but we will read these. We have the Usborne Illustrated Stories of Greek mythology. I'm definitely sure we're going to read the majority of these just because I love how pretty this book is. It doesn't have a lot of myths in it, but which ones it has, we will definitely read because I mean, I just want to read it because look at that. We have a Child's Introduction to Greek Mythology. The Stories of the Gods, Goddesses, Heroes, Monsters, and Other Mythical Creatures. The Usborne Book of Greek Myths. This one is a little bit more advanced than the illustrated, but it is still just as pretty and it also has a lot more myths in it. We have the DK Greek Myths Meet the Heroes, Gods, and Monsters of Ancient Greece. Here's that table of contents. We have the National Geographic Treasury of Greek Mythology, Classic Stories of Gods, Goddesses, Heroes, and Monsters. Now this one we will read in its entirety only because it is the required book for Greek Heroes and Myths, which is our new unit study. So we will be reading it in its entirety to go along with that. And the last Greek Mythbook, but it is definitely not the least, Dolores Book of Greek Myths. And here is the table of contents for it. For Hands on Activities, we have this Greek Mythology Parthenon Brain Teaser. So it's a wooden puzzle and the whole thing comes apart and she has to try to figure out how to get it back together. We have the Greek Myths Magic Painting Book. I love these for morning time because the only thing you need is water and it makes the most beautiful, vibrant pictures. And then we have the Greeks, Myths, and Mises. You guys, this book is humongous and it's hardback, which I was not expecting it to be. But these mazes are literally amazing. Emily is so excited to do it. And there's tons of them in here. She is planning to do all of these during morning time. And then the last thing that we are going to do is have all of our wooden blocks out for her so that she can build some of the different places that Percy is going in the book series as he goes, such as the Gateway Arch and the different museums and the hotels and things like that. And then we have a lot more games than usual. And that is because this is our first morning basket of a new school year and games are Emily's love language. And so I really wanted to make sure that I was making a point to fill her bucket first thing in the day with them. So I made sure to infuse our Greek mythology morning basket with a lot of different games that we could play that play in less than 30 minutes. So they're mostly quick play games. The first one I have is Top Trumps Greek mythology. Top Trumps is a war like game where you are playing against different things. So strength, magic, terror, audacity and top Trump reading for the different gods and goddesses. And then there's always fun facts about them as well. This is a printable version of Greek mythology spotted. It comes with Greek heroes and myths. So we will be playing this and spot it as one of our favorite games. And it's a quick play with two people. This game plays pretty quick with more. It could go a little bit longer, but Zeus on the loose is so much fun. And it's going to sneak some math in because what you're trying to do is get Mount Olympus to a hundred and you do that with all of these different numbers as you're laying the numbers down. Mount Olympus is basically your discard pile. And so you have to keep track by adding and subtracting all of the different numbers and specialty cards. So sneaking into math into our morning basket. Bingo with the Greeks. This is Greek God and goddess Bingo. This is part of Greek heroes and myths as well. Then we have a monstrous the game of mythic mayhem. It's a card throwing game of mythic mayhem for Olympians of all ages. Throw your monster. Use your monster trap powers. Use your monsters powers. Use location powers and gain faith to win. We haven't played this one yet, but it looks like a ton of fun. Fight for Olympus, which is a two player game. I'm always looking for great two player games for our morning basket because we are typically playing just Emily and I. So Mount Olympus, the home of the gods, your biggest desire. With your heroes by your side, you're ready for the decisive duel. Can you defeat your opponent and conquer Mount Olympus? And then last, we have Santorini. This is two to four players, but it plays really, really well with two players as well. And you're basically building Santorini with all of these block pieces. It is a lot of fun. As Socrates would say, wonders the beginning of wisdom.


As always, let me begin by paying acknowledging and celebrating the first Australians on whose traditional lands we all respectively are present and acknowledging and celebrating and respecting leaders past and present and emerging. It's my very great pleasure to welcome to this session Bob Einhorn, senior fellow Brookings now but a hugely distinguished diplomatic career behind him as you've seen from the CV papers as a senior State Department or very senior State Department official in the non-preferration arms control area during both in particular the Clinton and Obama administrations. As you might have noticed, we were going to be joined in this session by Amanda Gawley, who is the Australian Ambassador for Arms Control and Counterproliferation. But Amanda was given a special assignment in circumstances we can probably imagine, which made it impossible for her to join us. But I think we have so many other distinguished piloted members of the DFAT and defence establishments, both present and former, but even though I can't be relied upon, I can't be trusted to give any kind of empathetic view to the present government's position, no doubt someone will fill the gap if I misspeak. Let me begin in terms of the conduct of this session. There's a lot of ground we want to cover. So Bob and I will have a conversation covering eight or nine different topics over the next half hour or so, hopefully not much longer before we go to general discussion and Q&A. In which context, I think if we could work on the basis of just raising your hand physically or pressing the raise hand button to get into the discussion, that would work better than relying on me to follow a chat box. So I don't have a 10-year-old, so let's just do it physically as we can. So look, in our opening panel conversation, Bob and I will assume, no doubt heroically, that you've at least had a glance at the framing paper that was circulated a few days ago. And in our conversation, we'll take as given that low participants should of course feel able to challenge any of these assumptions. We'll take as a given, we'll take as given the high likelihood is unintended if not deliberate in the foreseeable future. We'll take as given the enormous existential risk associated with any significant nuclear exchange. And I think we'll take as given also the self-evident sense of the Reagan-Gorbachev statement, now actually recently embraced by all of Biden, Putin and Xi, that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. So taking all that as more or less given, our focus here will be on what if anything can be actually done to ensure that nuclear weapons are never used. We'll be looking at the state of play, the prospects for nuclear stockpile reduction will be an elimination. We'll be looking at holding the line on non-proliferation and we'll be looking at more general risk reduction issues. I want to start with the existing nine nuclear arms states and then moving from there later in the discussion to potential newcomers. So my first question, Bob, to get things started is basically is the framing paper too pessimistic. The framing paper describes the prospects for significant movement towards disarmament as desolate. Increasing modernizing stockpiles. With missile systems developed with no sign anywhere. Nights and nuclear weapons and national postures. Longstress Russia. Ending and with no buy-in at all from anyone who matters to the nuclear ban treaty. That's the picture that's painted in the framing paper. Is it too pessimistic beginning in particular the US Russia relationship given the possible ground for optimism. I guess and I'd like you to talk about this the Biden-Putin summit agreement to reestablish and strategic security dialogue to lay the groundwork for future arms control and risk reduction as they say. Is there any hope at all for further bilateral stockpile reductions of the kind that we saw after the end of the Cold War Bob. Thank you very much for that introduction and I think the organizers of the Crawford leadership forum for inviting me. Gareth for reasons that you just mentioned and also for additional reasons that you put in your framing paper. There are plenty of grounds for pessimism in the current environment. But that doesn't mean that arms control is dead. It means that the focus of arms control needs to shift, at least in the near term formal agreements to further reduce weapons are very unlikely in my view. It's a good thing that the new star treaty was extended for five years and a good thing that the United States and Russia have agreed to resume strategic stability talks on a bilateral basis. But the main purpose of those bilateral talks will be largely conceptual to reconceptualize strategic stability and arms control to consider how stability and future arms control will be affected by great power competition by disruptive technologies such as cyber and hypersonics by novel nuclear weapons systems like undersea drones and also by additional nuclear competitors, primarily China and North Korea. So we can't really expect any near term disarmament agreements emerging from these new and resumed bilateral US Russian stability talks. The priority now when the prospect of nuclear conflict is greater now than it's been for decades really should not be on further nuclear reductions. It should be reducing likelihood that nuclear weapons will ever be used again. And that means pursuing confidence building transparency communications measures