out, whole segments of economies, not to mention the human dramatic damage that it would cause. And we know, for work that we certainly have done at the IMF, that the poorest countries will be the most disproportionately affected by climate change. And we know also, because it's everybody's business, that advanced economies will not be immune. Some industries we know will be more affected than others, and some industries will be more instrumental in addressing those issues than others. You would not suspect that, but even central banks and banks have to actually take account of climate change and measure its impact. Insurance companies do too. Kristalina, at the World Bank you spend a lot of time, effort and money on those issues of climate change. Can you address some of those concerns and think about policies? Well, first let me say that climate change is not only happening, it is happening faster than we thought it would. And Stanford University gave us a favor to calculate what does it mean if temperatures were to continue to go up, up, up. So they go up to 2.5 degrees, it shaves 15% of the global GDP. It goes up to 3 degrees, we lose 25% of global GDP. And of course the cost in terms of suffering is unmeasurable. So what we can do, what we do, and what we can do more of. First the very obvious, eliminate harmful subsidies. We have done some, we shrunk them by half for nearly 600 billion to now under 300 billion, but we still have 300 billion dollars to go. And I want to praise countries like Egypt that have done the right thing. They had energy subsidies at 7% of GDP. Just imagine this is more than Egypt spent on education, health and social protection combined. They dropped them to 3%, Egypt has more money to invest in its own people. But also by doing so the energy sector became attractive for private investments and they went into renewables, massively some 12 to 14 billion. So that is happening, it has to happen faster. And of course when we do that we have to be mindful of the impact on poor people. When that is done in that fashion and I go back to Egypt, we helped Egypt to have social protection policy that reduced the negative impact of energy subsidies removal on poor people. We have to move also in agriculture where today most of the agricultural subsidies contribute actually to climate change and it do not help the energy sector to be part of the new low carbon economy. Secondly, it is absolutely paramount that we recognize a shift to the new climate economy is great for the economies themselves. We had a commission on the new climate economy, I was very honored to serve on that commission. We came up with a very attractive pathway. We would see 26 billion dollars created in renewable energy, new mobility, low carbon mobility, low carbon buildings and 65 million more jobs as a result. So those who tell you, oh going to low carbon is really scary and bad for the economy, don't buy it. And then comes the third part of the policy action that in my heart I believe is actually from the perspective of fairness most important. Help countries and communities that have done very little to contribute to climate change but are already living with its consequences, adapt. And I'm thinking here of Niger, Chad or small island states or coastal areas in West Africa. It is morally right but it is also absolutely essential for the sustainability of our world that we lift up action on adaptation. And here is what we have done at the bank. We have done two things, one we have lifted up our commitment to climate action. We would do 200 billion dollars as World Bank Group, as investments to say to people when we talk climate we put our money where our mouth is. And we will place investment in mitigation, things like battery storage, wind, energy, low carbon mobility, rail. We would put this on equal footing with investment in adaptation, agriculture that is climate resilient, coastal areas that have the mangroves and the coral reefs being protection against search and hurricanes investing in resilient cities. It can be done. It can be done. And I want to ask the audience how many of you believe it can be done and it must be done. Raise your hands. Let me test you. Good. I can just hand over the moderation of this panel, it's okay. Okay, we saw lots of hands. Thank you very much, Kristalina. You know, we have heard in the last few days, particularly from the private sector, leaders say it's also good business for me. So does the World Bank actually cooperate with the private sector to leverage your position in order to encourage investment in those segments? I'm so glad you're saying it. I was watching over there and I'm saying I'm going too long. I need to stop.  I shut myself watching the clock. It is absolutely fabulous that many business leaders are stepping up. Yesterday I had a meeting with the business leaders, CEOs that are committed to climate action, very impressive group, and what they do, they do it for their bottom line. They do it also for their reputation. Many companies have recognized that climate action is actually fabulous for their profitability and how we can help them from the policy side by relentlessly pursuing price for carbon. When price for carbon is introduced, it becomes much more attractive for businesses to act. We have now some 70 jurisdictions, countries and regions, that have embraced carbon price. By doing so, they give a win in the sale of business leaders that are going to transform how our economy works. Yeah, because the less carbon tax they pay, actually the more they can spend in innovation. We'll go to innovation in a little while. Thank you so much. So public-private partnership is doable. Large institutions like yours and investors, the investor arm ICL of the World Bank is doing a lot of that, investing and committing directly to those initiatives fueled by the research and the technical assistance that you do. Could I just say one more thing very quickly?  I guarantee you it would change your perspective. I did that and it works. APPLAUSE So we're going to move swiftly from climate change into another big challenge that cannot be addressed in a very... Well, that can be addressed in short order, but that clearly where we see the impact much later on, and that's demographics. And my privilege is to have a high-ranking representative of an aging society. And that's a privilege that we all have. Thank you very much, aging. But Japan is clearly one of those societies that is aging. Korea is another one. China will be in short order, and all societies will, as we see current developments. And a representative of a country on the continent where the demographic boom is also both a challenge for good and for precautions. So without further ado, Governor Kuroda, tell us a little bit about this aging population challenge. Yeah, as you said, already some advanced and emerging economies have experienced aging and even declining population. And their impact on the economy have been gathering increasing attention. So much so that already the G20 has set demographic changes as one of their major priorities under the Japanese presidency. Although there are many issues, I would like to briefly touch upon three issues, economic, fiscal, and financial implications of demographic changes. First, on the impact on the macroeconomy, an aging and declining population decreases labor force and thus put downward pressure on economic growth from supply side unless some countervailing policies have been made and effective. Second, on the impact on fiscal conditions and social security system as aging proceeds, expenditures on social security services increase while tax revenue and social security premiums might decrease. This would make fiscal balancing act so challenging. Third, in terms of the impact on monetary policy and the financial system, if long-term growth rates declined, together with demographic changes, the natural rate of interest will decline as well. This would increase the risk that central banks face the so-called zero lower bound in the future. In addition, as low interest rate environment persists and create demand become stagnant, financial institutions might accelerate their search for yield activities, potentially making the financial system less stable. That said, even though demographic changes have negative impact on the economy, economic growth could be stimulated, and the deligency of social security system may be enhanced by ensuring appropriate institutional settings and policy responses. You may know that in Japan, labor participation by women and the elderly has been increasing through work-style reforms. Can I just stop you for a microsecond, because I know this is something that you care deeply about. Because society was aging, because of the workforce need that you had, there was a sudden realization that there was a pool of amazing talent out there, untapped, and new government took actual measures to encourage the flow of women towards the economy. In the last five, six years, female participation ratio has increased tremendously, surpassing even the labor participation ratio in the United States, although still lower than the Nordic level. But this provided substantial stimulus to the economy in the last five years. And in addition, faced with serious labor force shortages, firms, companies have been increasing tremendously labor-saving technology and investment in the last five, six years by using new technology, such as AI and IoT. By the way, you may know that in the last five, six years, Japan's labor productivity increase has been the fastest among G7 countries, faster than in the United States, faster than in Germany. So while aging or demographic change could have a big challenging task to the country, to the economy, to society, I do believe that there are ways to overcome and even transform these challenges into opportunities for the society. So aging is a blessing from the productivity point of view. If you can invest in innovation and replace the absence by robots or other artificial ways. In Japan, not only companies but also labor unions not against labor-saving technology, robotics, AI or IoT, they favor the introduction of new technology, new labor-saving technologies to improve the economy and the living standard of the people. And yet robots cannot join the union. This is a very interesting philosophical issue. All right. Thank you very much. Moving from, but at some stage it has to, you cannot replace the entire Japanese population with robots. So somehow population has to turn around, right? OK. So, Desichi. Well, let's flip this around. I think moving from aging populations to a continent which has got a young population and just want to turn this thing around because the kind of narrative that you have on the continent tends to go something like this. We have got young people, they are unemployed, and this is a big problem. Now, once you see young people as a problem, clearly the aptitude is different. But let's turn this around and say that the continent has got a young population and as such has an opportunity. So now you turn this around and say that young people then are a resource for a country. And how does the country use the fact that it has got a young population and that, in other ways, reap the demographic dividend? Firstly, I think that we will have to increase our investment in the capabilities of young people. Because if you invest in the capabilities of young people, then they are able to embrace the new technologies that are actually emerging. And we have got to be cognizant of the fact that the future of work is going to be different. And just going through the different regions of the continent, it is very clear that young people are embracing technology on the continent and actually have a lot of creative spirit. And that if you have to unlock that creative spirit, you have got to invest in the capabilities of the young people. And secondly, is that we're going to have to broaden the skills base. And if you are going to broaden the skills base, we are going to have to think differently about education and the education system and the kinds of education outcomes that we actually have because they have got implications of the kinds of young people who are coming through the education system when you are going to be asking the question, does the curriculum that we have in various institutions cater for the needs of the changing economy? And that when these young people come through the education system, they are able to engage with an economic system that is increasingly being driven by