and welcome to this Gladiator. Hey everybody. Sorry, I'll cut off there. Hi and welcome to my desk. Stuff on me. Oh my goodness, sorry. Having a baby. Okay, so welcome to my desk. It's me, Gladiator, covered with cereal and doing a lot of engineering. It's been so cold out. So we're staying in and doing all sorts of electronics. So let's go to my computer real fast and I'll show off the design. I think I checked about this last week. So this is a board that will take a new pixel signal here. I always like to make it, maybe I'll turn on the T-docus layer cause it always makes it a little more visible. One moment. T-docus. Okay. It takes the new pixel signal from this connector here, puts it through a WS-2811 chip and then through an inverter and then through three power and channel fets into this terminal block that is basically like an open collector connection for power ground and then three channels red, green and blue. And the idea was that I would be able to use this to take a new pixel signal which like a lot of my controllers can now generate and turn that into a three channel RGB PWM output that can handle up to like 12, 16 volts and up to three amps per channel. So we got the prototypes going over here. So let's go to the overhead. I'll show this off. So this is the board. So you see the new pixel signal. Yeah. I pulled it out a little bit. New pixel signal coming here and you can kind of see this little red LED saying, okay, data's coming in, power. And then this is powered from, the signal's coming from this metro which is a five volt Arduino compatible ground and then V in here, this is a 12 volt power input. So I'm getting that to power this board from. And then this is driving a tower device. This is a little tower light. And these are 12 volt LEDs.  But this is actually working beautifully and you can see it's doing like, PWMing between all the different colors. Another demo I did, so this is working great. This is exactly the kind of thing I wanted to do. It's like I have three LEDs of 12 volts and I want to, you know, turn them on and off without a lot of wiring. Another thing you can do, this is a sign for a second, is use it to drive something like this which is a three or five watt LED. This LED takes five volts, not 12 volts. The only thing is, I think, I forgot to reprogram this. This might be only like, it might be like pure white. Yeah, oh my God, it's like the brightest in the world. Let me just update my code real fast to remove the... No, I just was, sorry, it's fine now. I just, it's worked Python, so it's like I just edited it really fast, no compiling. So now you can see this just ridiculously bright LED. You can see it's like so bright, it kind of washes me out. Driven as if it was a neopixel. So like a lot easier than having to connect up power transistors, dealing with like, you know, level shifting or whatever. This is all plug and play and then this is really easy to use.  So this design is great. I'm actually like kind of psyched because there's a lot of times where I wanted to use like 12, a lot of stuff is like 12 volts LEDs or really powerful LEDs and now it's easy to connect and then this is the little output pin. So if you want to chain these together, you can have multiple. I want to keep the board small so there isn't like a chain connector but you can mechanically chain them by just grabbing the output signal from here. So that's one prototype that's looking great, psyched to get that out. And then let's show the other prototype is a little bit more detailed. Let me just unplug this because I don't want to have any confusion. So the next prototype I've got is the... Itzy Bitsy ESP32. This is one of those 2020 designs that I'm trying to finally, you know, just wrap it up. Wait a second. Okay, so this is a board with... Show this off. ESP32 Pico module. That's what it's called. I know there's a lot of stuff that's called Pico but this is literally like the name of the module is called the Pico from Expressif and it has eight megabytes of flash, two megabytes of PS RAM and an ESP32, you know, Wi-Fi Bluetooth, Bluetooth Classic module. Which I really like.  Sometimes it's the tastiest flavor. Semicut connector, a little built-in NeoPixel, reset button and a user button, pin 13 LED. And then on the back, the USB serial converter chip that does the programming, little reset circuitry, a couple of nice capacitors for bypass filtering. And then a five-volt output signal. So this is for, if you're driving NeoPixels like with WLED, you really wanna have a level shifted up signal just in case you have LEDs that are sensitive that they really want five-volt peak-to-peak signal. This is a five-volt shifted output. And then diodes to select either VBAT or USB power. So this is kind of the same as the other itsy-bitsy boards we've got, but with the ESP32. Now I kind of wish that I didn't have the antenna, like kind of close to the SPI and UR pins, but that's kind of the standard locations I use for those. And you know, before the ESP32 existed, like I designed those pins. I noticed that, you know, didn't really affect the antenna output, but I'm also gonna make a version with a UFL connector or WFL connector. And that way on the off chance that it's like, no, I really wanna have much better antenna and I don't want it to interfere with the signals. Always have external antenna. It's very easy. I just pick and place a different module on. This is the exact same footprint. So that's the module. And so the test I've been doing to get it started is, you know, this is gonna be great for whippersnapper, I think, because it's so small. And then I just have it hooked up here to a temperature humidity sensor. And then I just have this little OLED connected, which is saying the temperature humidity and it connected to IO. And then if we go to the computer, I have just a really quick dashboard showing the output. And then you can see the connectivity dots over here. And then if I set this color to be like purple, if you go back to the overhead, you know, now this LED is purple. So it's kind of hard to see. Let me see if I can find something I can reflect it off of. Maybe this tissue. Okay, so this is like purple. And then I'll set it to be red. And then it's red. And then I'll set it to be green. And then it's green. Okay, great.  So that's the demo I did. So the only thing is after I did the demo, I was like, great, all I have to do now is do the low power tests. But then when I did the low power tests, the amount of current being drawn was like 150 micro ampere, which is really, it's not high, 150, but it should be more like, it should be 50 or less because the way I wired everything up, I was like, well, the NeoPixel's on a pin to power it. And I didn't have anything connected to the I squared C and the, you know, when it's off battery that USB chip isn't running. And so I actually tried, you know, I grabbed a bunch of these because I had a couple of prototypes and I kind of started piecing together what happened. So the first thing is, find it. Sorry, there's like, there's so many damp words on my desk. Okay. So the first thing I did is I realized that this level shifter is floating. So let's go to the computer and I'll show what I mean by that. So this is a fixed version, but I'll show you what it is. So this is the level shifter that we were taking signal in D5 and I was shifting it up the five volts. And when you're running off a battery, V high is powered. V high is basically the diode or of, show you the diode or of power from the bus USB or from the battery. And so what's happening is that this was, when you have a floating input to a gate, it's sometimes like causes extra current or it can like flicker up and down because it's floating. So I added a very like pull down and like that reduced the amount of current already, like, you know, like I think 20, 30 micro amperes or something. So that was step one, so that got added. And then the next thing I realized was that I had used MBR 120s for these diodes. And so when the battery was powered, actually the MBR 120s, which I use for some cases have kind of high back leakage. Like they could be up to like half a milliamp. And so the VBAT power was going through here and that was correct, but then it was leaking back current into V bus and powering things like the USB converter chip. What else was it powering? I think it was like, I don't know. It was like back powering something else. I think maybe it was just the USB serial converter chip because this should have been off. This should be only powered from V bus. So maybe it was powering this resistor divider here that's used for V bus detect. And so I swapped the MBR 120s for BAT 20Js. It's kind of like looked around. So BAT 20Js, three amp continuous current. I think like maybe five amp, maybe two amp continuous current, like four amp peak. And not too bad for a drop like 500 milliamps, about the same as the MBR 120, but much, much smaller reverse current. I see, I think I'll look it up real fast, BAT 20J. And like tons of them in stock. So maybe one amp, sorry. Sorry, it's continuous one amp, which is fine, just plenty. And then reverse current, it depends a little bit about like temperature and VR, but it's low, like in the under microamp on average for like, you know, five volts and 25 degrees C. And you know, the forward voltage isn't too bad. I mean, it's a little higher than the MBR 120, but it's like only a hundred millivolts more. And so what was great is after I did that in deep sleep, I was able to get 10 microamp years, which was super great. Thanks to the PPK I was testing, I was using, definitely recommend getting one of these. People are always like, oh, I wanna do low power stuff. It's like, unless you actually can measure, you don't really know, but you don't know until you know. And so this is the current at low. And then I think, yeah, in light sleep, it's about, you know, two milliamps. And then, you know, normal running, I think it's like 40 milliamps or something. So this is my earlier test of deep sleep. Sorry, this is the, yeah, like 40 milliamps and then light sleep, about two milliamps and then deep sleep, 10 microamp years, which is like, amazing, super great. So that design's done. So yeah, that's it. So that's the prototypes on my desk. So both of those are done and ready to go. So I wanna order those PCBs tonight, which is what I do after the baby's asleep. Okay, so let's go to the great search. The great search brought to you by Digikey and Adafruit. Thank you so much, Digikey. This is when Lady80 is the power of engineering at WSU. Find the things you need on digikey.com. Search is an art. What do you look for this? Not only is it like, you have to search, but you have to know what you're looking for. That's right. Wow, deep. Okay, so I just finished a design for this Itsy-Bitsy board. So let's go to the overhead real fast. I'll just show it. Really quickly. So this board, Itsy-Bitsy, so this is a style of board that I use for small breakout boards designed to be as compact as possible. And I use a micro USB and, you know, maybe I should be using USB type C, but for stylistic and historic reasons, I've been kind of sticking to micro B. And this is a micro B connector I use. And one thing you'll note is that this micro B connector, I don't think I have any other micro B, this is kind of the only micro B board I have on me. Oh wait, no, I've got like this Pico board over here. And then this is a Pico, which is also using micro B, although they use a slightly different style, which I'll talk about. And micro B, you know, it's a little, it's a little easier to work with. You don't need separate resistors on the CC lines. It's a little bit smaller. A lot of people still have micro USB connectors. I realized we didn't cover this connector on the great search. So let's go to the computer and I'll talk about this. So one thing to watch for with micro USB connectors is you really, really, really want to make sure that they don't rip off.  