that are designed to reduce the likelihood of armed conflict resulting from accident or miscalculation. It means developing informal rules rules of the road to create norms of responsible behavior in such areas as space and and and cyber and because in my view, any use of nuclear weapons today will almost surely be the result of escalation of regional conventional military conflict. It means focusing heavily on preventing regional armed conflicts from erupting in the first place, whether along the NATO Russian border, the South China Sea or Taiwan Strait, the Korean peninsula or cashmere. Eventually, further nuclear reductions may be possible, but for now the international arms control agenda will consist of these more modest risk reduction measures. I want to come back to risk reduction measures and perhaps some slightly less modest options in that area as well in a few moments. But let's first of all explore some of the other key players and in particular China, because even more eyes are on China these days than the than the big two, I guess. Although it's arsenal is only presently about one 15th on most estimates, the US size, and even though China has traditionally adopted a both a no first use and a minimal deterrence posture. What is your take on the risks associated with the current Chinese enterprise of modernization expansion diversification not least the recent information that's emerged about these missile silo sites. And in Western China, maybe up to 300, even though that doesn't necessarily mean 300 weapons, it could be a could be a show game what you take on the, the current risks associated with China's posture and whether it will ever be possible to get China directly engaged in control arms limitation arrangements. Thank you, Gareth and not just in my view it's almost consensus view now, China's current nuclear modernization efforts are disturbing, including what you just mentioned this evidence that they are constructing two or three new fields of ICBM silos that could house hundreds of multiple warhead missiles. And, you know, for decades, as you mentioned, China has pursued a minimum deterrence capability, but now that appears to be changing the goals of its modernization program remain unclear at a minimum in my view it wants to ensure a secure reliable nuclear retaliatory capability to deter the United States from conducting a disarming nuclear first strike by itself, that's understandable and relatively benign. But it takes place at a time when China is acting more assertively towards its neighbors and working hard to replace the United States as the dominant conventional military power in the western Pacific by achieving a mutual nuclear deterrence relationship with the United States, China may hope to gain a freer hand to pursue its regional objectives without fear of US nuclear coercion. China is therefore very unlikely to agree to anything that could impede its ability to achieve a mutual deterrent relationship with the United States, but at the same time China wishes to avoid armed conflict resulting from accidents, misperceptions or miscalculations. And so hopefully it will agree before too long to engage in a strategic stability dialogue with the United States. It's so far resisted holding such a dialogue at such a dialogue would allow each side to gain a better understanding of the other side strategic objectives and perhaps avoid, perhaps avoid worst case planning and even an arms race. It could also allow them to develop confidence building and other measures to reduce the likelihood of inadvertent armed conflict and conceivably, they could also agree on mutual limitations for rules of the road in areas with the United States and China have comparable probabilities, such as cyber space or hypersonics, but formal quantitative nuclear arms limitations agreements are very unlikely for quite some time. How much serious commitment is there within the present Biden administration given domestic political imperatives and the, and the extent of the emotion that now seems to be invested in the anti China position how much serious commitment is there to such a strategic dialogue as you describe it even a, even a feeling modest aspirations. I think there's a real commitment to do that. The Biden administration has emphasized that it while key aspects of the relationship will be competitive. It looks to cooperate in areas where interest can converge whether it's climate change or dealing with North Korea, but certainly avoiding inadvertent armed conflict is one of those converging interests. Moving across this rather broad landscape. Next, North Korea and which you've been very closely involved for a very long time with almost every dimension of US nuclear policy are prospects for a negotiated settlement with Pyeongyang now completely dead in the water. Do you see any hope at all for achieving denuclearization or even just a permanent freeze on North Korea's nuclear capability. Has the US really gone as far as it could and arguably should go and putting incentives on the table for North Korea to move. Gareth at their summit in Singapore Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump agreed to work toward the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, but nothing Kim Jong-un has said or done since then suggests that he has any intention whatsoever of abandoning his nuclear deterrent deterrent, which I believe he sees as essential to the survival of his regime. The North has continued a de facto moratorium on ICBM range missile tests and nuclear weapons tests, but it's continued to increase its strategic capabilities, including by developing and testing short and medium range missiles and also by producing fissile materials to expand its arsenal of nuclear weapons actually in the current report by the IAEA. The IAEA states that after a lengthy hiatus, North Korea has resumed the production of plutonium for nuclear weapons. The Biden administration has repeatedly reached out to North Korea and called for negotiations anywhere anytime, but the North has repeatedly refused to engage. I believe the Biden administration is realistic about what can be achieved with North Korea. It's reaffirmed the ultimate goal of complete denuclearization, but it recognizes that at least for the foreseeable future, that goal is not in the cards. And so it's prepared to pursue denuclearization, but as a long-term step-by-step process that would begin with near-term limits on North Korea's nuclear and missile capabilities. Further steps toward denuclearization would be deferred for until a future time, but Pyongyang hasn't budged. Perhaps it's ruled out engagement as long as it remains sealed off from the world due to the COVID pandemic. Perhaps it's waiting for unilateral concessions by the Biden administration, or perhaps after the failed Hanoi summit with Trump. It sees a little prospect of an agreement that would serve North Korea's interests. I'll let you finish, but what is the downside risk in the U.S. coming forward with something that is a credible unilateral concession, even if only something to do with the status of the war issue, the guarantee of diplomatic relationship, or something of that kind, which career is obviously wanting. The U.S. position has not been to put anything on the table before sitting down, but maybe we need a circuit breaker. Well, you know, the U.S. Ambassador and Envoy Sung Kim was in Seoul recently, and apparently the two allies talked about humanitarian assistance to the North, especially during the COVID crisis that could help jumpstart engagement between the U.S. and North Korea. But I think we'll have to wait and see whether the North has an appetite for beginning discussions. I think eventually it will. It's an economic crisis. I think the Biden administration is dead set against making major unilateral concessions other than humanitarian assistance to get talks started. I think it's the Biden administration is already pursuing a domestically risky engagement with Iran. It knows that the prospects for productive engagement with North Korea are even lower. And so I think it's reluctant to undertake more unilateral steps to get talks started. Well, we have to wait and see. There's no doubt a number of our participants will want to come back to North Korea and in fact all these issues so far, but just one more quickly on North Korea. How seriously do you place the risk of aggressive first use by North Korea of such weapons as it has. Do you count that as a risk factor at all? Well, you know, Kim Jong-un has has talked about initiating the use of nuclear weapons. I, you know, I don't think he's serious about it. I know he must know that that would mean the annihilation of his regime, which is something which is a thing he doesn't want. So, I doubt these threats are serious. Okay, let's pick up the pieces briefly with the other nuclear arms states, India, Pakistan, Israel, including the NPT non-members. What's the prospects at any of bringing them into serious nuclear arms control negotiations, whether bilateral or multilateral. And even if the prospect of stockpile reduction in those cases is zero in the present environment, what about the possibility for some serious, not just confidence building, but some more serious risk reduction measures like, you know, reduced deployments, de-alerting, and no first years, which we'll no doubt come back to. Any of that stuff? Well, you know, I think there may be some value in trying to bring NPT nuclear weapons states and, you know, non-NPT nuclear arms states together for consultations. I'm only talking, by the way, about seven nuclear powers. I'm not talking about Israel, which is not going to play it doesn't acknowledge having nuclear weapons. I'm not talking about North Korea. We don't want to invite North Korea to a table with nuclear arms states. So the seven nuclear powers, if you could get them together, might discuss some common challenges, like the challenges, the challenge of securing its nuclear weapons, installations, materials against theft or