technology. And that becomes crucial. And thirdly and probably lastly, is that the type of labor that is going to be required in the future is going to be different. And the fact that we have got these new technologies that are coming that are embraced, the rate of technological change is so fast that even these skills themselves might become obsolete. And so from a policy perspective, we have got to be thinking about how you make the transitions. And coming from a country with a very vibrant trade union movement, the attitude is always that we must protect the jobs. But that's wrong. It's a wrong attitude. You can't protect jobs. And my common example is you cannot protect the job of a Britannica encyclopedia salesman. They happened to be main in the May because the internet took the job away. But what you could do is to protect people. That is what we should be focusing on in that transition. How do we protect people rather than how do we protect jobs? Because if you think about protecting people, then you would think about what are the policies I need and what are the kind of interventions I need to transition people to the new economy that is actually emerging. Listen, Cicci, tell me something. Protect the people, not the job, is critically important, has been debated. And I think there is a lot of agreement around that. Are the unions in South Africa that are a powerful player on the scene? Do they agree with those principles? Do they negotiate whenever there is a plant closure? Or otherwise? If it's too political, that's OK. No, no, no. I will not get into the politics. I will talk to the economics. I long figured this one. So there would always be a contestation. So you were talking earlier on about climate change. And South Africa took a conscious decision to say we are going to increase the proportion of renewables in our energy mix. We have got an abundance of coal. And we have been using it. And we could talk about clean coal technologies and all of that. But we also have an abundance of sunlight. And we could use these things. And it was striking how the contestation in society manifests itself with the unions that represent the production workers seeing an opportunity in emerging industries in the renewable space. That is what they would embrace. But you can't tell that to the coal worker. And the question is always going to be in that process. How do you transition the coal worker to understand that there are opportunities that are emerging outside of the coal space? So is society having to manage those contestations and having to take people along? And one thing that South Africa had always prided itself in is our ability to structure national dialogue around complex issues. It's something that we seem to have lost in the past four to five years. But with a president who himself had come through those ranks and who actually enjoys structuring those national conversations, I actually think that we would be able to manage this contestation better. I just want you to observe how much we have been already touching on the need for cooperation, cooperation between public and private, cooperation between public, academia, unions, and how it's interrelated. Climate change opportunities, union dialogue, prepare the workforce for the future, identify the opportunities for young people. Anyway, we're going to move on. Thank you very much, both of you. And I'm going to now turn to another one, which is a perennial, or we think, a perennial question. But one that has been addressed historically and that we tend to forget about, which is economic inequality. History shows that the right policies can actually make a difference. And Anglophone countries have seen a U-shaped trend in income inequality of the past century, from the Gilded Age to a low around 1980. The big question now is, are we going back to the Gilded Age? And what's wrong? So we are privileged to have with us you, Mariana, and your topic is clearly on both inequality, or your favorite topic. You've got many topics. But your favorite topics revolves around inequalities and the role that innovation plays in relation to inequality. So I throw at you the two topics. You can play with them as you wish. And we'll interfere if we want. OK, so I think the one thing economists agree on, because there's lots of disagreement, is that innovation is a key driver of long-run growth. And how that growth is then distributed, if it is, in fact, in proportion to the collective generation of wealth, or whether it gets captured by particular actors, I think, is one of the key issues when we talk about inequality. But it's OK to just pause a bit on innovation, just to make sure we're all on the same playing field in terms of what we're thinking about. Innovation, often, we think about technology. And we forget that some of the most important technologies that we all use today across the world that are inside our smart products actually came out of trying to solve a problem. The technology was a spillover from actually having framed these problems in quite inspirational ways. So the internet was a solution to the problem of trying to get the satellite systems to communicate. GPS was a solution to a problem to know where the ships were, if you want, in the sea. There was multiple solutions that could have actually solved those problems. So the real opportunity I think we have today just coming back to the discussion we just heard, whether it's about climate, around the clean growth strategies in cities, around aging, or a huge problem that we have in our oceans today needing to get the plastic out, SDG14, is how could we actually link up this notion that we have to, we believe in innovation led growth. But if we can actually frame the SDGs, which are these 17 incredibly bold inspirational challenges, into concrete missions as bold as the one that was to get to the moon and back again in one generation, what would that look like? And there already, if you pause a minute and ask yourself what got us to the moon, this word cooperation, collaboration, bottom-up solutions was key. Diversity. Diversity. And it was very interesting how it also required changes in how we use government instruments, so procurement to really kind of crowd in bottom-up experimentation. But to get to the moon, many different sectors were required. This was not just about aeronautics. You needed innovation and nutrition and textiles in many different sectors. There was about 300 projects that got us to the moon, of which most of them failed. So the willingness to experiment, explore, to welcome uncertainty. We shouldn't forget that risk and uncertainty are two different things. But again, what could be different moon shots around not just renewable energy, but sustainable cities? Again, getting the plastic out. And I think this is a really important question in a forum like this. But the next point is that's almost impossible to do if on the home base, on the ground in different nations and cities, we don't have what's called innovation systems. And there's lots to learn from what was happening in the 1980s in Japan and the Soviet Union. You had the Soviet Union that was actually spending a lot of money on innovation. So their R&D to GDP ratio was one of the highest in the world, but they actually didn't achieve innovation-led growth. Japan had less R&D to GDP. It was still high, but not as much as the Soviet Union. But they had strong systems of innovation. So these dynamic horizontal linkages between science and industry, patient long-term capital. We sometimes forget that as nice and sexy as venture capital might be, the fact that it's so exit-driven, they want to exit in three years through an IPO or a buyout, that didn't actually help us get the nanotech, the biotech, the internet revolution. VC was very able to come in after a lot of different types of patient finance. So when you actually look on the ground at places like Germany, where they have patient finance, they have the Fraunhofer Institutes, these dynamic science industry linkages, very strong vocational programs and apprenticeships, I think there's been a lost opportunity in Europe, for example, to really learn from those lessons. We always talk about the core and the periphery. So Portugal, Italy, Greece, and Spain, the periphery, some of them were Northern European countries as the core. But we didn't ask, what do they have? How could we actually learn from how the KFW, the patient bank works in Germany? What might be the lessons for a country like Italy, which does have a patient bank through the Casa Depositi and Presiti, but it's not really been about cooperation, but just handouts, handouts to sectors? There is also the role played by public finance of that deep research, which requires timing. That's the point, right? You have both public and private finance, but the ability for public, patient, long-term, committed finance often lead the way, but in a particular way, when it's just handouts to sectors, the businesses that shout out the most give me finance, that doesn't necessarily work. When it is about transformation, then it works, where you're actually picking the willing, not picking the winners. Anyway, there's lots of really interesting, I think, lessons we can learn about when innovation systems have been strongest. And I do think today in Europe, where there's so much instability again, in terms of the European project, how to really think about the European region as a place that could also learn what works, what doesn't. And in the African continent, of course, where there is the African Development Bank, we also have the Asian Development Bank, we have the Chinese Development Bank. It's not just about public finance, it's the structure of these public organizations. And the more that they can really catalyze new forms of public-private partnerships, but also lead the way in the high-risk capital-intensive areas, which then crowd in private entrepreneurship, I think that's key, and that doesn't always happen. And the problem is if we just think of public versus private, austerity versus infrastructure spending, it doesn't actually help us get the more granular understanding of what innovation systems require. Terrific. So if you had, we'll come to the policy section a bit later on, but if you had a research and development tax credit system, you would make it very, very granular and you would actually pick the willing rather than the winners and not spread around. Well, you know, evidence is useful and R&D tax credits as well as other types of tax credits for innovation tend to only work when they're icing on the cake. So that's basically an indirect mechanism through which you can, if you want help, businesses innovate, but businesses innovate, businesses invest when their expectations about future growth opportunities are high. So the real question is what do we know about the kind of smart policies that have actually increased those expectations and it tends to have been through direct investment in bold new ambitious areas. And definitely the climate area is a very important one. And if you look at what's happening today in the energy vendor space in Germany, even though it's sometimes been criticized in terms of the renewable energy part of it, but the fact that it's been able to really transform manufacturing across the board so that the steel industry has lowered its material content through repurpose, reuse, and recycle, that was not done through a tax credit, that was done through a bold ambitious plan to lower the material content of the entire manufacturing base.  