And the part is surface mount, but then the legs are through hole, but it turns out that you don't need to hand solder them because as long as you put enough solder on these pads, as long as you find them big enough, and then you pick and place the part in, it sits in, and then as it mounts, the solder wicks in and holds it in place, and you get that mechanical strength of the slots or the holes going all the way through the PCB. One thing is you definitely need to do slots. You can't use hole because you have to have the cutout be exactly like 10% more than the size of the metal tab. You have to fit through, but it can't have too much space. You need that solder to go in and, you know, cause it's not through hole soldering. You're only getting that thin layer that the stencil is depositing, but you still want it to suction in and like grab that part real well, and then you can even see that a little bit of the solder melts. You can see it's well-soldered because it's silver on the bottom, not gold. That means that solder from the top wicked all the way down, and so the part is being held by the entire PCB structure. And when I first started using this particular component, I asked Mr. Ladyada to use brute strength to try to rip it off, and he wasn't able to. And I know that there were a lot of dead boards at the time that used fully surface mount, and those will absolutely just like tear right off the PCB if you don't have any enclosure or anything keeping it in place. So let's go do the key and find micro USB connectors that have those legs we want for legs. I'll show you another thing about legs. So if you search for micro USB, you'll see cables, adapters and everything, but we just want the connectors. And there's actually a lot, it's interesting. USB, DVI, and HDMI connectors are all in one, but I only want micro USB, so I'm just gonna filter here for micro. So there's micro A, AB, B, and then B hybrid. You kind of just want micro B. Micro A and micro AB were used for USB on the go, but nobody really used it as far as I could tell. Unless you're doing it on the go, just get the micro B. It's a little less confusing. And then let's also search only for active. And then let's look for in stock only and not marketplace. Just look at the ones that are available in stock. Okay, so number of contacts 10, weird. I don't know what that's all about. I'm assuming that's a double connector, maybe? What is that? Oh yeah, oh, weird. Look at that, this is freaky. Maybe this is, is it like USB, like this is the extended USB? I don't know, kind of freaky. We don't want that. So let's undo that connector type, no, number of contacts. We want five contacts, USB, power, data plus, data minus, ID and ground. And then we want it to be a receptacle, not a plug. Plug is the thing that plugs in, that's from the cable, receptacle is what accepts the plug. Let's filter. And then, so the only thing is the mounting type it's confusing because again, we want surface mount but with two whole connectors. So I actually don't, I'm not gonna look at the mounting type because I'm a little worried that it's a little mix and match. Okay, so let's then look at what's available. So this is an example of a surface mount connector. So let's look at the model. And you see how there's the pads. Oh, this is kind of nice. It's fully surface mount. It only connects to the top of the PCB. This is fine. If you have something on the bottom, you don't wanna have anything on the mounting tabs go through the bottom because you have something on the bottom. I understand, totally cool. But if you don't have an enclosure that keeps this in place, it's gonna rip right off. So for like dev boards or anything, there's a chance of looseness. Even though it has these like mechanical tabs here, believe me, it can rip right off. So love this, but I don't love it so much. Okay, so then let's look. Here we are, now we're talking. So there's a couple, there's another surface mount one. Another surface mount one. I happen to like these style. I'll tell you why. First off, you see those back legs, the ones near the SMT connectors, they're kind of wide apart. There's some that are, let me see if I can find it. Ooh, it's like a vertical style one. Let me look for a horizontal, because I don't want, I don't really want vertical. I think it's confusing. I don't want the bottom entry, I want horizontal. Let's see if that gets rid of the vertical. Even though the vertical ones are cool. This is reverse plug. I'm just gonna try to see if I can find one that has the pins close together. Hold on, let me sort by availability. Okay, I think this is an example of one that is, yeah. So see this one, the legs are a little closer and you need to have like very thin annular ring through hole, holes like pads. I like to have a little bit of like, again, a little bit of extra space because I don't want these pins, these mounting pads to short to the pins. And I like to have a large annular ring because that means I have a good amount of solder-seed. Like I have a nice big distance here, no risk of shorting between the two. So while this one does have the four legs, it's not exactly what I'm looking for. And this one I think is only, this one is I think a 50-50. It only has two through hole. Yeah, this one has two through hole and then two SMT in the back. This is probably okay, but I really want full, full four. So let's keep going. This one is the close one. I think this was the one, yeah. I think this one, this one has a nice big distance. I like that these are large holes, mechanical connect all the way through the body. This would be my pick because it's got four through hole tabs, the five SMT and the tabs are far apart. You have plenty of space to make big annular rings, lots of solder, big mechanical strength. Keep this from tearing off your PCB design. So this is my pick and the price is pretty good too. Lots and stock. That's a great search. Where are you? All right, that's our show for the week this week. Thank you so much everybody. Bundle up, stay warm. We're going to film stuff, post the stuff. We'll see everybody all this week. Lots of new products and more. Thanks for joining us. We shall see you next week. Bye everybody.


We've been graphing in rectangular coordinates, but because I was trained the way that I was, I might slip from time to time and talk about Cartesian coordinates or Cartesian graphing. Well, where does that come from? A little explanation is in order. In 1637 the French mathematician Pierre de Fermat expressed a very important idea. Every algebraic equation in two variables corresponds to some geometric curve. From the same time, Rene Descartes expressed another idea. Every geometric curve can be described by an algebraic equation. Now what we're actually doing has more in common with what Fermat was describing than with what Descartes was describing. And so we should speak of Fermatian coordinates. But because Descartes was a famous philosopher, and Fermat was just a lawyer, we instead speak of Cartesian coordinates. So let's formalize Fermat's concept. The graph of an equation in x and y consists of all points hk, where x equals h, y equals k satisfies the equation. And what this means is that if x equals h, y equals k satisfies the equation, then the point hk is on the graph. If x equals h, y equals k does not satisfy the equation, the point hk is, wait for it, not on the graph. So for example, let's see if we can determine which, if any, of these points are the graph of y squared equals x cubed minus 3x plus 14. So let's take a look at our first point. We have x equals 0, y equals square root 14. And whether or not this point is on the graph is based on whether or not x equals 0, y equals square root of 14 satisfies the equation. So equals means replaceable, so let's replace x with 0, y with square root 14, and see if we get a true statement. And since the statement is true, 0, square root 14 is on the graph. How about our next point, 2, negative 4. We'll let x equals 2, y equals negative 4, and equals means replaceable, so we'll replace x with 2 and y with negative 4, and see if we get a true statement. And once again, we get a true statement, so we know that 2, negative 4, is on the graph. How about 4, negative 2. So here x is negative 4, y equals 2, we'll substitute those in, and this statement is true. I mean, false. Since this is a false statement, negative 4, 2 is not on the graph. Checking to see if a point is on the graph is relatively easy, it's a little bit harder to find points on the graph. So if I want to find two points on the graph, I need to find a pair of values, x equals h, y equals k, that satisfy the equation. And if it's useful to keep in mind, we already know how to solve equations in one variable, so let's transform this into an equation in one variable by choosing a value for the other. But choosing a value is hard. That's why we like living under political systems where voting doesn't matter. Well, maybe not. So let's make a choice. How about if x equals 1? If x equals 1, y must be a solution to this equation where every appearance of x has been replaced with a 1. And so that gives us this equation, but this equation looks hard to solve. Now the good thing about mathematics is that unlike politics, if you make a bad choice, you can unmake the choice. You can make a different choice and suffer no important consequences. So let's make a different choice. So we picked a value of x before, let's make a value of y. How about y equals 1? If y equals 1, then x must be a solution to the equation where every occurrence of y is replaced with 1. So x must be a solution to... Well this is a quadratic equation and we know how to solve it. This still looks like it's going to be hard to solve. Well, third time's the charm. Let's try another value and see if we get an easy equation. If we choose x equals 0, then our equation is going to become... And that's easy to solve. And so that gives us the solution x equals 0, y equals 2. And so we know that the 0.02 is on the graph.  But if you're a good human being, or a mathematician, you might note that the problem involves more than just giving one solution. We actually want to find two points, we only found one point. So let's find another. So let's make another choice. Well how about if y is equal to 0? Then x has to be a solution to the equation. And again, this equation is also easy to solve. And we get two solutions, x equals 2, or x equals negative 2. And so that gives us two more points, x equals negative 2, y equals 0, x equals 2, y equals 0. Well, we actually did more than the problem asked us to do. We found three points on the graph. Let's talk about something like this. Now since this has the form of a formula for y in terms of x, we might just pick values of x and compute. So if we let x equals 0, substituting that in, we solve for y. So x equals 0, y equals 7, 0, 7 is a point on the graph. If we let x equals 1, substituting that in, we find that y is equal to 7 and 2 fifths. So x equals 1, y equals 7 and 2 fifths is also a point on the graph. So I know that most of you out there are wanting to deal with fractions, and you're really dying to pick a value of x, like 3, 7, or something like that. We might want to make this a little bit easier. And a useful thing to keep in mind is that if you multiply a fraction by its denominator, the fraction becomes an integer. And so that suggests we might want to choose x equal to 5, the denominator of our fraction. If we let x equals 5, then substituting that into our formula for y gives us 9. And so the point on our graph, x equals 5, y equals 9, that's the point 5, 9.