seizure. They might also share experiences, their own experiences with previous confidence building measures and compare notes on what has worked. But developing new risk reduction measures is more likely to be feasible, I think, in a bilateral or regional context, such as along the NATO-Russia border or the South China Sea. I've read about your 4Ds, Gareth, and I'm not terribly optimistic about anyone, any of them, whether it's decreasing the number of nuclear weapons and total inventories, decreasing the number of deployed nuclear weapons. What you have now is US and Russia, I don't believe are going to reduce their deployments. The UK, as you pointed out in your framing paper, has even increased the ceiling on its deployed weapons. China, North Korea, India, and Pakistan are increasing their deployments. De-alerting is your third D. I don't see it. I see United States and Russia retaining their highly alert prompt lunch, force pastures. And China, Pakistan and India once kept their nuclear warheads unmated from delivery systems, but now it looks like they're moving in the other direction. So the third D, not very optimistic. You're fourth on doctrine and prospects for universal buy-in to no first use. I'm dubious on that as well. Even for China and India, which have had no first use pastures, but may be moving away from them. But you probably want to talk more about the US approach on no first use. We'll come back to that in just one second. But if the weapon states are going to dig their heels in on any significant movement on any of these really major risk reduction issues, what on earth can they bring to the table in an NPT conference context that will begin to satisfy the production of the non-nuclear weapon states that the weapon states are simply not serious about disarmament. They can talk their heads off about transparency and Australia can talk its head off about, you know, all the wonderful things we're doing to contribute to energizing the nuclear weapon states to bring something to the table. But in the absence of any of that biggest stuff, I mean, is any of this remotely credible? Well, look, what can the nuclear weapon states bring to the table? I think many of the NPT non-nuclear weapon states understand that the current strategic environment is not very auspicious for arms control, especially for nuclear further nuclear reductions. And I think they recognize the need to pursue risk reduction measures that can reduce the likelihood of nuclear war. Will they ever be satisfied? No, they will never be satisfied, nor should they. The record of nuclear weapon states in implementing the NPT nuclear weapon states in implementing the Article 6 commitments is not very good. And this is going to lead, I think, to more contention at the upcoming review conference. But, you know, my own view is, and you've raised questions about this separately, my own view is it's not going to lead to additional countries deciding to have nuclear weapons.  It's not because of the slow pace of nuclear disarmament. Well, we'll come back to one of the key proliferation potential states Iran in just a moment, but let's let's go back to the no first use issue, which is the subject of a major international campaign at the moment and is probably the risk reduction measure with one of the four days with the most apparent like the root of some buy in around the place the nuclear umbrella states Australia included, played a really fairly crucial role in the past and inhibiting any move by the US down this particular to Obama as we know wanted to go the no, at least the sole purpose route, which is a functional equivalent of no first use, but was dissuaded eventually by the, by the Northeast Asian allies by the Central East European allies and with a bit of help from Australia as well, and not to do that. What, what are the prospects, and what's the desire ability of a no first use or at least a sole purpose commitment and what are the prospects of the moving in that direction what will it take to get it there. Well, I'm not going to make you happy with this answer. And in January 2017 in his last month as vice president, Biden expressed his personal view that the sole purpose of US nuclear weapons should be deter and if necessary, respond to nuclear attack against the US or its allies, Biden repeated that position as a candidate for the presidency. But now his administration is conducting its nuclear posture review, and I doubt that it will adopt a sole purpose sole purpose as an official US policy. Now, a key argument for sole purpose, or NF you as you point out is this equivalent is that US adversaries no longer believing the US will use nuclear weapons first in a crisis will have less incentive to use nuclear weapons first themselves. And as the United States maintains a prompt launch force posture US adversaries will place will place very little faith in the US NFU pledge and their incentives to preempt with nuclear weapons won't be reduced. So I think a critical argument for no first use, I think is seriously question. The detail of no first use and you've alluded to, to this is that it could undermine the confidence of US allies in the US ability to deter major non nuclear threats, NATO allies in Eastern Europe, and in particular Japan among US Asian allies remain opposed to no first use, especially as threats from Russia, China and North Korea have increased, and given the Biden administration's strong commitment to reinforcing the credibility of US security assurances to allies, I think a sole purpose declaration is very unlikely, despite what might be the president's personal preference. Now this is especially the case in light of the strategic and political full out from the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, but I think there's much that the Biden administration can do short of declaring no first use to indicate that the use of nuclear weapons should only be considered in the most extreme of circumstances in particular, it can reverse the Trump administration's apparent expansion of those circumstances. The Trump nuclear posture review explicitly reserved the right to use nuclear weapons in response to conventional military attack against civilian populations or infrastructure, or in response to a cyber attack against critical infrastructure, early warning systems or nuclear command and control systems, but the United States has effective and more proportionate and credible non nuclear means for deterring and responding to such attacks and nuclear response is simply not necessary. The Biden administration, like the Obama administration, but unlike the Trump administration should explicitly adopt sole purpose as a goal, and should commit to putting in place conditions that would allow that goal to be realized. It should give substance to that commitment by establishing dedicated consultative mechanisms with allies with the express purpose of identifying and promoting those conditions and evaluating periodically progress toward putting them in place to be sure. It's not a step that would disappoint advocates of no first use, but it's a step, at least in the right direction, unlike the direction in which we've been headed in recent years. We've directly acknowledged that it is what we call an Australian bullshit to suggest that the United States would ever use first nuclear weapons in response to a sub nuclear attack, whether it's cyber or hypersonic or anything else, it just won't.  Look, you're absolutely right in saying that without being backed by reduced numbers reduced deployment the alerting and so on. This does remain a statement rather than something that has a huge amount of credibility in extremis but but is this something we should give up on this so little on the table at the moment that this at least looks like something that would take us a credible step forward. So, once I was at a senior meeting was in the situation room and we're talking about these issues, it was the context of the 2010 nuclear posture review, and kind of before the meeting began I went to a very senior US military officer, and I said sir with the US president ever used nuclear weapons against a non nuclear attack would he actually do that. At the time I said he or she we were already thinking of a possible she, but in any way so I asked him he said, no. The president would not use nuclear weapons against a non nuclear attack, but he added, but our adversaries don't know that. And that's the critical thing from from the, the perspective of the US nuclear establishment. This is not an issue we'll pick up in discussion which I want to get to very shortly but just two other issues first of all. One is you've touched upon it but it is pretty critical a new technological development space cyberspace hypersonic drones. To what extent has that seriously complicated the prospect for any kind of arms control negotiation of the kind that we've been canvassing. The experiments, as you pointed out have only recently begun to conceptualize how to cope with potentially disruptive technologies like cyber counter space hypersonics and so forth. These technologies post serious potential threats to early warning and commanding control systems, and they could reduce decision time in a crisis. Now these challenges need to be addressed somehow in future arms control discussions it's no longer enough to deal with the threats to strategic stability posed by nuclear weapons themselves, but adding new technologies to the mix will clearly complicate arms control negotiations, because these difficulties are evolving so rapidly, and because of the difficulties of definition verification and attribution especially for cyber, it will be hard to deal with them using traditional arms control methods. Some, especially cyber will need to be addressed in separate informal arrangements like normative rules of the road, rather than formal legally binding agreements, and it's a, and here's an important point I want to make it. One needs to recognize, one needs to recognize that arms control by