They might affect the marginal spend. But how to devise them smartly again, we should learn about the granular instruments. So in Holland, for example, they focus that on the labor hired, not on the profits generated. And that's why the patent box policy, for example, doesn't work because patents are already a 20 year monopoly you're giving the private sector. There's no reason you would wanna lower the taxation on a 20 year monopoly profit, especially when profits are at record levels. What you really want to do is to stimulate those profits to be reinvested back in to the real economy. And there's very little evidence that something like the patent box works. It simply increases profits and potentially coming back to the inequality question just fuels that problem. So we're going to move into the inequality aspect of these long trend challenges and we'll come back to innovation. But I want to go first to you, Kristalina, because while there have been many changes about inequalities and reduction of inequalities between countries massively, predominantly driven by a few of them, still the numbers that you have recently published seem to indicate that there is an increase in extreme poverty. And that's an inequality that is in our face and not looking very pretty. So tell us a bit about that. Thank you, Kristine, for bringing it up. When we talk about inequality, the most, I think, shameful for us as a human race, the civilization is the existence of extreme poverty and hunger. And yes, we have seen over the last 30 years, the dramatic decline, the share of people in extreme poverty dropped from over 40% to under 10%. But my professor of statistics used to say about averages, you can put your head in the refrigerator, your feet in the oven, your temperature would be average, but you will be dead. And the reason I'm saying that is because for those nearly 800 million people still living in extreme poverty, the fact that we have been successful somewhere else means nothing. And what is most troubling is what you pointed to, that in a growing number of countries, primarily in Sub-Saharan Africa and in the Middle East, North Africa, affected by conflicts, the number of people in extreme poverty is going up. In Sub-Saharan Africa, it went up between 2019 and now from 273 million to 415 million. So we talk about war on extreme poverty, it will be won or lost in Sub-Saharan Africa. And here is the positive side of this not so positive story. We have been talking with African leaders and we actually strongly believe that the weapon of choice in this war ought to be digital. And we came up, Mariana, actually with President Kagame, we were talking about it with digital moonshot, digital moonshot for Africa. And what it is is to leapfrog by making sure that every African, every business in Africa, the small farmers, the governments are connected to the internet and use this connectivity to do what China has been so successful to do, link small producers to markets, create entrepreneurs. So we see digital ID as a game changer. We see e-payments and mobile banking as a game changer. We see the 800, nearly 800 million phones in the hands of people in Africa as a game changer. But it ain't gonna happen unless we act decisively. And as you said, we do it collectively. So we have our moonshot and I am actually optimistic that if we all align, and actually from the bank we said, we are going to put $25 billion investments from outside, we would mobilize at least another $25 billion. And of course, through private sector, and of course, we will be successful if we also effectively, as you said, invest in people in Africa. Now, seems very, people say, oh, how could that be done? But that was the same with Kennedy's moonshot and it got done. And Mandela said it best, impossible until it is done. And that I think, I mean, I do hope that we would keep our eyes on that war and that we will be victorious. Okay, but the picture you're painting is clearly concerning because the number of extreme pours is growing in absolute number. We also know that the convergence between very low income countries and higher income countries is slowing down. There is convergence, but it's slowing down. You wanted to add something. I just wanted to say that we know the reasons why extreme poverty is growing when we see it going up and they are a combination of four. Conflicts, natural disasters and climate is not gonna help at all. Population growth in some countries, and I think it's a Niger chat, and bad governance. Now, we clearly have to have strategy how to deal with all those four, but we also have to have determination and belief in people in Africa and especially in the African women. Empower them, help them to help themselves. Okay, couldn't disagree with that for a second. There's another inequality that abounds and that is much talked about and that I would like us to address as well because it is critical for the social contract and for some of the critical reforms that we've identified, such as carbon tax for instance, such as focusing fiscal space for education that will actually only succeed if inequalities are dealt with. Few numbers that you've heard about in the last few days. Top 1% earns 10% of total income in many G20 countries. Bottom 50% of the global population has close to zero health, which is why the other half is held by a very, very small group of people. You've read about that. And clearly that's an issue that we have had that has been addressed over the course of many decades ago and which is getting worse as we speak, certainly in some of the advanced economies but also in some of the emerging market economies. Mariana, would you like to address that point please? And I know that you have a link with innovation as well. Yeah, I mean, my view is that it's strongly linked actually to what we've seen around corporate governance. So we shouldn't forget that David Ricardo who was writing back in the 1800s already thought about the whole question, for example, of robots, jobs, wages, employment. And he had this chapter 31 called On Machinery, 1821. He was writing this and he said, we've got a problem because he was living through the Industrial Revolution. All these machines, modern day robots are taking jobs. There's gonna be downward pressure on wages. But then what we saw for 200 years up until I'd say about 20, 30 years ago is that as long as profits were being reinvested back into the economy generated, let's say from machine A, reinvested in another part of the economy, new jobs arose and also there was new, if you want, pressure on wages to rise as long as also labor, if you want, was organized. What happened in the 1980s with this predominance at least in the Western world with maximization of shareholder value is we saw different things happening. One is a fall in the reinvestment of profits back into the economy. We see this especially in recent decades with this extreme form of financialization of the real economy in terms of share buybacks. I mean, over $3 trillion worth used to buyback shares, boost share prices, stock options, surprise, surprise, executive pay in terms of this 1%, 99%, that's a very high number. Many companies like Apple were not doing any share buybacks under leaders like Steve Jobs. This year they announced a 100 billion share buyback scheme. The question of what that actually does not only for innovation, and there's a big question about is Apple also, if you want, reducing its ability to innovate by not reinvesting back into the productive structure, but also to inequality, because in fact innovation historically has been the result of a collective effort. And so this idea that you're maximizing shareholder value and not stakeholder value, which of course would include the shareholders. You don't get rid of the shareholders, but it would include workers. It would include government agencies, which as I mentioned before, have been critical to investing in areas like internet GPS, but also Elon Musk could not do what he's doing today without massive amount of government investment. Tesla itself received a 500 million guaranteed loan by the taxpayer, just kind of really recognizing that collective effort and making sure that the rewards from innovation are in fact distributed as collectively as the risks taken. That requires us to really link up our thinking and new thinking around corporate governance, innovation policy, competition policy, and it'd be really great actually I think if the World Economic Forum could show some real leadership in this area, given that it has such a voice from the business community and not all businesses engage in this extreme form of financialization. Can I just mention that if anybody has actually talked, written about the stakeholder approach value, I think it's Professor Schwab. So what you're saying is actually proving his point that you made a few decades ago, that the development of an enterprise and the success has nothing to do with pure shareholder value, but has to do with stakeholder value and making sure that everybody actually participates. And that's a clear link to what you're talking about, innovation at the center, inequalities on the decline. Absolutely, there is a link if you want between the relative inequality, we should remember that there's a difference between absolute inequality and relative inequality and this 1%, 99% is really talking about that. And by the way, people like Wilkinson have shown us also that it's that form of inequality that is also really bad for your health. It causes real stress if you want when people see that their own efforts are not if you want being rewarded compared to others. But I think that there's a real opportunity then to ask ourselves, what would it look like to be addressing these sustainable development goals at the value chain level? Because that does mean bringing it to the shop floor. It's not just about talking about the climate and the oceans as much as we all like to address those huge challenges. What does it actually mean from how you organize production for how you distribute the rewards from these... And some companies actually do that. Yeah, I mean that's also I think the hope that you see real heterogeneity. So just in telecoms for example, you have Huawei number one company in the world which I think sometimes forgets to tell the world it's a cooperative, it's like John Lewis in the UK. You have Ericsson which is I think more or less run by a stakeholder value notion. So the trade unions are on the board and then you have other companies like Cisco which are extremely financialized. So there's choices to be made. And remembering that there's agency in the economy. There's not just these global, if you want deterministic forces that we talk about like technology and globalization, but there's choices to be made within governments but also in the private sector. If I was to ask each of you four panelists whether you think that innovation is actually going to be value enhancing from a stakeholder point of view. In other words, will everybody benefit from more money invested in innovation rather than on share buyback schemes? Will it affect for good? Will it create more challenges, more difficulties as it's often talked about? You have a very short time because I want to move to the international cooperation. I'm convinced that it would require policies for I would call just transition. Perfect, that will take us into the policy requirements. Listen, Che. Well, I mean, it's a good question. Basically, innovation would benefit everyone including the shareholders themselves. And I think that going forward what we are seeing now with all of these emerging technologies it is what is at the heart of innovation. I think the one thing that you would find amongst economists is that innovation is actually good for technological progress and that's good for a future growing economist. We've certainly seen it in finance where clearly the combination of mobile and payment becoming e-banking and mobile payment has enabled a lot of people to actually go into commercial transactions, go into business using just their cell phone. Maybe. Just one anecdote, she mentioned David Ricardo who argued that industrial revolution, development of machinery may replace labor but he emphasized that that is in the short run. In the medium to long run, increased production, increased income would be spent and eventually jobs would increase and wages would increase. And I mentioned this Ricardo's argument in one of ministerial meetings and then one finance minister told me that yes I understand but politicians are more interested in the short run. So I'm basically optimistic about impact of technological change, innovation on income distribution or whatever in the medium to long run. But in the meantime, some government actions to guarantee a more equal distribution of benefit among the people may be required. That will take us into the policy sections which will be my last three minutes because we are very short on time and because when you have two economists sitting next to each other, they have to find a little area where they disagree so I'm not going to ask you Mariana to respond to your neighbor eminent economist comment about Ricardo. So I want to move on very quickly to the last issue which I think is in a way captures the sense that there has to be cooperation. There is interlinkages and there is huge value to be leveraged out of that. In the face of what has been a bit of a common diagnosis here, which is that we are seeing unfortunately too much fragmentation. Fragmentation in