headline news update. Welcome folks we have that our industrial straight up one hundred and fifty six nasdaq is up thirty seven S&P's up eighteen gold contract down at seven dollars ninety cents traded seventeen eighty seven an ounce we have silver down fifty three cents twenty three dollars fifty four cents an ounce light sweet crude off forty three cents eighty three dollars sixty one cents a barrel notes and bonds the ten year up ten ticks trade in one thirty thirty thirty year bond up twelve six at one sixty four twenty four and king dollar king dollars up two hundred and ten ticks trading out there at ninety four flat Euro one fifteen the end is at one thirteen point nine six the British pound is at one thirty six to one that you as dollar we get over me take a look at all the indices folks bottom line outside of the small capture at all time highs volume still contracting but the bottom line all-time highs the spies up about ninety we're out at that four sixty one we take a look at the queues the queues right now trading at up one thirty seven at three eighty eight net queues I mean that that looks like that's going to be that ABC three ninety two is the number on the ABC structure on the way up on the queues gold gold contract out here trading at a price point of eighteen seventeen eighty seven you've done one point three million contracts out today bottom lines get a sideways move we are going to get action tomorrow there's no doubt about it man I mean you know it's always intriguing folks with these fed meetings you know we always get like all excited the fed means coming out bottom line I do think that this one is going to really put some volatility into inside the market now that being said if you take a look at the note and bond market the bottom line is that that's saying it wants higher price so if that's what we get that is going to be a dovish report and I suspect what a dovish report is is this and I don't know how they're going to get around it a dovish report would be the aspect that they basically they're probably going to try and try to get rid of the transitory word but they're going to go on the aspect that they're still saying that they're going to taper first and they're going to finish tapering before they do anything with interest rates and if that's what they do the bottom line is you'll see the note and bond market go topside in the big way you'll see commodities go topside in the big way and hey man the market goes up but goes up no matter what happens so stay right there folks that come right back


This study provides a comprehensive profile of what patients consider to be the ideal characteristics of a good doctor in primary care. Patients emphasize the importance of clinical competence and professionalism, humanism when evaluating a doctor's performance. They also expect doctors to provide quality services and communicate effectively with patients. Additionally, they value doctors who are highly educated and have a good personality. These findings can serve as a basis for developing a more effective primary care workforce and providing better healthcare services to patients. This article was authored by Wenhua Wang, Jin Nanjong, Zhao Lu, and others.


Okay. So I know I've been talking about gearing up for the CASPA season and it's bananas that it's about to open up on April 29th, which is right around the corner. And one of the things that you have to keep in mind with your CASPA application is your hours, specifically your health care experience, your patient care experience, and your shadowing hours. So I've been getting a lot of questions on how to go about documenting them. So that is what we're going to be addressing in today's video. Sit down and look at my channel. Okay. So I had a few questions. And I've been talking about like my stats and, you know, all of the various different components of CASPA and things that you should be looking at. And one of those things is your hours, but specifically we're talking about your shadowing hours in today's videos, but this can go across any of the hours, volunteer, direct patient care, or a health care experience hours. How do you document them? What should you be putting in? What's the format that you should kind of be getting this documentation in? And I mean, how do schools verify it? So I had a question posed to me by Tender, okay? And Tender, I don't know if it's he or she or whoever, but Tender asks, how exactly can I go about documenting the shadowing hours and patient care hours? Is there a form that your supervisor fills out and initial? How do the PA schools verify these hours? Okay. So again, this is all based on the various different schools that you're applying to. The schools that I applied to required me to have my supervisor not only initial but sign off on all of the hours that I was claiming that I had shadowed. So I had to like write an email to the person that I shadowed with, ask them to just, I'm going to meet them with the paper and the documentation that they would need to sign. He asked me what were the days that I shadowed and he knew that the days were pretty much like eight to 12 hours, depending on the day. So I went in, I gave him the hours and he was like, okay, meet me here at this time. And I went and got the documentation and had him sign it. Now that was for one particular school. Other schools just kind of took what I had on CASPA, which you have that option to just obviously put in your shadowing hours in CASPA. How do schools verify it? They always say that they reserve the right to verify any of the information on your CASPA application.  Okay? So it's kind of like a disclaimer to say, you know, you better not lie. You know, this is like, we can test this, we can, if we for whatever reason have some inclination that there's something going on, we reserve the right to go and verify. And so some schools do, not all schools do, but you should really treat all of the programs like they do because the worst thing I made a video about like the worst thing that you can do on your application is lie because you're shooting yourself right in the foot. You're giving yourself kind of like, you think you're giving yourself a head start, but you're really kind of handicapping yourself, right? Because if for whatever reason things go bad, like that's it. Your career is pretty, as a PA, like your future career is kind of done because these program directors and people, they talk to each other. So it's very, you need to be very mindful of that. Now with that being said, how do you go about documenting it? For me, I used a little template that I made in Microsoft Word. There are people who use Google, Excel, like your Excel, like so people use Google Docs or they use their Excel spreadsheet. Some people use my PA box to put in all of their shadowing hours, but it really is a matter of, so with that being said, how do you go about documenting it? So for me, I used a Microsoft Word table, okay? I literally just made a table. I had the location where I was shadowing, who my supervisor was, the date that I shadowed, and how many hours I shadowed. And then I had a spot for my supervisor to sign at the end of everything, like if I was shadowing at the same location for a series of time and I would bring that with me and then you just compile it, okay? So obviously you can do that. You will then scan it in to like CAM scanner or whatever scan tool that you use. And you can just upload it to your computer just so that if the schools ask for those verifications, you have it. If the school has their own verification sheet, then what you need to do is print that out, which it will likely be in the supplemental application. You print that out. Make sure that when you are on your shadowing, your various different shadowing sites, you're able to go ahead and have the contact information for those people that you're shadowing and let them know, hey, I may need to verify this in the future. What's the best way that I can reach you at? So if it is email or phone or text, however it may be, you have their contact information. So when you have to go back on the back end and get them to sign this form that you're now applying to PA schools with, you have it there. Because for me, I did all of my shadowing the year before I applied to PA school and now I'm going in trying to apply and that's like months later for some of the schools type of things. So it's essential that you keep all of that in mind. Some people use Excel spreadsheets, some people use like a Google Doc sheet and they just kind of keep track of their hours that way. And again, you have to have the information of all the people that you're shadowing so that you can verify it. I've heard that some people just kind of keep a track of it in like a little notebook. You can keep track of it through there's like a little spreadsheet kind of thing that I made, forget that's the university for shadowing. You can keep track of it that way. Honestly, it's really up to you. I think the best way to go about doing it though is either making a table or keeping an Excel spreadsheet. That way you can just go and document the hours in that as soon as you get them done. And then again, if it's a matter of you're going to be shadowing at various different sites, you just print that out and have your preceptor sign it like when you're finished. Or have some type of documentation through email saying, thank you so much for allowing me to shadow these eight hours or 12 hours. I really appreciate it. And then you have that for your records. But ultimately, you need to have something for your records because when they ask you to verify, you're going to need to do it if they ask you to verify, okay? Thank you so much for this question. I hope the big takeaway from this is whatever is most convenient for you, okay? So be it Google Docs or Microsoft Word or a spreadsheet on Excel or get that to the university or my PA box, whatever it is, use those tools that are available to you. Whatever is the easiest to you, you write that information in there and keep a great track of it and the preceptors that you shadowed under so that when you have to go back, you have that information. All right, thank you, Tender. I really appreciate you asking me this question. If you guys have any more comments or questions for me, please, I know what to do. Leave it in the comment section below. Go ahead and like this video and subscribe, follow me on Instagram, edit on the PA and on Instagram at get that to the university. Thank you guys so much for watching. I will talk to you guys next time. Bye.


Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you so much for joining me and the ANU team here. And this event, the Chancellor's Panel, is the first event we're holding at the beginning of Alumni Week for 2023. And to commence proceedings, I'm absolutely delighted to welcome Paul Howes, who will conduct the Welcome to Country. And he's an integral part of the ANU family, so please welcome Paul Howes. Manda Ngu, Wurrga Wurri, Chancellor Bishop, thank you, Julie, for the kind introduction. And Yurya Murang, Pura Murambang, Maranya, good afternoon, everyone. You and I do Paul Giroa House, my name is Paul Giroa House. I was born here, the centre of my ancestral country at the Alcambra Hospital. God bless it. Anyone born in the Alcambra Hospital? One. Good great to see one hospital alumni here with me this evening. Injumarabala Dr Mathilda Williams House. My respects to my mother, Dr Mathilda Williams House, because of her I can, because of all of our matriarchs we can. Yilin Galangbo, Giba Bangu, Woga Bo, Megai Bo, Didenil Bang Mai. And ladies and gentlemen, young men, young women, Chancellor Julie Bishop, distinguished guests. Nyari Injumali Nyambri, Gumao Waugulu Waulabulao Ngunuao Nagara Gawiradri, Muji Gang, Yanangbu Jayandu. My respects to Nyambri, Gumao Waugulu Waulabulao Ngunuao Nagara Gawiradri, Elders, past and present. Nyari Injumarabu, Muji Gangu, Nurembanjigu, Nini Edadu. My respects to all people and Elders from all parts of the country. Nyambri, Waugulu Waulabulao Ngunuao Maiin, Gawinbanya Nginuga, Nurembangu Dara. Nyambri, Ngunuao people, welcome you all to the country. Nadu, Wuda Gabigi, Balabambo Gubu, Balagibangu Gubu. Goenguliala Dumbali, Murwai Marambu. We listen to our old people, our ancestors, our Elders, and they show us the straight, the correct path. Dullagangmuru, Bijerimuru, Goenguliala. Belangali now, Yamamali now, Waulamali now.  Mambu Wara Naminya Gu, Wuda Gabinya, Wuda Daraigu, Winninggala Gubali Gu, looking to see, listening to hear, and learning to understand. Yinja Malgiju, Yinja Marabu. A powerful word on country, philosophy, and ideology. It means many good things. They go slow, be patient, be polite, be gentle, and take responsibility. All those good nutrients. Yinja Marabala, Guji Gang, Gagam Marawala. Nunga Yalala Dain, Maiin. Respect is in the people and the government embracing and the ANU embracing Voice Treaty and Truth-telling in this country. Yinja Marabalawain, Giran Banana, Nuro Balabua, Gujiang Bing, Bunga Nara Nara. Respect is in the warmth of the campfire and the possum skin cloak that shelled us all. Our welcome to the country is always made in the spirit of peace and a desire for harmony for all people of modern Australia. And our main aim as local custodians is always to establish an atmosphere of mutual respect through the acknowledgement of our ancestors and the recognition of our rights that declare our special place in the pre- and post-history of the Canberra region. The name Canberra is derived from the name of our people and country from right here, gazetted on the 22nd of January, 1834, under the New South Wales colonial government. We have cared for Mother Earth since the dawn of time and evidence of our occupation, our sovereignty, our ownership can be seen everywhere throughout the land. Our signature is in the land, not just our DNA. And taking care of country is important to us all. Yinja Marabalawain, Moran Maginia, Borodorei. Respect everything living and growing. Look after the land and the rivers. And the land and the rivers will look after you. Yinja Marabalawain, Balabirida, Binna Binna and Yambri. Yawuluweonurambango. Respect is in the Canberra Creek and the breeze quietly moving through country. Goonguliala. Balawalawangadabu. Moranmadandabu. Mamayugurugambira. Respect is in the grinding stones and the carved trees made long ago on country. Goonguliala. Magamnawa. Wagadainanudangua. Bumiradaganda. Respect is in the soles of the feet of our dancers, hitting Mother Earth. Magagiribiringa. It's also found in the journey of the Bogong moths in the mountains. It tastes very good. Marambangmalang. Noyagoyimalang. It's wonderful. It's fabulous to be here. Chancellor to share this welcome to the country. Just finally, the law of the land. It talks about yinja malgiju. Mayangalangbu. Yandu mayangalangdu. Yinja malgiju. Yinyogea. Give respect and honor to all people. And then people will respect you. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. Yinyogea. There. Where we're now right now, left now. The past, the present and the future. Just like the acknowledge, sorry Chansell, one last thing. My mother was the first Indigenous Australian to be awarded an doctorate here from the ANU in 2017. Because of her ICANN, we can many of us can on country. She was also the first Indigenous Australian to ever conduct welcome the country for the opening of parliament of Australia, which was the 42nd opening of parliament and also the 43rd and the 44th opening of parliament. And we were gifted that opportunity last year for the opening of the 47th. And in 2006 my mother was awarded the Canberra citizen of the year. And today is my mum's birthday. So happy birthday to my mother. She's not here, but thank you for my mother. She's going to play a quick song on the Yadaki before I go. Thank you, Paul House. And what a beautiful ditch that is. And Paul, thank you as always for your gracious and insightful welcome to country. Please extend our best wishes to your extraordinary mum, the amazing Matilda House. And I too acknowledge and celebrate the traditional owners of the land on which we meet, the Ngunnawal Nambri people and pay respects to elders past and present. So please, thank Paul House once more. Thank you, Paul. Now not only is this the beginning of alumni week for the Australian National University, we also held open day here. So welcome to prospective students and parents who might be here. Hope you can also join the ANU family. It was a really exciting day on campus. I had a ball going to the different college presentations and meeting students and families who are considering a life here at ANU. And it's also a time to remember our extraordinary alumni, those who have been through this university will always be part of this university. And we have 132,000 alumni around the world. I think there are about 5,000 or 6,000 people on campus today. So there's obviously a great deal of interest in the Australian National University. And quite rightly, we are Australia's first and only national university. And we were set up with a national mission, a mandate to tackle the challenges facing our region, facing our country in the aftermath of the Second World War. And so I feel we have a responsibility to focus on the issues that impact on Australia's national interest. Whomever might be the government of the day, we have a responsibility to come up with answers, to have the debates, to have the discussions about national issues. And hence the fifth Chancellor's panel this evening. We are grappling with the topic of cyber security and its impact on our national interests. Now we have gathered some extraordinarily talented people with huge experience in this area and you are in for a treat. I will be moderating the discussion. But we have Suthagar Sivan Ratnam who is the Chief Intelligence Security Officer at ANU. And Suthagar has an extraordinary background doing all sorts of things including working in cyber at the Bureau of Meteorology, the Australian Signals Directorate. He is without doubt the kind of information security officer that allows the Chancellor to sleep well at night. We then have Olivia Shen. Olivia is an alumna from ANU and she's now back at ANU at the National Security College. But for about a decade she has been working in the area of national security, foreign policy in various roles with the Australian government. Then Stella Solar who is the Director of the AI Centre at CSIRO. And Stella has had, I got to do it, a stellar career. Nobody's ever done that before, have they? With Microsoft, with various IT distributors. She's been very involved with tech startups and she brings a wealth of experience to this discussion. And then Professor Joanna Weaver. She is the founding director of the tech policy design centre here at ANU. And she has had a vast experience negotiating cyber issues at the United Nations. She's worked within DFAT. She's had many roles within the Australian government. So we have people with vast insights, perspectives, experience in this field. So I'm going to take my spot in the middle and ask a few questions and get the debate going. So let's start by diving right in. My first question is going to be to Joanna. Right. Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 12 months on. This would have to be the first time that cyber operations have been used in armed conflict since Russia and China and the US and others actually agreed at the UN that international humanitarian law applies to cyber. So they were all on the same page on that day at that moment. So drawing from your experience in negotiating this agreement with others at the UN, can you share with us how laws and regulations being shaped now have been affected by what's happened in Ukraine? We now have, if you like, a living example of what was agreed at the UN. Well, maybe let me start by painting a little bit of a picture in terms of how that agreement came about. So in March 21, I got on a plane and headed to New York. This was in the middle of the pandemic, so very eerie flying at that time and arriving in New York, central station is empty. There are very few cars on the street and I met Putin's special advisor for ICT security in an Irish bar because we used to meet. They served vodka in Irish bars? No, that's why I went there because they didn't serve vodka. It was actually a very strategic decision because it only served three types of beer, light beer, dark beer, and wheat beer, and this particular ambassador is known for his vivacious capacity to consume alcohol, and I knew that I would have to have drinks, so I specifically chose the Irish bar, but we digress. So March 2021, the negotiations, we concluded those negotiations in May and had agreement with Russia, China, the US, and 20 other countries that international humanitarian law applies in cyberspace. That was endorsed by every single UN country in December of 2021, and that was a really momentous achievement, but the significance of that achievement, in particular in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine just three months later, was not something that we at all appreciated or anticipated at the time we were having those negotiations. So I think there's three things that stand out to me from the application of international humanitarian law and that agreement. Number one, it's pretty obvious that it doesn't matter if you agree the rules, there's going to be countries that will violate those rules, and if Russia's going to violate the most fundamental principle of international law, state respect for another country's