itself can't eliminate the threats posed by these new technologies. In fact, the most effective means of protecting against these threats will be unilateral, for example, taking unilateral steps to make early warning and command and control systems more resilient and more redundant. There's something you've been directly personally engaged with that issue right really from the outset what are the prospects now getting the JCPOA back on any kind of track will Iran's advances in physical material production given the Trump horror story mean that the restoration of the agreement is not going to make much practical difference is an agreement that doesn't address missile delivery systems and Iran's actions in the region still in agreement with having what should quick take on that we'll have to we'll have to leave some time for discussion so I just want you to open up the issue. Yeah, you know I look. Restorate, you know, the Biden administration to set plant restore JCPOA and use it as starting point for following negotiations on a broader deal that was strengthened the JCPOA deal with the regional and missile threats. The restoration was supposed to be the easy part. Well they began these indirect contacts and Vienna, but they bog down. I think the Iranians have overreached. We can go into some examples of that but I think they've, they've overreached in their negotiating positions. You now have a new hardline government to Tehran, President Ibrahim Raisi. He wants to resume negotiations he recognizes Iran is in dire economic straits, and it needs the removal of the sanctions through restoration the JCPOA to get the economy back on track, but I don't think he's going to soften their negotiating position. The Biden administration believes it's it's done more to reach to meet Iran halfway and doesn't want to make any unilateral more additional unilateral concessions. It says that negotiations can't go on indefinitely with the continued improvement of Iran's nuclear capabilities the experience knowledge the gaining from advanced centrifuge operation. It's going to be hard to put Humpty Dumpty back together again it's going to be hard to to restore the JCPOA and reestablish to long breakout time than the JCPOA guaranteed. So I don't know it's hard to tell now whether agreement can be reached sometime this fall if it's not reached. What the Biden administration may do is to try to skip the restoration of the JCPOA and go directly to these follow on negotiations these expanded negotiations that would also deal with the regional missile threats as well. But if they've had so much difficulty restoring the JCPOA, I wouldn't put, you know, a big bet on being able to succeed in the more complicated negotiation. There look just one last question which I would have been putting to Amanda golly had you been with us but I really like your take on it. What role of any can middle powers like Australia play in this whole nuclear arms control enterprise we have played some kind of a role in the past in developing normative positions with the Canberra Commission and so on the spilled out in the framing paper is there any prospect of us playing a useful role in the future and moving this agenda forward should we be minded to take over the years and you point this out in your framing paper Garth, or Australia has indeed punched way above its weight in these arms in these international arms control discussions, and you've played personally, a major role in that arena. You also point out that Australia has been a key participant in organizations like the NPDI, and they have helped pursue a constructive middle ground between the NPT nuclear weapons states, and some of the more strident, not aligned states, and this is sometimes a facilitated consensus at NPT review conferences, and maybe minimize some of the polarization that has played a non proliferation regime, but in terms of impact. Australia's most impactful role can be as a trusted ally of the United States, its views are taken seriously in Washington, both in bilateral contacts and there are many of those, as well as meetings of like minded countries like, like the quads. Richard. Yeah, thanks, Garth and thanks. Thanks, Rob.  But I do wonder about your question about middle power contribution. Because I think that's waning a bit from an Australian perspective and I think, I think there are probably three reasons for that one is the exceptionally good environment that you both have been talking about and the sense of real progress on the system's reduction. It's just not possible at the moment because of the very tense competitive environment between a number of the nuclear weapons states, uncertain regional situations and so on. The second is China, which of course hangs heavy over all of the Australian foreign policy debate at the moment, and a feeling in the system that the alliance and the nuclear umbrella that comes with it is more than ever. Third reason is, I don't think we've had a minister in recent times with the same personal passion that you brought to the issue, Garth, and I think that shows, but I would say that I do think that still embedded in the international security division in the department and across other parts of the Australian system like ASNO, there still is quite a deep repository of expertise in this idea that Australia can play an important role to push things along. We've seen that most recently. I think with Rob Floyd being elected as the head of the CTPO, and that continues a long tradition of Australian official serving in senior positions in international organisations dedicated to arms control and disarmament. And Australian diplomats still plugging away at things like technical questions on verification of nuclear disarmament and on the NPDI initiative to support the NPT, which has been hit a bit by COVID, hasn't been able to meet in person. So I do still think there is a role personally for Australia on middle powers, including encouraging the US system on in the negotiations in Iran. There was a bit of a wobble over the Iran deal a few years ago under the Trump administration, but ultimately the Australian government came down and said the deal was worth staying in, even though the Trump administration didn't listen to us. I think that's a valuable role we can keep playing. And certainly on North Korea, where we have a prominent role in sanctions enforcement. And also I think in talking to the American system about options there, including, I think, for stalling preemptive military action, which in most circumstances is the Australian system continues to believe would be highly risky and counterproductive. So I suppose there are a few thoughts about where Australia is. Richard thanks very much for that more specifically on just on the no first use sole purpose issue that is something presumably the Biden administration is going to seek allied input on what should our advice specifically be to Washington, if and when asked on that or frankly even if not asked. Should we be as cautious as Bob is suggesting we should be on this or is it something on which a little bit of heroism might be overdue. I will again I can't speak for the government here I, I think we will be reading the tea leaves pretty closely in Washington. And I think there'll be low appetite for suggesting a course of action to the Biden administration that we know that they're not going to take that's my, that's my guess. That's self fulfilling prophecy stuff I mean Biden's not going to take it if he doesn't get any signals from allies like us that this is legitimate cause. We all hide under the table I mean obviously lowest common denominator risk avoidance political risk avoidance is going to prevail. I weep a little Bob do you have any comment on any of that. Just one last question from me because the Crawford forum does engage not only business and public sector people but the civil society, non government organizations as well and Australian non government organizations are really been pretty prominent in the whole nuclear debate for a very long time but is anyone listening anymore to anything that comes from below is this. Not necessarily this whole nuclear arms control businesses necessarily a top down business, or is there potential for important bottom up contributions. Just one more dimension I'd like to get on the table before we break. Yeah, you know, when, when I was a government official, and I was a government official for many years. You know, I listened politely to NGOs. But, you know, frankly, I was a bit too dismissive, in part because I didn't feel they had access to the sensitive information I had access to. Some things have really changed with, you know, open source information so prevalent that so many issues with commercial photography a very high resolution, you have these non governmental organizations in a position to play important roles, and you have these think tanks and organizations like like you participate in Gareth with very deep expertise, including former government officials who know who remember how the sausage was made, and to have a real sense of decision making and policy making. And I think increasingly, they're going to play a big role, especially at a time when people don't have the answers, when, you know, a reconceptual conceptualization of deterrence and stability and arms control would be necessary. I don't think governments have a comparative advantage in in that. And that's a much more optimistic note on which to conclude after this sea of pessimistic desolation which we've been experiencing over the last hour. But we've been experiencing it with the help of some hugely interesting input from you Bob and hugely expert and experienced input, and we really really appreciate your participation. I would like to express my appreciation to all the other participants in this enterprise and bid the conference organizers Richard Pam or the rest of you. A very productive conference for the rest of the two days so thanks Bob thanks everyone and we'll now leave you to move on. Great.