trade, fragmentation in trust, fragmentation in technologies and if it's not happening then there is that threat of it which is looming out there when we know historically or prospectively that the flow of goods, the flow of services, the flow of data would actually be conducive to good things. How can international cooperation help? And I'm not asking you to reinvent the Bretton Wood institutions, thank you very much. They work not badly and they do their job but how can we just stimulate that international cooperation and is it by bringing together public and private? Is it by identifying the landscape of tomorrow if there is cooperation and the risk if there is fragmentation? What do you propose? I'll start with you, Lise Ciccio. You'll start with me. Yeah. You know, I would first start by restoring our trust in multilateralism because you see, we have got global problems and which cannot be dealt with just by individual actions much as individual actions contribute. Let's take climate change. We know that it impacts the whole planet. And if we say still contestation about reducing emissions or that kind of thing, then we have a problem because it pulls all of us together. So it pulls all of us off the agenda. And for me, the very first step would be that we must restore the faith and trust in multilateralism because that is where I think that we will make a meaningful impact. Would you agree with me that there has to be a strengthened collective endeavor but that the action in the main is going to be taken domestically? That is the exact proposition. And that is the point about globalization. We have got a global economy, we do not have a global government, right? So decisions have to be taken at a domestic level. But as we have seen, what you actually need is leadership at country level to embrace multilateralism and take concrete action at country level to give effect to international agreements. Okay. Kristina? We have to be much more mindful that there are winners and losers on any issue that we are discussing here today. And for international cooperation to be successful, much more attention has to be paid to those who may be losing. And this is why I put an emphasis on any issue that is moving us forward. Think of those that may be left out or behind. And how a just transition can be successful and that I think would make us more effective internationally. And if I may add to that, for that success we ought to have more women like you in the high corridors of power. Put these decisions in the hands of women, the moms and the grandmothers and very good things would come out of it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. There are lots of great men as well. We know that. We know that. I'm saying that very lovingly to all men in the audience and those on the panel. I love you. Okay. Aruiko, you too. Yes. As all of us know, after the war, World War II, for international finance, the international community established Britain's institutions. And for trade and investment, initially GATT was established and now we have WTO. And for international taxation, there's no international global institution. Instead of that, there are thousand of bilateral tax treaties. But now tax on digital economy has become a big international tax issue. And now OECD and G20 are engaged in finding global solution for taxation on digital economy. So I do think that free flow of data, information in the world, we may need some global, if not the institution, but global framework. On the one hand, guaranteeing the security, information security, data security. On the other hand, data could flow cross border freely and certainly public-private partnership is necessary. But still I think Aruiko, I can predict something out of this World Economic Forum I predict that there will be some public, private, strong discussions on that very topic. And if the outcome is that we find a new fiscal system to actually address digital economy, its value proposition and where it's sitting, it would be a fantastic achievement. Mariana, I'm going to give you exactly 10 seconds because we're out of time. Just to say that the climate challenge which just keeps coming up is the most obvious lens through which to answer this question. Of course it has to be international. Whether it's cleaning up the oceans or cleaning up the planet in terms of pollution has to be an international effort. But on the ground what it means is transforming cities, transforming regions, transforming production, distribution, consumption, and the role of nations to actually still provide these kind of mission-oriented lens and literally transform everything that government has at its disposal from prize schemes, grants, procurement policy that I mentioned to drive through that experimentation to reach those goals. That happens on the ground within particular countries. And that's, it's, you know, and governance structures really matter. You can tell that we would have needed at least another hour. And the best is yet to come because you have to remain seated and there will be a concluding proposition that will be presented by the president of the World Economic Forum. So don't go, can't go, the doors are closed anyway, you can't go. Yes. But with all our goodwill and humility we try to address an enormous set of challenges and I think that our panel members deserve a big, big round of applause. Thank you. Thank you.


Hi everyone and welcome back to another episode of our Pokemon VGC 2019 Ultra Series Guides. We've already covered two guides in the Ultra Series so far, if you've missed either of those and would like to catch up go back up here, I will link a card for you so you can check them out. There is an introduction to the Ultra Series to help give you an understanding of what to expect when you're going into this new format and a Primal Kyogre guide as well to give you a better understanding of what to expect from that specific Pokemon and understand how to build around it and what different angles you can approach when applying that Pokemon into this new series. So in today's guide, we're going to look at Primal Groudon, very excited about it. Primal Groudon is an extremely strong Pokemon. We saw some examples in our last guide with Primal Kyogre, how useful that can be and what you can do to support it and what its limitations are as well and how you can exploit them if you are going up against it. And we'll do a similar thing with the Groudon guide today. So we'll get into that in just one moment. But before we do, as always, if you enjoy this content, make sure you drop a like on the video, make sure you do subscribe to the channel so you don't miss any of these guide series when they do drop as well as our daily battle series, our flinch squad circuit, our stream uploads and everything else, VGC and Pokemon related that we have on the channel. But without further ado, guys, let's get into this one today. I hope you enjoy it and without further ado, let's start by taking a look at a Pokemon overview. As you can see, we've got Groudon on your screen. This is a Pokemon overview. Groudon is now a fire and ground type Groudon in the previous format was just a ground type, but now with that Primal Reversion, it gets access to a fire typing, making it even stronger than what it was. So it's a fire ground type. Primal Groudon has the ability Desolate Land when it Primal Reverts as well, getting rid and overriding that drought ability. It keeps its base speed of 90, but does get a big buff elsewhere. You can see it's based that total here. If we just go through a hundred base HP, 180 attack, 160 defense, 150 special attack, 90 special defense and 90 speed, you're going to have some differences in the type strength and weaknesses now because of that fire typing that it does obtain when it does Primal Revert. You can see here it's got weaknesses now to ground and a four times weakness to water, it has that immunity to electric and does resist poison, bug, steel, fire and the big one. Ferry now with that fire typing. That is a huge, huge advantage for Groudon going into this format. Zonius, as we all know, is one of the biggest threats going into this format and being able to resist those very type attacks and hit back for really strong damage because of that base, 180 attack stat that it has on its side is something that you can utilise now to deal with Zonius quite effectively. Now, just to explain the desolate land before we go any further, desolate land, as I say, does overwrite the drought ability. It is a variation of sun. We've covered the majority of what these effects are in our introduction guide. So you can go back over there and check that out if you'd like to learn a little bit more about desolate land, but you are going to keep all of the same effects that you get with drought. You're going to keep the advantage with chlorophyll users, solar power users and everything else in between. You're still affected by airlocking cloud nine. The big, big bonus here for desolate land is going to be stopping any water type attacks as long as desolate land is active on the field and desolate land will stay active on the field until Groudon is switched out till Groudon feints or another primal weather is switched into overrided being primordial sea or that delta stream from mega requires. So this gives us a basic overview of Groudon before we jump into anything. We're getting straight into the tasty parts of this guide. We're going to start off with a sample set. So the first guy that we're going to take a look at today is the standard offensive set. So you can see here that we are running just no speed investment on this primal Groudon. We're going with a raw speed stat of 110. We've got an adamant nature here. We've got an EV spread of 252 HP, 252 attack and four special defense. So nothing fancy here. Obviously holding that red orb that Groudon needs to primal river into primal Groudon, we're going to have a move set of precipice blades, fire punch, sword stance and protect just to give you an idea of the offensive calcs here on this primal Groudon. You can see a 252 attack primal Groudon, precipice blades versus a four HP, no defense. Zernius is a guaranteed to hit kill. That is pretty impressive. So knowing that Zernius can boost up in front of you from the next calculation, fire off a moon blast and you can pick up and knock out pretty cleanly in two hits with that precipice blades as long as it hits. So just the defensive calculation example that we've got here is a plus two, 252 special attack fairy or a boosted Zernius moon blast versus this particular Groudon is a guaranteed to hit kill. So meaning the turn that Zernius decides to Geomancy, you can precipice blades. The next term where it goes for the moon blast, it's only doing between fifty seven and sixty seven percent. So as long as you hit that next precipice blades, you can guarantee the knockout on Zernius. It's a pretty nice calculation and just shows an example of how bulky this primal Groudon is in particular with that fire typing that it's got access to. Now it's restricted partners. You're going to see some options here. Zernius is going to be probably the number one restricted partner that you're going to see with Groudon. Some other options that are going to be things like Ultranocrosman that can come from Duskman, Nekrosma Dawnwings, Nekrosma before it, Mega Evolves, and then something else that you're going to see more of those meme-y gravity teams, but something to consider anyway is going to be Curam White. Non-restricted partners, though, you're going to see Salamence. It offers Tailwind support. It offers Intimidate support. It is an extremely good switching for Primal Groudon in front of other Primal Groudons that do threaten it. Incinero is well paired with Groudon. It can take advantage of that. Sun, it's got the dark typing. It's got Intimidate, Fakeout support to give Groudon a little bit of room. And Smeagol is something else that I would stick on the end there, because Smeagol's utility and support options that it has access to within this format is still going to be very good at supporting both Primal Groudon and Zernius if you see that pairing together. Pokemon checks that you're going to see against Primal Groudon. Enemy number one is going to be Primal Kyogre. If Primal Kyogre comes in on the field, it will overwrite that desolate land ability with Primordial Sea and it will start to threaten Groudon pretty quickly with those four time week water type attacks that it can throw out a Groudon boosted by the rain. Mega Requizer is going to be another