sovereignty, then the expectation that they will not be violating it in cyberspace is an unrealistic expectation. But nonetheless, we have agreed it and it means we now have the ability to say this is the standard that the international community has agreed and we can hold to account. The second thing that Ukraine has really shown is that cyber security issues are absolutely national security issues. They cannot be divorced from them. Many countries we've heard or some commentators at the start of the Ukraine conflict say, well, we haven't seen the flash bang Pearl Harbor cyber incident that everyone was expecting, and in my view that's a total and utter misunderstanding of how cyber is used in conflict. It's like saying all of a sudden we now have aeroplanes that can drop bombs and saying we think we'll no longer have tanks or infantry battalions. It's when you're adding cyber warfare into, it's adding a domain rather than saying you will exclusively have things operating in cyberspace no more than we would expect war at the time to move entirely into air. So the, the, it's very clear that we, that cyber warfare is now a fundamental part of modern conflict. And there are many instances and examples of that in Ukraine. And then the third thing I think the example that stands out to me in the lesson that we learn from this is it's actually not just about offensive and defensive cyber operations or how good your cyber security is when you talk about this now. Cyber security is important, but also equally in, in the Ukrainian context, digital services have been just as important. So the Ukrainian system of digital identity has been absolutely integral and allowing refugees who fled without papers, for example, to be able to prove who they are, to be able to receive payments and support and to stay in communication. So the idea that this issue is an issue purely focused within the military domain and purely focused in the context of offensive and defensive cyber security is really a fallacy. So cyber security is national security, digital government services are government services. And when we're talking about this, if we focus purely on the tech or if we focus purely on the laws and the rules, we miss the picture. We actually need to have focus on both the technology and the laws, the context in which they're used. And that's really what we're trying to do at the tech policy design center. Thank you. Now let's segue from war to peace. Suthaga, cyber resilience. How can we democratize? Can I say that? How can we democratize cyber resilience so that all sectors of our economy can be prosperous and safe without undue dependence on government and expensive cyber services? Can you just elaborate from your perspective? Thanks, Julie. One thing that's worth noting is in the last five to 10 years, cyber threats have become democratized. So there's a really low barrier to entry for people wanting to do cybercrime. And we're talking about things like ransomware as a service, hacking as a service. So even the most unsophisticated threat actors out there can now find services, find technologies that will allow them to do cybercrime at scale. So if there's one thing that's become democratized in cyber, it's on the threat side. And it means with very little effort and very little outlay, you can do sophisticated damage. So on the other side of the equation, the sort of the defensive side, if you will, we have to do the same. We have to democratize the ability to defend. Now, most breaches in Australia happen to small and medium businesses who don't have access to cyber talent in the same way a bank would or even a university. And they don't necessarily have the same level of interaction with with government. Most small businesses or medium businesses aren't going to ring up the Australian cybersecurity cell. So there is a security divide that's beginning to form. And yet a lot of Australia's prosperity depends on this very sector. Small and medium enterprise, mum and dad operations. If a large company like Medibank and Optus, and we've seen that in the news, they will survive with their reputations damaged undoubtedly, but they'll survive. But a small business incurring exactly the same fate, exactly the same type of attack will most likely fold. So this is a major problem. We have to empower these small businesses to be able to defend themselves. Government cannot scale to the millions of businesses that exist in Australia in that particular segment. Government is a backstop. So it's really important to understand how we can improve their access to cyber talent, improve their ability to build culture, make them more self aware about the data that they possess. So a lot of the services that you interact with. Small, medium businesses have incredible amounts of personal information that they may not know how to do, may not know how to secure. So we have to teach them. I think it really comes down to education in the first instance. We have to have an ability, I think government has to have the ability and industry itself has to have the ability to be able to teach people how to be safe when they run their businesses, but it is just part of contemporary risk management. Can't rely solely on government and we can't rely solely on industry. It has to be a combination of both. There's also a role to play for suppliers as well. A lot of these businesses outsource their IT and they think they're safe. So they have an expectation, they should have an expectation that their IT providers are able to keep them safe. And I think that's where the law can help. It's no different to occupational health and safety. It's no different to any other form of risk management. There is an expectation that you should be safe. And I think alongside that are changes to, and it's already beginning to happen around privacy legislation. So we're seeing more and more effort being placed on who is actually accountable for privacy, the kind of penalties that exist if you don't look after people's private data. Now the thing that I really liked in the recent amendments that are coming from government is that one of the enforcement mechanisms is that if you have prospered, if you have benefited from not looking after someone's private data, well then part of the fine is proportionate to the benefit you accrued. Now that is an amazing shift in behaviour and it's an amazing shift in regulation changing behaviour and I really applaud the government for starting to think about it in these terms. How do you think the behaviours will change? Is it a deterrent or is it an encouragement? What's going to happen? For some it will be a deterrent. For some who have monetised and benefited from a lack of privacy controls, it will be a deterrent undoubtedly. But for most it will be more regulation that they don't know how to deal with. So for those people we need to help them. Just like we do with every other aspect of consumer law. So I think for the vast majority it will be an incentive to get things right. And it's raising awareness that this is an issue that has to be taken seriously. It's just part of the health and the risk management of anyone doing business anywhere. That's exactly right. Yeah. Now Stella, we can't have a discussion about cyber security without talking about artificial intelligence. And we have chatbots and data deserts and Chinese facial recognition technology and all of these advanced technologies cause us to reflect on the ethical issues, the questions raised by the global pursuit of technological development. So what are your views on the implications of AI technology and how AI is changing the landscape of cyber security, indeed changing society, humanity potentially? And AI has really captured our imaginations, I think, over the last couple of months as well. So there are many debates out there on how to define AI and what AI is. But two key characteristics really stand out for me that are also connected to how it's changed the landscape for cyber security. One is scale and the other one is persistence. Artificial intelligence can deal with scale incredibly well. It can deal with large volumes of data, make sense of the data, find pattern in that data. And that is incredibly valuable for us. You know, we have challenges that are beyond what our minds and hands can solve alone. We're needing to solve health scientific challenges, find new breakthroughs and there is a data centric complexity to that, that we need tools like artificial intelligence to be able to navigate and solve for those. At the same time, that scale element can scale some negative components. It can scale biases. It can also scale negative actions, positive actions, but also negative actions. And so for me, scale is that operative characteristic that I think is important for us to factor in when it comes to artificial intelligence because it can help us do positive things at scale and negative things at scale. And in a persistent way, artificial intelligence technology, it doesn't get tired like a human would get tired behind a computer. It doesn't miss an anomaly or like a blip if there's, you know, something that is out of pattern. It doesn't miss that. And so this persistence and scale can be used for positive. It can also be used for negative things. In fact, in our recent report about Australia's AI ecosystem momentum, it talks about one of the key benefits that AI has brought to organizations is increased security. It talks about how artificial intelligence can do better network monitoring, application monitoring, and improve security. Here's the ironic thing. The same report also found that one of the key challenges that artificial intelligence is bringing in is security. So it starts to make you realize that actually AI is only as good as we lead it. It's a tool in our hands. And, you know, if there are positive intentions, it will have positive outcomes. If there are maleficent intentions, it will have negative outcomes. So it has really upped the ante. I wouldn't say that AI has contributed to one side or another. More so, it's upped the ante on both sides. And I hope we can do more to up the positive elements. One more part that it's really put a spotlight on is how much of a frontline we're all on as individuals in this cybersecurity domain. Artificial intelligence has enabled experiences that we're having a tough time telling whether they're real or not. Suddenly, any kind of social engineering attack or cybersecurity attack that individuals might be getting are emphasized because we're not able to tell what's real and what's not. And so in the same way that email has spam filters, I'm almost wishing for a experienced spam filter to be able to weed out what's real and what's not. And so I know that our teams at Data61 have been doing a lot of work on dark pattern detection, which is about looking through the web experience and being able to see are you trying to be manipulated with this ad or are you being taken down and non-secure pathways through this click, which is so difficult for us to tell. And so I really see