Thank you, and to all of those of you in the audience for whom English is not a first language, I apologize, because Spanish is not only not my first language, it's really not a language for me at all. I want to thank our hosts for inviting me to talk again this morning. It's been sort of a tradition the last few years for me to say something about the relationship between HP and the Debian Project. We have a relationship that goes back for many years. I think you've just heard some words and some thoughts about the importance that the Debian Project plays to at least one government organization. What I want to try and do today is a little bit different than what I've done in the past. So those of you who've heard me talk about HP and Debian hopefully in the past won't be completely bored today. I want to talk a little bit about the relationship between HP and Debian from the perspective of what it's like for a large corporation to try and participate in the free software process and how HP tries to do that with Debian. But first, a little bit about who I am. Out of curiosity, how many of you in the room have not heard me speak before somewhere? A few hands in the back. Okay. I won't spend a lot of time on this then. The probably the most interesting things are that I tell people I made my first personal contribution of source code to this thing that we now call free software in about 1979. And if you know your history, this is before the GPL existed. It was before we had great terminology for talking about this whole phenomenon. It was even before I was employed by HP. In fact, I was still a high school student at the time. And if you'd like to know the story of what that contribution was and what it was about, I can tell you about that some other time. I've had the pleasure of being employed by Hewlett Packard where it's been off Agilent technologies since 1986. And so, not as long as my involvement in free software, but also, you know, very long and very rewarding for me experience. I became a contributor to the Debian project very early in the project's history. In fact, today, there are very few people still active in Debian who have been around as long as I have and I don't know sometimes if that means I'm just too dumb to find something more fresh and exciting to go work on or whether it's a really great demonstration of just how important I think the Debian project is in the world. I've had lots of different roles in Debian over the years. I continue to maintain a non-trivial number of packages. Some would say perhaps not as well as I should, but that's life. I also, at the moment, serve as president or chairman of the Debian Technical Committee. But perhaps more interesting, I've been for the last couple of years the president of Software and the Public Interest, which is the nonprofit corporation that exists in the United States to hold property and trademarks and finances and so forth on behalf of not only the Debian project, but a number of other very significant free software projects these days. I invite those of you who will be here for the rest of DEBCONF to come to the SPI BOF that we have scheduled sometime later in the week. I don't remember which day it's on, but there are actually several members of the board of directors of SPI who are here now or will be here by then and some past members of the board and so forth, and it's a great opportunity to learn a little bit more about that organization and its relationship to Debian, how the finances of the project as seen from the U.S. perspective are going and so forth. I also have the privilege these days of serving on the board of directors of the Linux Foundation and the Consumer Electronics Linux Forum, both representing HP. And for those of you who pay attention to news in the United States, you may have seen that there's a new coalition that was formed within the last week called Open Source for America, and I'm pleased to be one of the founding members of this. It's an organization that will attempt to encourage greater use of free software within the U.S. federal government system. But then those of you who know me well at all will understand that, you know, what I could spend all day talking about are the things I do with free software associated with my hobbies, most notably playing with high powered model rockets and building satellites. Since the last time we had a DEBCONF last November, I had the opportunity to fly this rocket, which is so far my biggest toy. That's, I guess, if I do the math in my head about 26 centimeters in diameter and, you know, it's as tall as I am. And this is what it looked like taking off on its way to about 6,000 feet or not quite 2,000 meters elevation. I happen to think that's a really pretty picture. That's Pike's Peak in the background, which is a very significant landmark in the front range of Colorado where I live. And not only do I spend time playing with building and flying the rockets, but this is a completely open hardware and open source solution for the avionics for collecting data on these rockets and controlling their operation that I've been working on jointly with Keith Packard, who many of you will recognize as another Debian developer and long-term contributor to the X-WINDOW system. Keith and I have given some talks about this at other conferences, including places like Linux Conference Australia. And in fact, just last night we submitted some talk proposals for LCA and Wellington, New Zealand next January with an update on the new version of this system that we're currently working on. If you're interested in this, there's lots more information on our website at altosmetrum.org.  This has been a really interesting year for me. Some crazy things have happened. I don't know how many people have had the experience of having Linus Torvalds as a barber. I'm not sure I recommend it, particularly when he comes at you with shears like this. If you haven't heard the story, at the Linux Conference in Hobart, Tasmania in January this year, there was a fundraising activity to try and generate some money to help with research to try and save the Tasmanian devil. These cute furry little ferocious beasts are at risk of becoming extinct because they suffer from a facial cancer that is transmissible between different members of the species. And the population is fairly small and constrained to the island of Tasmania. And so they're very concerned about the fact that this facial cancer could end up causing them to become extinct. This story is sort of long and complicated. Go search on facial dignity if you'd like to find my blog post about all of the details. But by the end of the week, we had raised more than $40,000 Australian to go to this charity in exchange for which I agreed to let Linus shave me. And the results, frankly, were pretty hideous.  