one. It's a bit like Mega Salamence. It does resist those precipice blades. It can come in and overwrite the desolate land with its Delta Stream ability or airlock pre mega evolution. It can also resist the fire punches as well as Groudon can throw up because of its dragon typing and set up pretty easy in front of it with something like a sword stance and start threatening Primal Groudon or whatever is next to it on the field. Another check that you're going to see and not so much a check, but something that will be causing so much disruption to Primal Groudon is Cracellia, it's so bulky, it will resist those precipice blades. It can easily take those fire punches and it can disrupt with speed control, icy wind, trick room, skill swap to support something next to it like the Primal Groudon, so they're common things that you will maybe see together going into this format and things that you need to be aware of if you are playing Groudon, have certain checks for these Pokemon to support Groudon a little bit better. So that is the first set that we will be looking at today. The next set we're going to look at is a trick room and tailwind set. So this is a very bulky Primal Groudon. We're going to run a careful nature on it. We've got an EV spread of 148 HP, 28 attack, 60 defense, 252 special defense and 20 speed, so a raw speed stat, like we say, that 113 and that can take advantage of trick room and tailwind. We're going to go for that same move set. Again, a physical set, precipice blades, fire punch, sword stands and protect. You can always interchange the sword stands out for something like substitute or rock slide if you do feel the need for it there, but just to give you an idea of some of the offensive cult on this particular Groudon, a plus two, 28 attack, Primal Groudon, precipice blades versus a 252 HP. No defense Primal Groudon is a guaranteed one hit girl. So if you can get that sword stand set up with your Primal Groudon, you know, with your precipice blades, you will be able to take down an opposing Primal Groudon pretty easily before it can do too much to you.  So Primal Groudon because of its buff to its base special attack stat going up to 150 can now take advantage of things like eruption and Earth Power. So things to be very aware of if you are running up against an opposing Primal Groudon because they can be a special variant and that can be something you can fall into the trap of trying to intimidate. It's not going to have any effect. They can throw out an Earth Power and pick up a quick hit also. You need to be aware of that. This Groudon is a lot more sturdy, so it is going to be able to take those attacks a little bit better than your normal Groudon builds. You're going to see partners here, restricted partners. In particular, you're going to see Lunala, something like Primal Kyoga in that dual Primal team makeup is going to be something that players all going to tend to run in this type of Groudon can work quite nicely in that dual Primal combination there and also Sogaleo as well can work quite nicely with Groudon because of its steel typing, its access to trick room, its access to why God to protect Groudon and deal quite easily with some of the threats that you do see in this format. Non-restricted partners, you're going to see, especially if you're running that dual Primal core, Mega Minetric is something that really performs very well with its fast pivot, its lightning rod and intimidate that it has access to to support the Primal Groudon and Primal Kyoga. Bronzong's another one to support that Primal combination between Groudon and Kyoga and then Tapifini is something else that really does help support this Primal Groudon. It has access to icy wind, nature's madness, heel pulse, swagger, a flurry of support options to really make sure that this Groudon is supported well and performing to the best of its ability. Going to have Pokemon checks here as examples. You're going to see something like Mega Salamence. It's such a good switch in as we've already mentioned to Primal Groudon and resisting the fire punches and being immune to the precipice blades just allows Salamence to come in, set up its own speed control if it wants to and start really threatening with those hyper voices that it commonly carries. Yveltal is going to be another Pokemon that threatens Primal Groudon pretty heavily. You've got a big defense stat on Groudon, but you've still got to be very careful around Yveltal, not being able to hit it for very good damage with those precipice blades because of the immunity there. And the fire punches is something that you have to rely on, especially if you're going to see something like Yveltal. Primal Kyogre, if you see that Kyogre switching, then you're pretty stuck against being able to hit this Yveltal for super effective damage.  So you need to be careful around opposing Primal Groudons if you are playing your own and make sure you are dealing with him and supporting adequately when going into matches. So that is the trick room until when set that we're going to have a look at and we'll look at our final set, which is going to be a special variant of Primal Groudon like we've already mentioned. It does get that buff to its special attack stat. Now going up to base one hundred and fifty and it does have access to some nice options on the special spectrum rather than just all physical. So we're going with a modest nature here. We're going with a speed stat of one hundred and forty two. Ev spread was super simple. Just four HP, two five two special attack, two five two speed. We're going with a move set of eruption, earth, power, hidden power, ice that can be interchanged for overheat if you want a more reliable fire type attack outside of eruption and protect offensive calcs. Here you're going to see a two five two special attack. Primal Groudon earth power versus a two five two HP. No special defense Primal Groudon is a pretty much guaranteed one hit go. You've got an eighty seven point five percent chance to pick up the knockout on your standard Primal Groudons. So if you can get any little bit of chips, say from a mega Salomon type of voice or something along those lines, then you know you're going to be able to pick up the knockout pretty cleanly with this particular Primal Groudon. Defensive Calcure just to give you an example of what the defense capabilities are of this Groudon without really any investment. You can see a two five two attack Primal Groudon precipice blades versus this particular Groudon is a guarantee to hit kill. So on most situations, if you're going up against a slower Primal Groudon, you're going to be able to beat it most of the time. If it does come down to a one on one situation. Restricted partners here, you're going to see things like Yveltal in 2016. We saw Arash and Marty have a lot of success on a national level with the combination of Primal Groudon, Yveltal, and it is a very strong combination Yveltal can provide tailwind support can deal with a lot of the things that Groudon does struggle against and just generally be a nice pairing and a nice switch in for Groudon's weaknesses. Going to see other restricted partners like Ho Ho. Again, it's going to be able to take advantage of that desert land ability with that harsh sunlight to an advantage of those sacred fires that can fire out. It's again, got tailwind. Again, going to be a nice switch into Primal Groudon, ground threats that are coming out at you. And then the last example here is going to be Palkia, which does resist and has a really nice time against Primal Kioga, which is one of the primary threats that Groudon has to deal with. Then you're going to see non-restricted partners. Interesting choices here. You're going to see Mega Metagross that we have access to that now in this format. Something that you might want to look at it does has a lot of options next to Primal Groudon and could be a mega that you want to take advantage of. And you can see Jumpluff as well with that chlorophyll ability. Again, another combination that you saw on that Arash and Marty team from 2016 paired with that Yveltal with the chlorophyll. It has access to sleep powder and other options like Encore and tailwind and just is a very strong support option for something like Groudon and has that ground immunity as well. That's really important to help support Groudon in a really tight situation. And then Tabukoko is going to be something else that can partner nicely with Groudon with the electric terrain, giving you immunity to sleep moves. And it also gives you that option to new mega requiser with a potential Perineum Z and also the Electrium Z that can new Primal Kioga if we do see that hit the field. Pokemon checks, you're going to see things like Mega Latios or Mega Latios are going to be things that really do wall Primal Groudon pretty hard. It's a levitate ability makes sure that they're not taking any damage from those ground type attacks that would be otherwise very threatening. And also being part dragon does mean that it can take and deal with those fire type attacks even in that desolate land harsh sunlight. So they're going to have a really easy time against Primal Groudon for the most part. Landar Aetherian is going to be able to outspeed Primal Groudon. It has got access to intimidate going to be immune to those ground type attacks. And it is going to threaten back pretty hard with a Z move potentially or just general earthquakes being thrown out from this Pokemon that Groudon is not going to like sitting in front of and taking another Pokemon to check if you have not got any rock coverage at all. It's going to be horrible. Now, you're not going to be doing so much damage to it. And it's not going to be doing so much damage to you. But the fact is that you cannot really do too much to it. If you haven't got any rock coverage or something in your team to check that Pokemon, probably not going to see too many hauls in this format, but we can't say so early on how reliable that is. And if all gets access to regenerate or at some point in this format, then you can see its popularity coming back and becoming a lot more present in the format. So something that you do need to keep an eye on. Make sure you do have checks in your team to deal with it. So you're not just dead waiting in front of it, not being able to do anything while it sets up support options for partnering Pokemon like Tailwind or something like that. So that is the slot and bulky set. We're going to get on to the next part of this guide, which is some sample teams for you guys to go away with and try out and get you started within the Ultra series. So you've got the first sample team is going to be that really common ground on Zernia's build. We've got the Incinero, Salamence and Mungus and Tabukoko making up the combinations there. We've got the second sample team ground on Yveltal. We've already mentioned that you've got the Mega Metagross in there, which gives a bit of additional support against things like Zernia's. That could otherwise be a bit more threatening for Yveltal. And then the third sample team down below is going to be ground on Lunala. So three variations of primal ground on teams that you can take away and test and they're all slightly different. They've got similar support options within them. But I think for the most part, a lot of the small options you need are going to be quite similar to supporting ground on, but some different variations there to have a go with and get you started playing primal ground on in the Ultra series. So the poker pace and the raw pace will be down in the description. And if you do have a try with them, I hope they do you well. And they're getting into the Ultra series as easy as possible. So they are the sample teams for this guide and we're going into our last part, which is always going to be the counters and summary table. So just to give you an overview once again, before we finish up, primal ground on is that fire ground type. It has the desolate land ability. It has a max speed of 156 minimum speed of 85. Common speed you're going to see on most primal ground on. So it's going to be around that one 10 speed mark support checklist that you need to have when building around a primal ground on. So you're going to need speed control ground on again, a bit like primal Kyogre, it's a bit middling speed. There's a lot of Pokemon faster than a lot of Pokemon slower than it. So you're going to need some speed control to help crowd on function. Fake out support is generally very good to help you get momentum. Change your board position up whenever you