that AI has upped the ante on both sides and it's really emphasized how much of a frontline each of us are on as well. And each of us as well as being obviously personal private citizens, we're also part of organizations and that frontline, it means that each of us are also a doorway potentially into the organization and the cybersecurity considerations. Now, Olivia, if I were going to study AI at ANU, I'd trot off to the engineering, computer and cybernetics department, wouldn't I? But I note that at the National Security College you've introduced a course on artificial intelligence. Now, that tells me that you think governments and policymakers need to understand more about AI. And I get that because I see this debate going on, the tension between those who think AI can be used for the betterment of humanity and those in the military industrial complex who are delighting in ways to improve the lethality of military operations. So what are you teaching and what do we need to learn? Well, firstly a shout out to my colleagues at the School of Cybernetics, they do have a great program if you have a year to spare. But for me, for the National Security College, what we did was create a course that's specifically geared towards policymakers and people in the national security community. So to wind this back a little, the way I came on this journey was that in 2019 I was lucky enough to win a Fulbright scholarship to look at artificial intelligence in the US and specifically the ways that artificial intelligence was being used in national security settings. So I was looking at things like facial recognition, persistent surveillance, predictive policing where the AI supposedly will tell you where the crime is going to happen before it even happens. And also algorithmic tools that were deciding really fundamental security decisions like whether you were released on bail and what the length of sentence you would get for a crime you committed. So I did this research in the US and I came home utterly terrified because I think it goes to what Stella said about the scale and the persistence of AI. And as someone who's worked in national security for over a decade, I can actually completely understand the temptation and the potential to use these technologies to keep us safer. Imagine the intelligence analyst that never gets tired. Imagine the cop that never misses a pattern, that finds anomalies and patterns that a human brain cannot really comprehend or achieve at scale. These are all the kind of uses that are incredibly attractive to the national security community. And at the National Security College, our mission is all about developing the people, the ideas and the networks that keep Australia safe and make Australia safer into the future. But what is security? Security at its heart is a freedom from fear. And freedom from fear in our society, I would like to think, also includes freedom from fear of your own government. And government is very much in this incredibly privileged, powerful position. Government actually has a monopoly on the use of force. And yet we come into all of these conversations about the uses of AI in the national security field that is incredibly opaque. It often doesn't satisfy the first principle of uses of AI around transparency or in some cases proportionality. So on these metrics, AI uses in national security settings is really risky and it's really consequential. So it's incredibly important that government knows what they're doing. Because these tools, Stella talked about them being tools, they're not inherently good, they're not inherently evil, they're not inherently neutral either. AI takes on the values of the system that created it. And the system that creates it, frankly, doesn't quite know what they're doing a lot of the time. If anyone's been watching the RoboDebt Royal Commission and been following it closely, it's a pretty clear indictment on a system that doesn't understand the capabilities and the tools that they're dealing with. Now, frankly, I wouldn't even call RoboDebt AI for a whole bunch of technical reasons I wouldn't need to go into. But this is a program that was legally, ethically and mathematically flawed. And yet an entire system rolled it out, sustained it, justified it and continued to justify it in the name of security and budget and good governance, even when people were being severely harmed. And I saw that in a lot of my research in the US, right? I saw people with disproportionate amounts of power using these tools against people who had the least power, people who were most likely to be discriminated in the data that built the AI, people that had no recourse or were too scared to seek recourse, people who were vulnerable, people who were marginalised, and I don't want that replicated here. So that's a long way of saying that what I intended to do at National Security was bring a course that really targeted from like policymakers in the National Security space and we bring in speakers from academia, from industry, from experts like Stella to come to the course and cut through both the hype and the fear mongering around AI and really hope that we can help policymakers avoid some of the pitfalls that we've seen in other applications, both in Australia and overseas. Thanks, Olivia.  So perhaps you, Stella, and then Joanna and Siddharika, please. How can we as a nation invest for long term prosperity in terms of workforce capability and the accompanying governance and critical technologies and think of it in terms of small to medium businesses who we know are the most targeted sector when it comes to cyber crime and are so impacted by changes in privacy, reporting and the like. So how are we going to achieve that, Stella? It's a big question. How are we going to achieve that? What we definitely see is that SMEs are being left behind on the technological journey. They generally don't have those dedicated resources to look at cybersecurity or artificial intelligence. They don't have those teams in the same scale or investments at the same scale as the larger enterprises. And so, you know, there's education is one of them, but also technology, how we make technology, how tech firms also make technologies as another one, a lot of technology is requiring custom, highly skilled individuals in order to implement and that is just going to be out of reach for so many SMEs in the short term. So I think there's a couple of different layers to it. One additional point I really want to mention is for us to really uplift our capability in the technology landscape, we're going to need to think of not a band-aid fix for right now, but also a longer term uplifting of our skills and capability throughout the education sector. And this actually starts off very young as well. So one of the programs that I've been engaged with is the Day of AI, which is about enabling young students from years five to 10 in without official intelligence skills. And this is so incredibly critical to do early on. It just got expanded to years five and six and why? It's because we want to enable individuals, young students, before they start getting divided off with subject selections to different experiences. I myself got into technology by accident. I was going to be a film composer. And so I did not have the technology exposure during my education. I landed into it by accident and then learned on the job very hard. It was a very hard journey, but I did that. It should not be an accident. It should be a structured education approach that starts off very early. And the reason I also want to emphasize it needs to start off early. I will talk about right now about women specifically in the digital arena. There is a divide when it comes to skills in the digital arena where women are choosing not choosing as many stem or digital technologies courses through the careers. And that's actually a risk right now because it means that women may become more vulnerable to cyber attacks. And so digital and STEM are becoming critical life skills same as financial literacy, digital literacy is a really critical life skill. It doesn't matter whether individuals want to go into technology or not. Digital is actually a critical life skill so that individuals are not vulnerable in this increasingly technological world. And that's why we want to start incredibly early before this subject divide happens and we miss out on enabling people to have thriving lives later on. So Tharga, I'd be interested in your thoughts on what Stella's just said. I couldn't agree more. Yeah. Security literacy. You're nodding. Yeah, security literacy starts at a very, very young age.  And she said, I want to come and learn about cybersecurity. I want that for every single school age child in Australia to learn from the get go how to be safe. We teach them how to be safe in the sun. We teach them to be safe swimmers. We teach them to cross the road safely. Well, it's more dangerous in some respects to open up your laptop, open up a browser and be on the internet. We have to teach our children. The future economy depends on it. Our future resilience depends on it. The government has said we want to be resilient by 2030. Some of these people haven't entered the workforce yet. That's seven years from now. They're still at school. Some of these people, we need to reach them, teach them and make sure that they are safe. The other thing I would add is, and just to pick up on the thread around smaller medium businesses, cyber is at its core from a pure security perspective, a risk management thing. And it's often looked through the lens of technology. And it really shouldn't be all the time. It is risk management. It's like any other form of risk management, which means we should teach it as such as part of everyday governance in a business and we don't. So if you're going to start a business, there should be something that tells you how to be cyber safe. The internet should not be something you should be scared of, either for our children or for our business owners. Olivia. Could I just briefly add to that? Because I just this week, I was in Singapore leading a study tour for the NSC. And we met with the Singapore Cyber Security Agency. And they're in fierce agreement with both of you. But they've just had such an impressive whole-of-life cycle approach to building up the cyber workforce. So in the space of five years, they've increased their cyber workforce nationally by 5,000 people. They have 900 students exiting high school with really great baseline cyber security skills that will hopefully then lead them to studying cyber security and computer science at university, working in the field and beyond. And they start really early. They start from kind of like primary school age all the way through cyber security professionals who are now like the leaders of businesses, small and medium-large businesses who are then kind of like filtering that knowledge and that expertise throughout their organizations and creating a really vibrant cyber talent ecosystem. And I think that's what we have to think about like