My wife said, please don't wait until you come home to start growing your beard back. So as you can see, fortunately, she congratulated me for raising so much money for charity using something that cost me nothing to acquire and would cost me nothing to replace. And I'm pleased that it did actually grow back. I also, last month, had another one of those sort of mind-blowing, life-altering kinds of experiences. This was a picture that was taken at the Forum International Software Livret in Brazil last month. That's an amazing event by any measure. More than 8,200 people attended that Congress this year. It's clearly one of, if not the largest free software events that happens in the world. This was the 10th anniversary of the event. And to celebrate, the Brazilian president, Lula, showed up at the conference. And not only did he show up and shake hands, but I was very impressed to see him give about a 30 or 45 minute talk without notes, without teleprompter, or anything, speaking very clearly and very passionately about how important free software is to the economy of Brazil and their success at growing to be what is now the world's 12th largest economy. It was the first time I've had the chance to shake the hand of a sitting head of state of a significant country. And I have no idea if that will ever happen again. It certainly never happened to me in my own country. So anyway, enough about me. It's been a fun year. Lots of interesting things have happened. This is a quote that I love to share with people from Evan Moglin, who many of you will recognize as one of the people who helped to create the GNU General Public License, particularly who helped to run the process by which GPLv3 was drafted. His law professor in New York is now the head of the Software Freedom Law Center and various other related things. He said a few years ago in a speech given at Harvard Law School that we now have a body of software accessible to everybody on earth so robust and so profound and its possibilities that we are a few men months away from doing whatever it is that anyone wants to do with computers all the time. He was, of course, speaking about the body of available free software. And this is something that caused me to pause and stop and think, because I believe it's absolutely true. And it helps to focus us on what I think is a fairly profound thought, which is that the question really is no longer whether free software makes sense in some fundamental way, but rather when and how best we should use free software, particularly in the corporate world, to try and pursue our business objectives. And part of the reason that this ends up being such an interesting question is that the way free software works is so fundamentally different in how it's produced and maintained and consumed than other software models. A key attribute of Linux and many free software applications is that they are developed and supported quote unquote by the community. What does that really mean? Well, a couple of the key elements of it are that no single company is in charge. There are in fact a range of contributors with varying interests and abilities and motivations who come together to create something that represents a much more substantial aggregate contribution of human intellect and willpower than any single company or any single government could ever afford to bring together in any other sort of model. And as a consequence of this community process and the rules that the community has chosen for engaging with each other, often expressed in the terms of the licenses that we choose to use for our software, users end up having flexibility in how they want to acquire support for open source technologies. And this is because we've in effect lowered the barrier of participation by licensing our software in a way that causes everyone to have, everyone who uses the binary programs to have access to the source code, we in effect have said that any user can become a developer or in many cases, more importantly, they can pay someone else to be a developer on their behalf because frankly as much as some of us would like to believe otherwise, most of the users of our free software don't really want to be developers but the freedom that they get as a consequence of the licensing structure and the relationship between producer and consumer of software that we've chosen opens up a whole range of possible behaviors that they wouldn't have access to otherwise. And of course there's this ultimate notion that if whoever the upstream creator or maintainer of a piece of software is behaves badly, we always have the option to make a copy of that source code, create a new focal point for activity in the process doing something we call forking and to carry on developing the software in a new and better way. And we've actually seen this used a few times in the past. I think the transition of the X window system from the old X386 structure to the way it's managed now through X.org and free desktop.org is an excellent example of this. Development had stagnated, there was a small group of people who were gating the ability of contributors to make progress with the software and the community eventually said no, no, no, this is not healthy, it's not good, we wanna do this better. And they were able to do that because of this open collaborative process that's enabled by the kinds of licenses that we've chosen. So what's the impact of this whole sort of community development process for companies? Well, they're sort of good and bad things. There's exciting stuff and there are challenges. One of the exciting things is that the emergence of these sort of internet enabled communities of developers and users that frankly would have had a hard time existing before the internet because one of the keys is that in order to create a critical mass, you have to have enough people with common interests who can come together to form a community. The existence of the internet allows this to happen over broad geographic distances and among people from different cultural and economic and social backgrounds. But the combination of the emergence of these communities and the behavioral models that these communities have chosen enabled by open access to standards really has accelerated the development and adoption of free software in the PC industry. And I think it's interesting, one of the big major industry analyst firms, Gartner, has put out these predictions where they they changed the date and the number a little bit from time to time but they're basically saying that we're a year or two away from something like 80% of all software in the world having at least some open source content in it. And I have no trouble believing this because sitting as I do on HP's internal open source review board, I can tell you that today I believe HP is in the software that we build and ship to customers and we are now one of the 10 largest software companies in the world though that's not usually I think how people think about us. I suspect that we're at or beyond that point already. And the other thing that's really interesting to me that's very powerful is that the free software movement allows innovation to come from really surprising places. And this is because of what we call the long tail of contribution. As an example, one of the recent releases of the Linux kernel had more than 2400 distinct people who had made at least one patch submission in that kernel release cycle. If you go and look at a histogram of how many patches and how many