can to start getting that speed control in place to help crowd on setup and just alleviate some pressure when you're in a really tight position. Water resists are super important in this team. Ground resists as well are something that are very important that I haven't mentioned, but I would definitely put alongside this water resists switching because you're going to need something. If primal ground is out on the field, primal Kyogre comes in and you need to switch out. But you have to take a water type attack in the meantime. So what you want to do is have primal ground on out and know that you've got. OK, I've got mega salamence in the back. It can come in, take a water spout more comfortably than some of the other options that you might be looking at in your team. Something like Tappi Finney is perfect for that. Something like a Moongus is perfect for that. You can switch those in. They can take and absorb the big water type attack so you can get ground and back in, disrupt their weather and start gaining momentum yourself. It's the same for the ground type attacks. Have something like salamence on your team that you can switch into an opposing primal ground on its precipice blades. Just to alleviate that pressure until you've got your speed control set up, get your ground on back in and then start doing the same thing from your end. Redirection is something that is going to be very useful for ground on and because of that primal weather, the desolate land having pivot options in your team is going to be extremely useful. Having something like a fast Volt switch user, a fast U-turn user or vice versa with a slow Volt switch or a slow U-turn are going to be very useful for being able to just position ground on well and make sure that you are maintaining control of that weather. And then we can look at some Pokemon threats here. You've got primal ground on, lander is Therian, primal Chialga, Xerneas even is a threat because even if it gets set up, you've got to remember that primal ground on can only take so many moon blasts and if your opponent is supporting the Xerneas with intimidate support, then things can get quite tricky, especially if they have a bulky Xerneas that can take a number of precipice blades or if you haven't got a reliable way to hit it. A wide guard is a thing.  No matter what Pokemon you've really got out on the field in this format because these moon blasts are plus two going to be doing a lot of damage. So making sure that you've got real secure Xerneas checks going into this format is going to be super important, even with Pokemon that do resist their attacks. Yveltal is going to be something else that you need to check for because, as I say, with that ground immunity, it's an easy switch in on to ground on and start threatening with those big dark type attacks pretty easily and do some nice damage and really start to disrupt your side of the field and Cure on White is going to be something else that primal ground on does need to watch out for slightly. It's got access to that Earth Park can be very threatening in the right situation. So something just to be a bit aware of. You're going to see the Pokemon walls here. You're going to see Mega Salamence is going to be something that really walls primal ground on quite a lot. You're going to see Mega Latias, Rayquaza, Hoho and Lugia all if you have not got any sort of ice coverage for certain options there or rock type coverage for the other ones. And the last option on the end we've tagged on is Zygarde Complete Form. It's going to be able to resist those fire type attacks that Groudon can throw out and especially if your opponent has intimidate support, those precipice blades are not going to be doing enough damage to Zygarde that you would need to it's got access to coil. And if it's got something like heal pulse support next to it as well, it can be very disruptive. You're just not going to be able to get the damage onto it that you need to. So that is something to watch out for as well. But that wraps up the primal ground on guide for today, guys. I hope you've enjoyed it. I hope it's been very beneficial for you going into the Ultra Series. Remember, this isn't kind of an introduction to the Ultra Series to help you get an understanding of what these Pokemon can do, give you some sample teams to take away and test out in the format and just get you familiar with how to play things and get you started in the Ultra Series to the best of my ability that I can without over complicating everything in the process. So I do hope you have enjoyed it, guys. It's been a pleasure as always. Thank you so much for tuning in and we'll be back with another guide very soon in the next one. We'll be covering mega requires are one of my favorite Pokemon that we've got access to going into the Ultra Series. So I can't wait for that. Hope you can't wait either. Do leave your comments in the comment section below and I look forward to reading through those as soon as you leave them and getting back to you as soon as I can. So thank you so much once again, guys. Have a great day, morning, afternoon, whatever time of day it is. And I'll see you for the next one. So until then, take care and bye bye.


Welcome to Monthly News number 15. 15 already, wow. So this month I released Storyhoppers Season 2. A lot of new videos, if you haven't checked them, make sure you do. My personal favorite is the dark side of data and the fuel of electric cars. And there's one more to come, which precious plasticers will probably like. And these Storyhoppers videos were a bit different than usual. Wait, let me show you. This is flawed. They don't make any money from you consuming data. That theory is absolutely false. Aha, so wrong. That's the problem with design education. No sense of complexity at all, no logic.  You should have stayed with your plastic stuff.  These recent topics have been really weird and doesn't seem right to me. Why do you make these weird, surprisingly informed videos lately? I love the first season of Storyhopper, but this new season has some really bad points. All right, I would say the most hated video is my perspective on profit. It's just my perspective, but sure. And it's true, these ones are different. Usually Storyhopper videos are easier and difficult to disagree with. I mean, it's nice if a guy goes to a landfill and shows to other people or if he picks up beach plastic. However, they also just address a problem on the surface. They don't really go to the root of it. I think Adrien sums it up pretty good. I really like the post-capitalistic Dave Hackens version four. That's nice. Still looking to see if awards keep coming in now that we're getting to the root causes of these shitstorms. I think that's a valid point. This stuff is just less popular. People don't like having resistance. However, I think it's crucial to do this. And let me tell you why. See, I think we need to understand our world better where we live in, the infrastructure around us. And this is a completely different reality depending on where you live. I mean, it's completely different in Kenya and Thailand, South America and the US. And I come from the Netherlands, a very well-developed country. And this makes me part of a small group of privileged people in the world. And looking at my YouTube stats, you most likely come from Australia, US or Europe, a developed country as well. And I truly believe all humans are good from within. They all do their own best with the energy and knowledge they have to be a decent person. Whether it's saving energy, trying to reduce the amount of plastic they use, or not throwing away food, stuff like that. And sometimes you do harm without really knowing it just because you're part of a very wasteful system. And just looking at myself, the concrete building I live in or the electricity I need to power up the lights, maybe not my own, but even outside on the streets or the globally shipped products I can buy, like a simple banana. And more often, I don't even realize all of this stuff. It's normal. But it's not, it's actually a luxury. But just because I'm part of this system with all this luxury, it also means I leave a huge footprint. And the developed world is actually just a small group of people in the world. But the amount of damage they create is pretty big. Now we don't choose in which system we start our lives, but we do choose in the one we end up. And I think it's time to fix these faulty systems. Now these videos are all about discussing it, exposing these problems, talk about it and see if we can think of a better solution. But another crucial part is also to actually try it out, prototype that world, figuring out that system and test it. And that is what we're gonna do next month. But that's for later. Now, so making all these videos takes an incredible amount of time. Not these monthly news updates, but the story hopper ones. Because they're 100% made by me.  Yeah, it's a lot of work, but I like it. However, there's one last final step which I absolutely don't like. I don't have the energy to do it. And I just, I don't know. But it's so crucial. And it's making sure the video is actually being seen. The only thing I do is upload it on YouTube and show it to my own little bubble. It's so much more powerful when it goes beyond when people that are into cars actually see the fuel of electric cars video or people that consume a lot of data show them the dark side of data video. Which means going on to these website and niche communities on the internet to, I don't know, ask them to write a post about it or post the topic in the forums. And again, this is something I absolutely don't like to do. So if you ever wanted to help out with this project, please do that step. Don't do it for this monthly news updates. Those are crappy. These ones are just for you, but do it for the story hopper videos. Those are the ones that need to be shared and inform other people. Okay, that's enough, now some other news. So this month I was featured in The Vogue Man, which is kind of weird knowing that I always have dirty clothes with holes in it. Which are cool. But that picture itself was actually one of my best liked pictures ever on Instagram.  Come on guys. Maybe I should just focus on modeling or something. And Ben from New Zealand, also known as NZ Chicken has rebuilt our precious plastic map and it now runs completely open source on open street maps. And remember that shopping window we did a few months back at the bike oven, I'm still done. Where we put this shopping window full of plastic trash to make a statement that plastic is valuable. All right, so keep that in mind. So every year in April, this month, there is this big design fair in Milan in Italy. And this is top notch where the best of the worlds go. It's all about new ideas, originality and authenticity.  Now that looks similar. No worry Rosanna, we're all open source, do what you want. And finally, here's a nice clip of Mattia going to Morocco to help out the guys there to extrude plastic beams. Hello community. So today I'm here in Morocco with the guys from Kuhn and we've been here for the past 10, 14 days to work together to try and help them improve their processes and make beams more efficiently so that they can really set up a small production here in Casablanca, Morocco. And let me show you what we've done for the past couple of weeks. So one of the main things that we've been focusing on in during these two weeks is being to really try and clean up this workspace so that they can work more efficiently. We made a nice display for all the beams that they've been making in the last few days. And a tool area, a mold making area, as well as all the plastic where they chopped the plastic and sorted by color and by type, as well as all the space for the machine. So here's a compression machine, nicely labeled. The extrusion machine, which is no hours but it works on the same concept and they use it for making beams. So on top of making the workspace more efficient and properly set up, we've also been really focusing on making beams. And I will let Mohammed explain what we've been working on for the past couple of weeks. So we start to work in with beams. We do many experiments. So we get different texture, different color, different shape and we start to make some products. So as you can see here, we've been trying to put together a little bench as a showcase of the possibilities, of the huge possibilities of working with beams, 100% recycled beams. This all comes from waste that is collected in the area and we are very happy with the end result.