not just as, well, here's the segments that you target, but how do you facilitate that whole ecosystem? And it goes to a critical point that Sothegar mentioned at the very beginning. It's about democratizing these skills. So not just beyond the small and medium enterprises which we know are vulnerable, but the individual vulnerabilities. If we consider cyber as a risk management approach, then it can't be, it can't be sort of like tech wizardry that someone else does or that we devolve to some sort of company or some sort of third party to do for us. It is a lifelong skill, but it's also about a lifelong ability to participate with agency in a cyber security world because cyberspace is like the base infrastructure of our lives now. And yet we've developed this sort of learned helplessness where we don't know how our data's been collected. We don't know the cybersecurity of the devices we rely on daily. And we don't wanna navigate through that complexity. But I think there's a role to be played by both government and the private sector to help us actually navigate through some of that complexity so that those cyber skills can be democratized at the individual level as well. Whenever I think of Singapore and its ability to introduce a national curriculum, I think of federation. We navigate the perspectives of states and territories and can't even come up with a common school starting age. But anyway, just saying, Joanna, how could Australia navigate what I think is a growing shift in the narrative, placing more security accountability on suppliers of software and services? Now we're seeing that narrative shifting in the EU, in the US, is that something we should be embracing here? Well, look, I think it's definitely, if you look at the US's latest cybersecurity strategy that just came out this month, they've really placed an emphasis on saying, look, we've tried voluntary cybersecurity guidelines, we've tried to say you should do this. It hasn't worked, so they're moving very much to a model where they're saying, you must implement this and much more severe penalties and placing that onus not on the individuals, but shifting it from the individual to the suppliers and the makers of the technology. I think perhaps the biggest way to understand that shift is maybe by using an analogy. If you think about the car that you drive, right? We drive a car, when you buy that car, you know that it's made to particular safety standards. When you get in your car, you put on your seatbelt, you drive on a road that you know is built to particular specs and standards, well, if you're living in a country like Australia, and you obey the road rules, there are clear road rules to use when you're driving your car. And I think what the analogy at the moment in terms of cybersecurity has largely been, put on your seatbelt, the onus has been on the individual, whether it be an individual person or an individual business, and there's been no guidance about the safety of the vehicle, the road, and little guidance about what the rules of the roads should actually be. And this shift is basically saying, we need to put those standards around the way that the car, in this instance, the way that our experience online, the product that we're using, shift it so that there are mandatory safety standards. But it's not enough just to do that. And my fear at this conversation, particularly when you look at the Australian government's cybersecurity strategy discussion paper, it's full of conversation around regulation, which is great. I lead the Tech Policy Design Centre. We focus on regulation, but if we only focus on regulation, then we will, we still need people to be putting on their seatbelts. We still need people to be obeying the road rules. So I think it is a sign of the maturity of the discussion, but it's not the full answer. Stella. I'd like to expand that conversation a little bit. There is no one point in the chain of technology creation that can take the full accountability and responsibility. And it's because as technology or a solution, as it moves from the technology vendor to then the services suppliers and then connects with additional data sources and ultimately comes to the organisation who's implementing the use case and then comes maybe to us as private citizens, as experiences, there are so many additional things that get added onto it that this technology supplier all the way upstream can actually not control the downstream. And so we're really needing to think about how to empower each of the chains that are connected to make responsible, secure choices throughout because there's decisions and choices that are happening throughout. And in fact, we know that from national listening tour that we conducted that businesses want to do the right thing. There's very little guidance in what that right thing is. And so one of the reasons we just launched the responsible AI network is national wide network to help demystify what those right things are when it comes to AI. What is the guidance? The fact that law and standards and principles and governance and leadership and technology, all of those need to come together to do the right thing. But there's just very little guidance out there. And so we really want to invest in building out easy checklist type approaches that SMEs can also leverage as well all the way through the chain so that everyone can be empowered to make responsible and safe choices. Well, let's turn to governments.  And governments have a monopoly on certain information. So there's no question of giving consent for that to be held. So governments should lead by example. What about the security accountability of governments as suppliers of public goods? Are they holding themselves to the same standards that they want private companies to meet? I mean, are they exceeding the security standards that they set for the private sector? Olivia's laughing, so I'm going to you first, Olivia. Johanna and I have both worked in government and we're just like, oh. Explain the eye roll. The eye roll is an obvious no, unfortunately. Look, I think, so just on the cybersecurity front, we've had successive ANAO audits that demonstrate Australian government agencies are not meeting the baseline standards that they're asking companies in Australia to meet. And that's quite problematic. I'm not saying that it's a case across the board, but it's very, very uneven. And some of these are really big agencies and departments that hold some of the most precious sensitive data sets on you and I as citizens. So this is quite problematic just from the sort of cybersecurity angle. And it's good to see that sort of ACSC and ASD are helping government departments to lift their game. But I do think government needs to get its own house in order before they tell industry what standards they should be meeting. And I think there's a credibility problem there, right? And on AI, it probably gets a little bit worse. In 2019, the government of the day released a set of AI ethics principles. Pretty high level, but pretty easy to meet because they're high level. It just sets out the intentions for responsible uses of artificial intelligence. They asked five of Australia's biggest companies to adopt and pilot those principles. And to date, I haven't known of a single government agency that is signed on to adopt it or pilot it. So a little bit of a problem there. A little bit of a double standard. And I wonder how that's going to influence the next tranches of regulation that government is going to try to enforce or implement. Jonah, does the dispersed nature of modern work that you've got employees working remotely and we've seen it during COVID, at least for part of the time now, is that going to increase the challenge for governments? I mean, they've got pockets of older software systems that remain vulnerable and now people working from home with home computers that might not meet stringent security standards. Is that adding to the challenge? Look, I think government does have unique challenges when it comes to cybersecurity, in part, ironically, because a lot of the systems that they're using are legacy systems because they want to have particularly secure systems. So there is this sort of circular irony to it. I think people working from home does increase challenges, but I think actually the biggest problem in government is a lack of knowledge and skills about these issues. And that's why my center in next quarter will be piloting a training course that is designed to really help uplift the capability of across the public service because we have a real challenge in being able to understand and identify and ask the right questions. And I think for me, that's the most alarming thing out of RoboDet. It's the questions that were not asked. The lawyers that gave the clearance that didn't ask the question and it goes to that point of there's this idea that technology is still something that sits over here, that isn't a core part of every single public servant's job. That isn't core to every graduate of ANU. This is not something that sits off to the side. We actually need to give everybody the capability to be asking and answering these questions. Well, Suthaga, that kind of brings me to a question. And I've got my ANU Chancellor hat on when I ask you this. How are we going to enliven and grow investment in cyber research and development in Australia? And so Australia can be a net exporter of talent and know-how and innovation rather than, as I believe we are today, net consumers of cyber innovation and heavily services reliant. So Chancellor, one of the biggest challenges I think Australia has, and it's building on Olivia's point earlier, we are a digital economy and yet we're not necessarily producing a digital workforce, nor are we necessarily building the innovation that will drive the next wave of the economy. We generally buy things from overseas. And that is a problem. Because every time we do that, we forgo the opportunity to build something for ourselves. Now, we're at the National University, one of the core elements of our mission is nation building. Part of that has to be digital innovation, security innovation, building cyber talent, building new ways and new approaches and new thinking so that our economy can prosper. I'm being shamelessly parochial and shamelessly Australian when I say this. But it has been so long watching, certainly from my perspective in government and outside of it, watching us just accept the standards and accept the software that's from elsewhere. Now, if we want to change that, we've got to change the way we look at ourselves.  