First of all, morning everyone. It's audible at the back. Am I right? Perfect. So Hi, I'm Trishul. I work at Clicks, a company called Clicks, and I volunteer for Mozilla and Just a way to put it, I believe myself as a clock-handed at Clicks and Superman at Mozilla. So Today, I'll be talking about progressive web apps. How many of you know this term? That makes my task really, really easy because the next slides I can just really skip that. So what is a PWA? It's a common ground between website and native app. It has discoverability of web and retention of an app. So how many of you know Alex Russells by any chance? Okay, so he is a guy who said they are just the website that took all the right vitamins. How many of you agree on this statement on with me? Okay, let's see the hand count and let's talk after this stuff. Why are you talking about PWA? It's installable. How many of you agree with that? Perfect. Works offline. Faster load time. This is our crucial one. How many of you agree on this? They're faster load times. Cool. Push notifications. I know everyone is annoyed. How many of you are really annoyed by push notifications? Okay, we are on the same page then. All in all, an app-like experience via web. So a typical PWA looks like this.  When you install, it gets an icon like that. If this is the icon just in case. It's a simple app. Then it has a splash screen and finally, finally the app. So this is what a PWA looks like. How to create a PWA? A simple web app manifest. So the first part basically tells where the manifest is and the second part what manifest is. It's just a JSON file which has kind of metadata about your app like your name, short name, the color theme, the icon on the splash screen, something like that. And I believe like this is a common knowledge by now. How many of you know service workers? It's getting easier. So I believe service workers are building block of PWA. So it provides features like offline caching, push notifications. So the title of my talk is PWA on steroids, right? But this is all about PWA. The question is where are the steroids? What are steroids? Any guesses? Anyone? I know it's early morning, 10 o'clock. So still here's the thing like I'm just engaging so that I don't sleep. So anyone? Kind of. That's a right good. Anyone else? Multi-platform native plugins like Kodoba. Sorry? Syncboost request. Okay. Yeah, kind of. Sorry? Performance enhancement. So this is really interesting because I got lots of new ideas now because my idea was very, very, very small, very, very narrow. And I just keep it to browser APIs. So the modern browser APIs gives the power to JavaScript to interact with the device features. That this led JavaScript to go beyond the browser to make more app-like features to start with. We have something called a speech synthesis. How many of you use this one? For those who have not used, let's try to use it if my browser allows me. Okay. Oops, not this one. Or really I should have put if it works. Mirroring has always been a pain. Where is it opening? Really? I cannot see. I'm just typing like hopefully it works. So let's say speech synthesis. Okay. So as simple as it's a normal text-to-speech engine and so maybe my laptop needs a mic. Good morning. Or maybe how I said morning in the really morning. Good morning. That's how my morning sounds in the morning. I really wish it could be like something like this. Good morning. But you know how it works. So looking at this, this is the line of code. These are the lines of code which I used to make that. Just look at the code for a while. That's the beauty of JavaScript. The developers have done enough work to expose an API which you can use for five lines and you can generate an output like that which I did. So the first thing we have to get a speech synthesis object and this is kind of not mandate free. This gives the voices from a browser. Else it will default to whatever your language of a browser is. Then we create this speech synthesis is a trend and we pass the text, the actual text which we type or which we read. Kind of screen read or something. And these are the settings which I can do which are not mandatory. And then all you have to do is very, very obvious thing, speak. So that's the line of code which I wrote for that experience. Okay. So let's do the reverse of this. Speech recognition. So let's say so before this I'll give you a disclaimer. This talk will be lots of demos and whoever has attended a talk before or spoke anywhere you know the probability of success of the demos in live talk, right? So please spare me. Please believe in me. And let's keep our fingers crossed the demos work. To start with, let's try this. Oh really? Yeah. Good morning. No? Good morning. Okay, it's working. Okay, time to turn off. Sorry. It's getting really, really literal. So the point is like this is right in my browser. I have no text, speech to text engine there. This string has been originated from my browser. And before I say something please get kind of acquainted with my laziness. So if I do something I really don't want to write a code for that. I want to write like 5 line, 10 line, not more than that. So in the same case I wrote few lines with that. All I need to do is have this WebKit speech recognition and we have some functions like on start when someone starts speaking when the microphone get the audio from somewhere on error or end on result and recognition dot start. So this function is really interesting on result. So if you have looked at the example what it did, it typed something and then it tried to rectify that to make more legible string out of it. So this function basically has something called as isFinal. So this function what it does is the parameter which it gets is called result and isFinal. So without isFinal it still tries to make sense out of it so it shows interim results and when isFinal is true it shows the final result. So how many are still on this like this makes sense through your speech recognition speech synthesis? Do you think of any usability in your app which you can provide with these things? How many on that? Okay. We are getting there. Media capture API. How many of you know that? Okay. I'll put it very simple. It captures the media of your laptop or system whatever it is. In our case let's have a quick example if it works. Media capture API. So don't judge me on my UI because I'm really bad at that. So I just want the work to be done. So it's a simple app which kind of takes my camera input and I'm really sorry for you guys because you have to see two of me. I know how I look. So I just created a very small app. What I do I just take a pic of me. It works. And these are the simple CSS filters which I can apply maybe like this or maybe just blur it and then go to the normal window. So once the right side is the canvas element and you know how much magic can be done with the canvas elements, right? So again for this there's a small piece of code which I made. So this basically gets the user media which is from my device and I can define I want video, audio or whatever I want. So in this case I just wanted video. I said video through and my stream object has the video of me and via that I can capture the element and put it on the canvas. Okay. Okay next one. How many of you know this device orientation? Okay how many of you play Temple Run? It's old I know. So what happens is like with this API we get a three dimension position of our device. In this case specifically mobile. So you know like this is why I feel this is interesting because this is another way to have a user input, right? Rather than just having like type something or speak something this is very getting very physical. Like for example Temple Run I really like that game because in that I was engaged rather than putting left, right swipe. Right. So this give me another dimension where I can use the JavaScript to give a better user experience to my user. So I'll give another try. I will try to connect my phone to my laptop and see if that works again. Is it working? Okay it works. So no thanks please. Let's go for device orientation. Okay. So this is my masterpiece of UI so please don't judge me on that. So this give this ball gives me exact position where my mobile is in the 3D dimension. And accordingly I can take the user input or whatever I want to do. Please don't judge. Okay. Moving back to our slide. All I need to do is to listen to this even device orientation and it gives me three dimensions. X, Y, Z. Z is, can you read that or if I'll read that for you. So Z gives the rotation around Z axis obviously. X give you like left to right how my mobile is moving and Y gives the front and back. Okay. So let's move to the next one. Web share API. How many of you know this? How many of you dated like in your app, in your like let's say any website. If you want to share anything your data you have to write the URL and give a copy feature so that you can just copy it to the clipboard and user has to paste in whatever social media. How many of you have faced this problem? Right. So in modern browsers this can be solved like this. Oh, I'm using that. Did it work? Oh, come on. Sorry for that. Okay. So let's type something like hey share it for them. I'm out of time. Okay. I heard the alarm so I thought. Okay. So all I need to do is share and it opens my native it opens my native browser native browser and please don't look at my contacts. I should have turned it off. And I can pass the text to my gym really everything right now. Okay. Cool. So I did this just from my web app. A native share right to my Gmail. So I love this API for a single reason. This is one of the simplest API like pretty straightforward. If you look at the code of this navigated or share the title you want to share the text you want to share the URL you want to share that's it including this