of 2012, day two, this is theCUBE, SiliconANGLE.tv's extensive coverage of VMworld. We go out to the events and we extract the signal from the noise. I'm John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE.com, and I'm joined by my co-host. I'm Dave Vellante of Wikibon.org and we're here with Chad Sackich, who's the Senior Vice President of EMC, Longtime, CUBE alum, friend of theCUBE. Great to see you again. Guys, Dave, John, it's great to be here again.  I remember the chalk talk session that we had about abstracting complexity and, you know, we're going to do to storage and networking what we did to compute it.  Was I right? Yeah, well, your direction is very clear, right? The record. So my question is really, are we, you know, we're there with storage, like, we're making a lot of good progress there. You're seeing some major action going on and networking, but yeah, I get thinking in general, you were right on. So you got to feel good about that. You really had a good grasp of where it was going. There's still a lot to do. Yeah, clearly. So, you know, the software defined data center is partially about where value moves. It's mostly about where policy is controlled, but it's also about decoupling control planes from infrastructure, right? So in storage land, we're done pretty well in terms of the policy moving up to SDRS, storage IO control, policy communication with stuff like VASA and things like that. But one thing that is still not right in storage land is the fact that the control plane for storage is always embedded in the storage target. So there's still work to do and there's lots and lots of cool stuff for future EMC worlds and VM worlds, but you can see insane progress. Well, you just wrote about VM granular storage. Yeah. It's kind of exciting, gave us a few hints there. Well, so that was top, top secret last year, right? And we were working on engineering prototypes at the time. We weren't really allowed to say much about it. And then basically I saw Duncan Epping, one of my buddies at VMware, do a blog post on it. And then VJ who did the session posted it and I'm like, okay, I guess it's wide open. Fair game. So I did the post, that will change the game in storage. And I'll tell you, it is consuming one of the largest proportion of our engineering roadmap for future years to come across everything that we're doing. Talk a little bit about why that will change the game, help people understand. So this is a bit of a weird idea. So it takes a little bit, it's like quantum physics, you kind of have to forget what you know, right? Basically today data stores, whether it's on block or NAS is a bad construct for virtualization. Because it means that the policy at the storage layer is always in a container where the container contains multiple VMs. And all of the VMs have that policy, whatever it is. If we want to get to this software defined storage world, the storage infrastructure, whatever it is, would need to be able to enforce policy on a VM by VM basis, not fake it. NAS devices can kind of fake it today by doing file level snapshots, file level replicas. But literally the storage array would need to operate in something that would be a VM or a V app level of granularity, something that's called a VVol. The other reason that it's problematic is that managing these environments at scale involves managing thousands and thousands of LUNs or file systems, which is a pain. So there's something that's called an IOD multiplexer, a name that only an engineer could love, which basically is like the IO path for everything regardless of the number of VMs. It means that in the future today, the way storage policy works for VMware is they pick what data store you place and then they move the VM to try to meet the policy. Ideally what would happen is VMware as the policy layer would say, this is the policy I need for this VM, you figure it out, and then you're the one that if you need to make a change internally to keep that policy coherent, do it. You can get to it from any available path. Right, okay. So Chad, I want to get your perspective on something because you're in the trenches, but also you got that unique ability as an executive to kind of see the big picture in kind of the 20 mile stair. Pat was just on talking about the convergent infrastructure demo HP was doing and yesterday they laid out the old way, new way, old servers to cloud, old apps to new apps with big data, PCs to mobile, et cetera, et cetera. So the question for you is I want to get your perspective on if converged infrastructure is considered old, which I believe it is, because it's been defined many, many years ago. And you now factor in that data, data, dealing with data, big data in all aspect data, moving data around, all aspects of that relative to storage, defined data infrastructure as a way to talk about it as a modern converged infrastructure. What's different about the new data infrastructure if I want to make the statement that data infrastructure is the modern version of converged? Given the market force of flash, storage, and the stuff you were mentioning. So first things first, today's definition of converged infrastructure of integrated server network and storage hardware stacks. It's really about just getting people to spend less time on the stuff that doesn't matter, right? It has nothing to do with the individual architectures of a good server or a bad server, the individual architectures of the right storage design or the wrong storage design. It's literally stop paying attention to the noise, move on to deploying something that matters, right? And you saw the HP demonstration, which I thought was cool, but hey, we did UIM demos a couple years back and so on and so forth. What is changing is these new requirements at the storage layer are coming in a couple of different forms. The first form is when customers need Swiss Army knives because they're small and that's the only infrastructure they're gonna have for storing all their data. They're small data, they're big data, they're NAS, they're blocked, they're object. Architectures that are simple, easy to consume, buy, transact, go through the channel, those are the things that are winning today and they're gonna win tomorrow. Because of the packaging and simplicity. Packaging simplicity and their general purpose, right? And I think you can expect to see continued growth of things that look like hybrid arrays, that have Swiss Army knife-like functions and VNX as EMC's answer in that market, right? And VNXE, but what we're finding is as soon as a customer has the requirements that says, I'm okay with not Swiss Army knife, right? I want a design for purpose. Immediately they diverge into three different architectural models that are just totally different and you can take the EMC product- Where data is critical. Right, and it's a sufficient scale to warrant this. They need it for transactional systems where all of a sudden the all-flash world starts to become very, very important, right? And what we saw is we saw that the requirements, by the way, in all three of these categories is that scale-out is a fundamental design construct. So basically in transactional systems, scale-out models that increasingly, and step-by-step-by-step will move towards all-flash models just intrinsically based on technology will come to dominate. And we looked at it and we saw that Extreme I.O. was, in our opinion, the best technology out there, right? Then you could buy. That's right, or that existed, right? So we're doing demos here that show hundreds of thousands of IOPS all doing in-line D-duke, all things that you just could never do if you didn't build it in. Okay, so let's talk about flash, because I want to do traffic, go ahead. Very briefly, John, right? So that's category one. The second category is the scale-out NAS. The fastest growing category of storage infrastructure that's in this space, and you can see us and others battling it out furiously in that space, right? Icelon is growing faster than we can manage it. Like our biggest problem is how do we grow our resource, our channel and all that stuff. But the third category that is also scale-out in its nature is basically analytics storage, right? Whether it's unstructured with Hadoop or whether it's structured, massively parallel DAZ systems, right? So each one of those is solving a very unique and different architectural problem, but they've got these fundamental characteristics of scale-out, built-on commodity parts, software-based, and their characteristics are suit to need. I totally agree with you. And I want to ask, and it's causing a lot of confusion. First of all, those are legit use cases and architectural constructs. Now the question now, because we're coming back down to the old days of interoperability conversations, integration support. So the question is that it seems to be, everyone's definition seems to be different because their architecture is different, because of their environment. Are you seeing any new, is that true? Do you see this data infrastructure? And how does that make data infrastructure different than just saying, hey, I'm buying some conversion infrastructure? What's interesting is these architectural models flow from their use cases. Check, agree, agree, agree, right? But what is unfortunate is that there's not a decoupled control plane. Wouldn't it be nice if there was some sort of like hint, hint, abstraction layer that would not just be for EMC stuff, and not just for these three categories of transactional blocks, scale-out NAS, and by the way, the transactional block is scale-out in nature. And the scale-out NAS use cases and even these object storage models, wouldn't it be cool? There really needs to be an open flow of storage in a sense. Some sort of software solution policy-based homogeneous infrastructure. Put a top-down data management strategy. But the thing is that it has to not mess with the data path. It needs to be control path only. So I'll just jump in and throw a wrench into the equation here. So HP ships an open flow hardware device in their quote, converged infrastructure. We have Bethany Mayer who leads that networking group, and they have a conversion infrastructure. They're organized beautifully around the old convergence. But yet no one talks about open flow on HP. I think they're the only ones shipping a product. Is that because it's not relevant in the architecture? So I think, as I was writing the blog post from last night, I was thinking to myself, it's funny, people will look at everything and analyze it. And analyze it. And like for example, VMware's doing some tech previews of things called vSAN, EMC's doing previews of things that cannibalize our other thing. And everyone always wants to jump to the conclusion of like, okay, who's eating who, and who's doing what, and it's fun drama to watch. And it's fun, it's exciting. It's IT, right? Yeah, yeah. But what does a relevance equation, though? Well, what people miss is the biggest hazard for any company isn't that you get eaten by somebody else.  