We will invest in that innovation. We need government to open the doors in some respects. We need to encourage startups, most startups, particularly in information security or cyber security, most startups in Australia fail. That is not the case elsewhere. There is an insatiable appetite in the US and Europe for security startups. Here, you'd be lucky if two out of 10 survived the first five years. There's something clearly wrong in the way that we are supporting startups, small businesses, cyber talent, growing innovation. And I think places like A&U have a very special role in that because we are incubators of innovation. And I take to heart the vice chancellor's challenge about doing spinouts, billion-dollar spinouts. I think universities, whether it's us in particular, with our national mission or other universities right across Australia, we have, I think, both a mandate and an absolute need to grow, research, to show the world how much better it can be done. We've probably got one question left for all of you. So let me muse for a moment. I recall discussions when I was in government about the tensions over the issue of encryption and the government's cyber security strategy would always say, we need robust encryption for individuals and organisations to protect their information. And then in the next sentence, they'd warn that cyber criminals are using encryption to evade law enforcement. You know, that inherent tension. So what changes in regulation might be useful to improving long-term cyber resilience, balancing long-term economic prosperity? Can we balance compliance with natural corporate mechanisms for accountability and risk management? So I'm going to start with you, Stella, Joanna, Sathaga, and wrap up with Olivia. Over to you. I'll take the artificial intelligence lens on this. One of the biggest challenges that we experience when we are meeting with industry is that as soon as we mention artificial intelligence, it defaults into ethics and principles. And it actually ignores that there's this whole legal system that still applies to AI as well. And so greater clarity is what our objective is to create that greater clarity that the law still applies for AI. There is a coming wave of standards that I think are going to be very surprising for industry that are starting from this year, like the AI management system standard. I think it's going to catch a lot of industry by surprise and really thinking about AI governance is important right now so that we're not caught by surprise. Only then do we consider principles, you know, once law standards have been addressed. And then thinking about a robust governance model for AI within an organization, it's not something to be siloed off to IT or research and development, which is what we see generally. It's something to connect to the core governance models of the organization. And in fact, we're running a set of really intriguing pilots right now to connect AI into the ESG governance model because ESG is an all-of-company kind of governance approach. And many of the topics addressed through ESG are also the topics that come up when it comes to AI. And so thinking of it as integrated to the governance of the organization, recognizing first that responsible and safe AI starts off with the law is important so that we dispel that myth that we have to default into principles. And then really leaning into leadership. Again, I mentioned at the start, AI is only as good as we lead it. That is showing us to be incredibly true. It's only as good as the maturity, the skills of the organization, the robust governance models. And so that's why it's so important for organizations to implement governance right now. So I'll take it quickly, one from a government perspective and one from a business perspective. I think, and the business is much easier if I had a magic wand to say the biggest regulatory change that would have the biggest impact on cybersecurity would be making it much clearer and unambiguous that we have an obligation as a director to ensure that your company has strong cybersecurity protections in place and to have public reporting about that. I think that's the single biggest change that would make the biggest difference because it would drive change from the top and the people that control the budgets as well. Within government, I think, and going to the specific question you raised around encryption and how do we have encryption driving innovation but also from the security perspective. This is a really structural issue that we have within the way that our government departments are structured but also the way that our ministers look at these issues. So if you take three pieces of regulatory reform that will be really crucial in Australia over the next parliamentary term. One is privacy, one is cybersecurity strategy and the other is around digital identity. Those three processes are run through three different departments, report to different ministers, run through different committees within the public service and then they go through, when they get to cabinet, they'll go through different cabinet procedures. Some will go through the National Security Committee of Cabinet. Others will go through full cabinet or cabinet. Why does this matter? Because if you have something that is going through the National Security Committee of Cabinet and going through a security stream, you're not properly considering those other impacts. Yes, you may have someone who gets seconded into the room of all of the national security folks but they're the outsider in the room. As opposed to if we take a structural change to the way that we structure those committees both within the public service but also at the ministerial level, then you start to have a more equal balance of power so you can have an informed debate about those issues rather than one that's siloed with attack on. And incidentally, we've just released a report cultivating coordination on exactly that issue. Good luck with that. Right, Sathaga, your thoughts. I might take this from, I guess, the private sector perspective. What government can do, Yana has covered off incredibly well but there's no substitute for building a good security culture inside your organization in order to make the right decisions, enforce the right governance, make the right decisions around technology and people. If you don't build that culture, none of this is gonna work. No matter what the regulation says, no matter what the best practice compliance handbook says, if those decisions aren't being made because your culture doesn't align to your values and the values don't measure and respect security, then nothing's gonna change. And almost every high profile breach that you've seen in the media, I can sit there and point at a cultural failing and had that particular organization paid a little bit more attention to the advice, whether it was the CEO or the board, paid a little bit more attention to that advice. I bet you that breach might not have happened or at least might not have been as severe. So my big push here is around building security culture inside corporate Australia because I think that will make a world of difference. I can't imagine who you were referring to. Moving on, Olivia, thank you. So the National Security College recently had Chris Inglis, the US Cyber Security Chief come to visit and he's talked a lot about creating a new cyber social contract. So cyber that is for social good, in other words. In Chris's view, we've spent too long allowing cyber risk to be borne by those people who are least capable of bearing that risk. So small businesses, for example, or individuals. And so in order to flip that around, we do need some regulation at the top, the kind of regulation that we see on critical infrastructure, for example, that has really brought that conversation about securing critical infrastructure from attack into the boardrooms. Assigning that responsibility really, really clearly because, frankly, there was a long time of drift where it just wasn't being taken seriously enough. So I think that that is one element where we can adopt some of those learnings from other types of regulation. But Chris also talks about having government be clearer about the threats and being more transparent about what the risks are we actually have to deal with. And communicating that clearly both to the community level, the business level, and a whole of enterprise society level, right? Because I keep coming back to this idea that cybersecurity or cyber skills, it has to be really individualized and democratized. It is the base infrastructure of our lives. It is something that we need to take ownership of as well and do our own risk calculus of. I absolutely agree with the points about corporate culture. But I think at an individual level, I don't want to feel disempowered in the cyber future. Like I want to be contributing. I want to build a better cyber future and I want to be part of that conversation and part of that mission. But I think there's an onus on us to really take that on board as an individual approach as well. So when we talk about national sovereign capability, what about our individual cyber capability? And how do we build that? Because I think if we achieve that, then the national agenda will be much easier to manage. We don't have time for any more questions, but I was going to ask each of you to just give one takeout. What would you like this audience to leave here remembering? Stella, I'm going to start with you. Just one sentence, no more. What's your takeout? Digital skills. Good. Johanna. Technology policy is relevant for every single person in this room. Swathaga. Digital skills for our children. Liv. Roses are red, violets are blue. If the product is free, the product's probably you. Oh, now that's got me thinking. Ladies and gentlemen, please thank the Chancellor's Panel this evening. We have Stella from CSIRO, Johanna from the Tech Policy Design Centre at ANU, Swathaga, who's our first Chief Information Security Officer, and Olivia from the National Security College here. Please give them a round of applause. Thank you. Now, we could have gone on all evening, but I have very strict instructions that I have to bid you farewell. Wish you a safe trip home, and please remain connected with ANU, be part of the ANU community, hopefully the ANU family, and we'll see you here at least next year for the next Chancellor's Panel, but hopefully in the meantime, much sooner than that. Have a very good evening. Thank you.


Hi everyone, Joe for jazby's casewrakes.com here with the random number block randomizer for NT baseball number 26 Futuring some nice teams right here That's how it works big. Thanks to this group for making it happen There are the numbers right there. Let's roll it and randomize it 303 6 the hard way one two three four Five and six baseball season around the corner folks looking forward to that Jason down to Ed Three into three six the hard way for the numbers one two three four five and Six we've got six down a two After six All right, so Jason with six and eight Nicholas with three Tristan with one and seven Alan with zero so Alan you get any and all redemptions for these teams right here including one-of-one redemptions That's the rules that's in the description Tristan you'll still get live one of ones Jason with nine Alan with four Dan with five and Ed with two Let's order the numerically All right, thanks gang. I'll see you in the next video for the break jazby's casewrakes.com