will create that native search for you. How many of you want to implement this in your app? Perfect. We are going there. Cool. Okay. How many of you know this API? Amazing. Amazing. So till now for every API I have a demo and I have a demo for this too but the breakout chances of this is 95% so please don't judge me on this API because you know how this works the connection in the browser in the real time and in live talk. Okay. So I'm still here. How many of you want to try this with me? Not so interesting. Trust me. I'm not that bad. Okay. So here what I have is a Bluetooth bulb. Okay. What I will do is try to connect this with my browser. Okay. So I will just turn it on. Okay. Hopefully it is on. Let's check for this. Let's check. This is kind of bad situation. Really? Okay. Hmm. So the better idea is I will do it here and then publish it there maybe. Can I share it like this? Okay. So that you can see actually so what I'm trying to do here is connect this and this detects a Bluetooth bulb around. I just connected. Okay. This turns blue. So that's my indication that it is connected. So Okay. Now it's tricky how to hold both of things. Hmm. Okay. I will do it more. Let's quit this. Color choice. Is this purple? Yes, it is. Okay. Let's do like this. These are individual APIs and they are not powerful. No doubt. But the real power of JavaScript is in clubbing the APIs. Right? So what I have done is um I wrote some JavaScript to upload a file and detect the color of it and turn it in that color. Make sense? Since my demos are working I'm getting a bit more ambitious and and if... If it fails in further, please don't judge me. Judge me on the previous contents, okay? Okay. Let's try this. Remember this API? Okay. So I'll again turn it on and let's... I'll just put it here so that everyone can see it. It's interesting. I'll just keep it. It's red. So that's what I want to convey to you people, right? I can give you the knowledge of APIs. These APIs exist. These APIs work like this. But this combination is to us on our JavaScript developing things, right? Like these are the dimensions which you can use. You can combine the APIs and do amazing stuff. Okay. So five minutes are left. It's for with question answers or without? With question answers. So okay. I had some more demos but I think we are not permitted with time. So for that all I have to do is first find the device and here what I do is just give the device name or the service which I want to use so that I will narrow down if you see in my Bluetooth list, not all elements not all the Bluetooth devices were discovered. For example, lots of mobile will be having Bluetooth. My laptop will be having Bluetooth. Only the one which I wanted. So I can bound it which kind of devices I want to look. Okay. Then there's something called as GAT. I'm not sure if that time is enough for that probably. I will be outside to explain more on this. So I want to make understand two things. One is service, one is characteristics. So service is basically what kind of service I'm giving. Like for example, bulb is light service or battery service is like for example this example was from what's that like heart rate monitor a Bluetooth heart rate monitor. So I can get the battery service of that and what characteristic I want is the battery level. So this will give me the battery level of that monitor and I can listen to that even something called as characteristic value changed. So whenever that battery level change, it will notify the server. Okay. Cool. Here we have some success stories from PWAs. There are some name, some may you may know, some may you not. But I'm sure this I can everyone knows. Everyone in the room knows right. How many of you use Twitter PWA by any chance? If not try it once. Okay. What is the future of PWA? It has been around for long. Right. But still very small subset of it is really popular. Any guesses? Play store? It's on the way. Exactly. More APIs, better browser support because what I've shown is like may or may not work in every browser. Right. This is a caveat. So with better browser support with more APIs and the first thing Web Assembly. How many of you know that? How many of you are excited about Web Assembly? The day we can we put Web Assembly code with the PWA things will change drastically. Here are some references which I use and with that I'll show you. Thank you. Okay. So we'll have time for a couple of questions. I can just hold it, right? It's fine. I can hold it. Yeah, sure. So who had a question? Hi. Thank you for presentation. I have some more questions. So do you think it's production really because of we know that only Chrome support all the way I can make sure that I use Chrome but my client can use it. So implementing any advanced feature how I would do that I I create two versions of it. Like I have like for example share API I have both options. I will detect if there is navigator.share I will show just the share button else I would go for the native like how we do the copy paste thing. So from the experience of using speech synthesis what I learned was that you can get offline when you've turned your phone off a native app will still do speech synthesis but the browser won't which is frustrating. So I also learned about an API called Wakelock which is super bleeding edge. True. That will be really helpful but the caveat with that is like the browser when the home screen is locked just to it's kind of security feature you can say but that's a trade-off. But that will be really interesting to allow in some cases. Anyone else? One more question. What do you think about React Native Web because I heard that Twitter implemented WA with React Native Web or something right? Yep. I love that. So I believe in like idealistic I never say like PWA will take over everything but there are cases where we don't need a native app there are cases where we don't need PWA right? So you don't need to create a native app for everything lots of cases can be covered with this for example you are having an e-commerce site you want to create an app for that in no way you need a native app for that. So we have to live in a like homogeneous word you know. So it totally depends on you like what kind of cost you want to bear what kind of clients you have. So yeah. Last question. How was a shared API in the browser? Sorry? In the browser, shared API when you want to share something in the browser, in desktop how was how looks when you I'm not sure I get a question. I mean it will not make sense in desktop because these are extending the native behaviors which is concerned to mobile. Thank you very much. Thank you everyone.


Welcome back to theCUBE's coverage of Veeamon 2022, Dave Vellante with David Nicholson. Brian Schwarz is here. We're going to stay on cloud. He's the director of product management at Google Cloud. The world's biggest cloud I contend. Brian, thanks for coming on theCUBE. Thanks for having me. Super excited to be here. Long time infrastructure as a service background. Worked at Pure, worked at Cisco, Silicon Valley guy, Techie, so we're going to get into it here. I love it. I was saying before off camera, we used to go to Google Cloud next every year. It was an awesome show. Guys built a big, big set for us. You joined right as the pandemic hit. So we've been out of touch a little bit. It's hard to, you know, you got one eye on the virtual event, but give us the update on Google Cloud. What's happening generally and specifically within storage? Yeah, so obviously the cloud got a big boost during the pandemic because a lot of work went online. You know, more things, you know, kind of being digitally transformed as people keep trying to innovate. So obviously the growth of Google Cloud, you know, it's got a big tailwind to it. So, you know, business has been really good. Lots R&D investment. We obviously have an incredible set of technology already, but still huge investments in new technologies that we've been bringing out over the past couple of years. It's great to get back out to events to talk to people about them. Been a little hard the last couple of years to give people some of the insights. You know, when I think about storage, you know, huge investments, one of the things that some people know, but I think it's probably underappreciated is we use the same infrastructure for Google Cloud that is used for Google consumer products. So search and photos and, you know, all the public, you know, kind of things that most people are familiar with, maps, et cetera. Same infrastructure at the same time is also used for Google Cloud. So we just have this tremendous capability of infrastructure. Google's got nine products that have a billion users, you know, most of which many people know. So we're pretty good at storage, pretty good at compute, pretty good at networking. You know, obviously a lot of that kind of shines through on Google Cloud for enterprises to bring their applications, you know, lift and shift and or modernize, build new stuff in the cloud with containers and things like that. Yeah, hence my contention that Google has the biggest cloud in the world. Like I said before, doesn't have the most I-ass revenue because that's a different business. I've got, you can't comment, but I've got Google Cloud running at $12 billion a year, run rate. So a lot of times people go, oh yeah, Google, they're, you know, third place going for the pros and cons. But that is a huge business. There aren't a lot of $10, $12 billion, you know, infrastructure companies. Rapidly growing market.  