And the challenge usually is related to your business. If your existing business revenues are over here, it's very difficult to go and say, I'm going to eat myself with this thing over here. One thing that is very interesting is as we do this, there's value that moves all over the place. We launched this VDP thing, right? Which will no doubt eat some of the low end of Avamar's business, but that's okay. And it's all good, right? I think that in the case of the HP thing, they need to make that team literally have a charter that says your job is to kill the old way. Yeah, not just a feature. It's not a feature. Your job is to kill the old way and set up some... Well, successful companies eat their own before the competition does. That's clearly an Oracle decided to take the different approach. They just kind of protect this whole nother. Now there's no story, but... I think it's, Joe said it. Joe's a man who's just a fountain of genius quotes. Tucci, right? He basically said the single defining characteristic of all the companies that die in each one of these technology waves is they're playing a defensive game. Right, so I'm not going to tell Larry Ellison what to do. He owns an island. I do not. So clearly he's doing something right. He's like a telco. Protect your territory, extract rents out of the ecosystem. You know, there's probably people inside Oracle going these in memory database models, these NoSQL database models, Cassandra, all this stuff. We've got to get in there. And someone within Oracle, hopefully for their sake, is saying, yes, we will protect you from the natural organizational tendency to... Or maybe they're saying Hadoopa snake oil. Yeah, right, you know what I mean? Yeah. Well, what's the big disruptor that you're seeing right now? I know time's getting tight here, but I want to ask a couple of questions around just observational chats. So you don't have to, no one will take read into it other than just your genius. But share with us your observations of what you see disrupting out there.  Biggest disruptors I see over and over again are totally new data models, totally new application models. Far out in a way, like, look, there's disruption in the world of flash and storage enormous, right? There's disruption with SDN and networking enormous, right? There's disruption of open stack entering into the market and gaining steam, right? And you can see VMware responding this week, in my opinion, you know, looking at VMware from an outsider, responding to changes that they're seeing in the market, embracing that. Dynamic ops, the Sierra and others, right? But far and away, when I talk to customers, the thing that really basically changes their business is when they have new data models and that's partially like database models, it's partially big data and analytics. And as they entirely build new apps using new app frameworks, that changes the game entirely. In some cases, it doesn't necessitate traditional storage, virtualization at all. So my question next one is more organizational around the industry, because you had the experience in following your career of doing a lot of integration work with VMware as part of the EMC team. So you've seen under the hood, you worked with the players, you were in the ecosystem, not only personality, but also as a technical person and executive. So you've worked with the VMware machinery. Yep. So okay, here's the premise. VMware's growing like a weed. They're expanding beyond the VMware focus of just VMware. I would say more like a flower. Like a flower, more like a beanstalk. So now they're going multi-vendor, they're embracing obviously the partnerships. And we're seeing their moves like Nacir and some of the other things that are just, like Joe said, it's a rapid disruption. What's your advice to people like VCE, like NetApp, other vendors and other startups that have to kind of make quick decisions around how to adjust to VMware? Is there any advice, observation you can share with them? Because I'll see, when you make moves like Nacir, it changes the game on the whole architecture because now you have an emerging software component, policy based, blah, blah, blah, and VCE is more of a high end thing. VCE in particular has to make some, just some tweak their positioning, change their messaging and do those kinds of things. So that's a very good question. I think that the reality of it out there, right, is that every technology company is looking out for their customers, if you don't look out for your customers, something's going to go horribly wrong. They're looking out for their shareholders and they're looking out for themselves, that those are all like one little idea package, right? Yeah, they make their moves. And they need to, each company needs to think about what is in my strategic short-term, long-term interests. And that's just a fact. I'm not saying anything that's earth-shattering there, right? I will say that VMware has got a track record of creating shifts in the industry that represent, to some degree, terrifying changes to the old, but turned out time and time again to represent huge opportunity, huge triggers of innovation. But they're not surprising anyone. If you're in the know, it's pretty obvious, they know what the maps are. The trick though is that when you first find out about something that you look at and you go, wow, this is going to have some impact. If they're successful with X, it's going to impact something Y and that's going to cause some disruption to my little company ball of customer, shareholder, self-interest, right? You can either curl up and fight and that could be a winning strategy. It hasn't proven to be a winning strategy to date, right? All of us have to basically out-innovate. And don't get me wrong, VMware's got companies that are trying to out-innovate. So basically, to summarize, you put your running shoes on and keep up. Totally, man. Basically. Totally. Nail your value proposition, make your tweaks you need to do and keep your running shoes on or be left behind. And accept that basically the only constant has changed. The things that were your core value proposition at some point may not be your core value proposition tomorrow. So today, there's a set of value proposition that leads more customers to choose EMC for VMware than anyone else. Great. How will those change over the next two or three years? They will change. How has the community changed? Here's a question for you because you can get some insight on this one. How has the community of VMware, VMware ecosystem changed over the past 24 months, 12 months, and how do you see it evolving? Obviously it's growing, so that's one factor. New new entrants, new migration of people coming in. So how would you see what's changed and where, what do you think it's going to be going? Someone actually asked me this online. They said, now that VMware is the 800 pound gorilla, they're no longer cute and cuddly and fight the man and they are the man. How'd that happen? Stick it to EMC. So the thing that I responded with is the community around VMware. And here I'm not just talking about the vendor and partner community. I mean the community community. People, the people, the real people. They gravitate towards VMware to Vmugs to VMworld because it's really cool and great technology because it's helping them with their business and because the community is a self-fulfilling thing. So long as VMware can keep cool technology that's helping people with their business, the third one of a community that is self-fulfilling will keep happening. I mean Vmugs are bigger now and more interactive and more intimate now than I've seen them before. Yeah, they're on governance in a way.   I'm gonna get you, BJ, right there.  I mean like, I don't know whether you guys feel the same way, but this is one of the most fun dynamic communities. I don't think that that is changing. I think it's solidifying. What would you say to the VMware employees that now inherit the greatness of Pat Gelsinger who should do a great job. He's young, he's solid, he's got great experience, great knowledge, great technical knowledge. What would you share with the folks that watch us from that are employees of VMware and they're partners? I've had the great luxury of working with Pat from the first day that he came to EMC. A funny story, I don't know how much time I've got, but I'll try and make it short because this is a gas.  Pat's coming in, give him the brain dump on everything EMC. And I'm like, okay, great. So I sit down, I'm on the whiteboard, I'm explaining it. And then he started to ask some questions that illustrate he had a fundamental lack of knowledge about the storage industry as a whole, right? And I'm like, wow, this is going to be funky, right? Literally a week later, I'm back and he's arguing about the code path inside ingenuity with Symmetrix Engineering. So in the time span of one week, right? He hit the books. Boom. That's a quick study, keep up with us on theCUBE. That's one thing we know. He had that Matrix program. He's an engineer's engineer. He accepts nothing other than being the best. He's very passionate about that. He's very focused. And what I would say is, I think it's one of the best examples that I can think of in recent history about exec transitions, right? So what VMware needed when Paul came in was a vision of where VMware could take the entire industry. And if you look back, what he said way back is basically still kind of directionally where we're going. It's gone through different names, cloud OS, data center OS, software mainframe, software defined data center. It's always been this idea of abstract pool resources, make them elastic, which allows people to focus on the stuff that's up higher, right? And then over the years that included a lot of different strategy changes to expand into the app. The vFabric data director thing was a joint EMC and VMware project. Lots and lots of stuff like that, right? What's needed now is that focus on execution against vision. There's nobody better in the world to do that than Pat Gelsinger. Okay, we have to cut it short with Chad. Small interview turns into a long, great content machine.  Great to have you on theCUBE, great to see you. John, it's great to be here. We'll be right back with Mark Egan from VMware. We're going to talk about what's going on at the CIO level, how these guys are rolling out and how they eat their own technology. They live it, they're use casing it, so we want to hear cutting in stuff from VMware inside the ropes at VMware. We'll be right back with Mark right after this short break.