That's a big, got a big storage business. I know you can't tell us how big, but it's big. And if you add in all the stuff that's not in GCP, that's, you do a lot of storage. So you know storage. You understand the technology. So where is, what is the state of technology? You came, you were background in Cisco, nearly networking company. They used to do some storage stuff sort of on the side. And we used to say they're going to buy NetApp. Of course that never happened. That would have made no sense. Pure storage, obviously no storage, but they were, you know, disqueray company, essentially. Cloud storage different. What's different about it? What's the, what's different in the technology? How does Google think about it? I always like to tell people there's some things that are the same and familiar to you. And there's some things that are different. If I start with some of the differences, object storage in the cloud, like just fundamentally different, you know, object storage on prem, it's been around for a while, often used as kind of like a third tier of storage, you know, maybe a backup target, compliance, something like that.  Okay, you know, use object storage for all the songs out there. You know, and increasingly we see a lot of growth in. Well, how are you, how are you defining tier one storage in that record? Spot, again, you're thinking streaming service. Okay, fine. Autify goes down, I'm pissed. Yeah, this is true. That's how you're done. Not just you, maybe a few million other people too. One is importance, business importance. Okay, tier one applications, like critical to the business, like, you know, business down type stuff. But even if you look at it for performance, for capabilities, you know, object storage in the cloud, it's just, it's a different thing. Because of the architecture that you're developing? Yeah, yeah, and the applications that we see running on it. Obviously, huge growth in our business in AI and analytics. Obviously, Google's pretty well known in both spaces, big query, obviously on the analytics side, big, massive data warehouses. And obviously. It gets very high marks. Yeah, yeah, very, very well regarded, super successful, super popular with our customers in Google Cloud. And then obviously AI as well. A lot of AI is about getting structure from unstructured data.  You're trying to train computers to basically deal with analog things. And it's all stored in object storage, machine learning on top of it, creating all the insights and frankly, things that computers can deal with, you know, getting structure out of the unstructured data. So you just see performance, capabilities, you know, importance as it's really a tier one storage. Much like File on Block is, where, you know, have kind of always. Depending on, right, the importance. So there's a fair question, right? Because we're used to thinking, oh, you're running your Oracle transaction database on block storage, you know, that's tier one, but Spotify's a pretty important business. And again, on BigQuery, it is a cloud native born in the cloud database. A lot of the cloud databases aren't, right? And that's one of the reasons why the BigQuery is- And Google's really had a lot of success taking technologies that were built for some of the consumer services that we build and turning them into cloud native Google Cloud. Like, you know, HDFS, we were talking about open source technologies, came originally from the Google file system. Now we have a new version of it called where we run internally called Colossus.  I remember one of the early Hadoop worlds, I was talking to a Google engineer and saying, wow, that's so cool that Hadoop came. You guys kind of, you know, were the mainspring of that. He goes, oh, we're way past Hadoop now. So this is the early days of Hadoop. It's funny whenever Google says consumer services.  But no, a consumer service for Google is at a scale that almost no business needs at a point in time. So you're not taking something and scaling it up. They're tier one services. Exactly, exactly. You're more often pairing it down so that a Fortune 10 company can leverage it. So let's dig into data protection in the cloud, disaster recovery in the cloud, ransomware protection, and then let's get into why Google. Maybe you could give us the trends that you're seeing, how you guys approach it, and why Google. Yeah, one of the things I always tell people, there's certain best practices and principles from on-prem that are just still applicable in the cloud. And one of them is just fundamentals around recovery point objective and recovery time objective. You should know for your apps what you need. You should tier your apps, get best practices around them, and think about those in the cloud as well. They don't imagine the concept of RPO and RTO don't just magically go away just because you're running in the cloud. You should think about these things. And it's one of the reasons we're here at the VeeamON event. It's important, obviously they have a tremendous skill in technology about helping customers implement the right RPO and RTO for their different applications. And they also help do that in Google Cloud. So we have great partnership with them, two main offerings that they offer in Google. One is integration for their on-prem things to use basically Google as a backup target or DR target. And then cloud native backups, they have some technologies being backup for Google. And obviously they also bought Castin a while ago because they also got excited about the container trend. And obviously great technologies for them, those customers to use those in Google Cloud as well. So RPO and RTO is kind of IT terms, right? But we think of them as sort of the business requirement. Here's the business language. How much data are you willing to lose in the business versus what? I don't want to lose any data. Oh, how big is your budget? Oh, okay. And then RTO, how fast do you, that's RPO. RTO is how fast do you want to get it back. How fast do you want to get it back if there's an outage? Instantly, how much money do you want to spend on that? Oh, okay. And then your application value will determine that. Okay, so that's what RPO and RTO is for those you may not know that. Sometimes we get into the acronym too much. Okay, why Google Cloud? Yeah, when I think about some of the infrastructure Google has, why does it matter to a customer of Google Cloud? The first couple of things I usually talk about is networking and storage. Compute's awesome, we can talk about containers and Kubernetes in a little bit. But if you just think about kind of core infrastructure, you know, networking, Google's got one of the biggest networks in the world, obviously, to service all these consumer applications. Two things that I often tell people about the Google network, one, just tremendous backbone bandwidth across the regions. One of the things to think about with data protection, it's a large data set. When you're going to do recoveries, you're pushing lots of terabytes often. And big pipes matter. Like it helps you hit the right recovery time objective because I want to do a restore across the country. You need good networks. And obviously Google has a tremendous network. I think 20 subsea cables that we've built underneath the world's oceans to connect the world to the internet. The other thing that I think is really underappreciated about the Google network is how quickly you get into it. One of the reasons all the consumer apps have such good response time is there's a local access point data into the Google network somewhere close to you. Almost anywhere in the world. I'm sure you can find some obscure place where we don't have an access point. But look, search and photos and maps and workspace, they all work so well because you get in the Google network fast, local access points, and then we can control the quality service. And that underlying substrate is the same substrate we have in Google Cloud. So the network is number one. Second one in storage, we have some really incredible capabilities in cloud storage, particularly around our dual region and multi region buckets. The multi region bucket, the way I describe it to people, it's a continent size bucket. Single bucket name, strongly consistent that basically spans a continent. It's in some sense is a little bit of the nirvana of storage. No more DR failover, right? In a lot of places, traditionally on-prem, but even in other clouds, two buckets failover, right? Orchestration set up, whenever you do orchestration, the DR is a lot more complicated. You got to do more fire drills, make sure it works. We have this capability of a single namespace that spans regions and it has strong read after write consistency. Everything you drop into it, you can read back immediately. So I say I'm on the West Coast and I have a little bit of an on-premises data center still and I'm using Veeam to back something up and I'm using storage within GCP. Trace out exactly what you mean by that in terms of a continent size bucket. Updates going to the recovery volume for lack of a better term in GCP. Where is that physically? If I'm on the West Coast, what does that look like? Two main options. It depends again on what your business goals are. First option is you pick a regional bucket. Multiple zones within a Google Cloud region are going to store your data. It's resilient because there's three zones in the region but it's all in one region. And then your second option is this multi-region bucket where we're basically taking a set of the Google Cloud regions from around North America and storing your data basically in the continent, multiple copies of your data. And that's great because if you wanna protect yourself from a regional outage, right? Earthquake, natural disaster of some sort, this multi-region, it basically gives you this DR protection for free and it's not free because you have to pay for it of course but it's free from a failover perspective. Single name space, your app doesn't need to know. You restart the app on the East Coast, same bucket name, read and write instantly out of the bucket. Cool, what do you do with Veeam? You know, so we have this great partnership obviously for data protection and DR. And I really often segment the conversation into two pieces. One is for traditional on-prem customers who essentially wanna use the cloud as either a backup or a DR target. And traditional Veeam backup and replication supports Google Cloud targets. You can write to cloud storage. Some of these advantages I mentioned are archive storage, really cheap. We just actually lower the price of archive storage quite significantly, roughly a third of what you find in some of the other competitive clouds. If you look at the capabilities, are archive class storage fast recovery time, right? Fast latency, no hours to kind of rehydrate. Good, storage in the cloud is overpriced. It is, it is historically overpriced despite all the rhetoric. Good, I didn't know that. I'm glad to hear. Yeah, so the archive class storage, you essentially read and write into this bucket and restore, so it's often, you know, one of the things I joke with people about, I live in Silicon Valley, I still see the tape truck driving around. You know, I really think people can really modernize these environments and use the cloud as a backup target. Get a copy or get an off-prem. Won't you guys use tape? Well, we don't talk a lot about all the Veeam. No comment, no comment. Okay. And just to be clear. When he says cloud storage is overpriced, he thinks that a postage stamp is overpriced. Right? If I give you 50 cents, are you going to deliver a letter across country? No. Cloud storage is, it's not overpriced. Okay, we're going to have that conversation. I think it's historically overpriced. I don't, I think it could be more attractive relative to the cost of the underlying technology. So good for you guys pushing prices. Yeah, so this archive class storage is one great area. The second area we really work with Veeam is protecting cloud native workloads. So increasingly customers are running workloads in the cloud. They run VMware in the cloud. They run normal VMs. They run containers. Veeam has two offerings in Google that essentially help customers protect that data, hit their RPO, RTO objectives. Another thing that is not different in the cloud is the need to meet your compliance regulations. Right? So having a product like Veeam that is easy to show back to your auditor, to your regulator to make sure that you have copies of your data that you can hit an appropriate recovery time objective if you're in finance or healthcare or energy. So there's some really good Veeam technologies that work in Google Cloud to protect applications that actually run in Google Cloud all in. And to your point about the tape truck, I was kind of tongue in cheek, but I know you guys use tape. But the point is, you shouldn't have to call the tape truck, you should go to Google and say, okay, I need my data back. Now having said that, sometimes the highest bandwidth in the world is putting all this stuff on the truck. Is there an option for that? You know, again, it gets back to this networking capability that I mentioned. Yes, people do like to joke about, okay, trucks and trains and things can have a lot of bandwidth. Big networks can push a lot of data around. Obviously. And you've got a big network. We've got a huge network. So, you know, if you want to push, you know, I've seen statistics, you can do terabits a second to a single Google Cloud storage bucket. There is super computing type performance inside Google Cloud, which, you know, from a scale perspective, whether it be network, compute, you know, these are things scale. If there's one thing that Google is really, really good at, it's really high scale. If your companies can't afford it. Yeah, if you're that sensitive, avoid moving the data altogether. If you're that sensitive, have your recovery capability be in GCP. Yeah, well, and again. So that when you're recovering, you're not having to move data. It's approximately, yeah. That's a great point. Fail over your VMware cluster. Exactly. And use the cloud as a DRR target. We got very little time, but can you just give us a rundown of your portfolio? Yeah. In storage. Yeah, so storage, cloud storage for object storage.  Like I mentioned, archive storage. Our first party offerings in the file area or file store, basic enterprise and high scale, which is really for highly concurrent, you know, kind of paralyzed applications. Persistent disk is our block storage offering. We also have a very high performance cash block storage offering and local SSD. So that's the main kind of food groups of storage, you know, block file and object. Increasingly doing a lot of work in data protection and in transfer and distributed cloud environments where, you know, the edge of the cloud is kind of pushing out outside the cloud regions themselves. But those are our products. Also, you know, we spend a lot of time with our partners because Google's really good at building and open sourcing and partnering at the same time, hence with Veeam and obviously with File.  So there's a lot of partnerships we have that are important to us as well. Yeah, you know, we didn't get it to Kubernetes. A great example of open source, Istio, Anthos, you know, we didn't talk about the on-prem stuff. So Brian, we'll have to have you back and chat about those things. I look forward to it. To quote my friend Matt Baker, that it's not a zero sum game out there and it's great to see Google pushing the technology. Thanks so much for coming on. All right, and thank you for watching. Keep it right there. Our next guest will be up shortly. This is Dave Vellante for Dave Nicholson. We're live at Veeam on 2022 and we'll be right back.


If I was to work with the Jobs Plan team, I realized that part of the initiative is to work with more senior people, but the one thing that I would focus on is helping people understand what it is they want to do, whether you're working with high school kids or even kids in college and university. What career do they want to see themselves stream to, because there are different ways of getting there, and if they know what their goals are, they can really achieve them.


Hi, I'm Darren Taylor, the Senior Project Officer for the Humanities and Social Sciences at Akara. I'm going to talk briefly about the Australian curriculum history with a focus on ANZAC Day as an illustration of the important learning it describes. The curriculum places Australia in its World History context by integrating the Australian experience with what was happening on the broader world scene. This reflects the importance of students understanding their own and others' histories, appreciating our traditions and how they have changed, all within an increasingly diverse and interconnected world. The curriculum focuses on the use of evidence to reconstruct the past, recognising that the past is open to interpretation and debate, and enables students to explore the significance of events and developments in our history. ANZAC Day captures the imagination of the entire nation on the 25th of April each year. What is probably less well known is what schools across the country are learning about the significance of the ANZAC tradition through the Australian curriculum history. In the Australian curriculum history, the ANZAC tradition is included as essential learning for all young Australians, and is most explicit at years three and nine. In year three, students learn about the ANZAC story as an important day on the national calendar. In year nine, students investigate World War One in depth, learning about why men and women became involved in the war, the places where Australians fought, the nature of warfare, the Gallipoli campaign, and the impact of World War One on Australia. Students also learn about the significance of the commemoration of the ANZAC tradition itself and its human qualities of courage, mayship and sacrifice. While this is most explicit at years three and nine, wherever students are investigating Australia's wartime experiences in the curriculum, such as World War Two, Vietnam and Afghanistan, there is an opportunity to engage in learning about the meaning of ANZAC Day and to connect it with the great work schools do through their activities and remembrance of those who served and died in all wars, conflicts and peacekeeping operations. The content of the Australian curriculum history enables students to engage with primary sources and practical hands-on history, to discover the first world war through the words of our ANZACs, investigate photographs, visit war memorials and attend ANZAC Day commemorations. More than ever, young Australians are journeying to Gallipoli each year to remember the fallen and to reflect on the costs of war on our nation. On the 25th April 2015, Australians will mark the 100th anniversary of the ANZAC landings at Gallipoli. With the Centenary of ANZAC fast approaching, there will be many opportunities for schools to connect student learning in the Australian curriculum history to local community and national events and activities. What a wonderful opportunity this will be to bring learning about the ANZAC story to life, to understand the Australian experience of war and its enduring impact on Australian society.


Stationery versus stationery. These two terms are often confused due to their similar spelling and pronunciation. Let's take a closer look. The word stationery spelled with an A is referred to something that is not moving or not intended to be moved. For example, almost every gem has a row of stationery bikes. Stationery spelled with an E on the other hand refers to paper, usually paper that is used for writing letters or notes, such as here. I should use the nice stationery to write to grandma. Next time think about whether you are referring to something that cannot be moved or to a piece of paper. That's it for today. See you next time.