lines of code and all that, you will see that the number of significant contributors who do a lot of work on the kernel is much smaller than that. It measures probably in the dozens for the Linux kernel for other software projects it might be even smaller than that. But the exciting thing is how many people there are out in that long decaying tail of contribution who made one patch submission or maybe two. And what's exciting about that, these are people who are using this software for purposes other than to be a developer of the Linux kernel or some other project who have run into some personal issue or concern that got them motivated enough to go understand a problem, figure out how to fix that and make a contribution. And what we have seen time and time again is that this ability of people who are not fundamentally setting about to work on a particular piece of software but who in the process of trying to do something else run into something that motivates them to put in a chunk of time to help discover and triage a particular bug to come up with a particular fix just opens the world in a fundamental way to a level of contribution and innovation and a rapidity of development and improvement of software that could not exist under any other software development or related economic model. So if we wanna take advantage of this as companies, if we want to have access to this incredible stream of development and technological enthusiasm, we have to learn to productively participate as citizens in these community development processes if we want to be able to benefit from the open innovation that can come as a result. So I said I was gonna talk a little bit about sort of what it's like for a big company to try and work with a free software project. I think one way I can do that is to compare and contrast a little bit what I think free software developers like me really want and then talk a little bit about what I think large companies really want and then we can see what some of the challenges might be. It's really difficult to characterize what free software developers want. Why? Well, we're all very different people. We come from different backgrounds. We have different social and economic pressures. We have different experience bases. We speak different languages. We look different. We all look funny, right? But I do think that we share some very common elements. One of them is that we're usually motivated by doing what I call scratching itches. This is the desire to work on something that matters to us personally. Sometimes we work on a piece of free software because someone is paying us to. But the most productive contributors to our communities of development are the people who are there because they want to be. They are personally motivated and they're working on something that really matters to them. Another thing that I think we share in common is that we really don't like working on schedules.  It's really because we are working on things that we are personally passionate about. We often are working on things we're not being directly paid to work on. And therefore, we're working on this, even if we're doing it with the approval of the manager of our company, saying, yes, it's okay for you to work on that for a while. It's still sort of a spare time activity for many of us. I laughingly explained to somebody once that I work on free software a whole lot more than I would if I were really being paid to do it all the time because as a passionate thing that's sort of an avocation for me, I work on it every time I have free time that isn't being soaked up playing with rockets. And that's actually a lot of time. But this notion of trying to make deliveries of particular pieces of development on a schedule is something that's very difficult for us. We can sometimes get motivated to meet a common deadline to sort of agree that we'll try to accomplish something by a certain point in time. But that's very different than sitting down in the way that many corporations think about developing software of how many engineers do we need to put on this for how many work days in order to deliver a particular result. It's also, I think, a common element among all of us that we really value the collaboration. We like sharing with each other. We like it when other people look at the work that we've done and say, that's cool, I wanna use that. It's particularly interesting to me when people say, oh, that's really cool and I've thought of a use for that that you didn't think of and I'm gonna go do something that you never anticipated that's really cool. And then I look at it and I go, oh, wow, that's really great. I'd like to take that back and do something else with it. We get these sort of feedback loops going where we're collaborating and working to drive forward something that maybe none of us anticipated in advance. And fundamentally at the end of the day, the thing that drives a lot of our behavior is personal reputation. I've said in the past that one of the reasons I think Debian has such a history of delivering high quality software is that we all understand that every time we upload a package, every time we make a release, the thing it's going to affect is our personal reputations and we care a lot about our personal reputations. Every once in a while you look at some contributor behaving in a way that you think is a little strange and you wonder what they could possibly be thinking because you know that what they've just done is going to have a negative hit on their personal reputation and you can't understand why they would want to tolerate that. And I think at the end of the day it's important to understand this and to think about it because there is a big distinction between the concept of personal reputation and what a company actually cares about. So what is it that a company like HP really needs? Well, I hate to be this way but the number one item is revenue. We need money. That's how companies operate. It's what makes the whole thing go. You know, I could say profit. I could say return on investment. I could use all sorts of things. But fundamentally what we have observed through the history of business is that if you take more money in on the top line the rest of the things all sort of take care of themselves if you're not being an idiot. The other thing that companies really need is growth. If you have studied economics you just take this as a given. If you haven't you might go well why do you have to grow?  I would encourage you if that's something you don't understand to go read an introductory text on macroeconomics. The way the economy of the world works standing still in a business is an excellent recipe for failure. It just doesn't work that way. And in order to get revenue and growth what we've come to realize is that companies really need to be able to differentiate themselves. This is particularly true for companies that participate in commodity markets. How many of you make decisions on which x86 family servers you're gonna buy based on the logo that's on the front of the box? I bet you that's not often the first thing that you look for. Unless of course you're enlightened and always buy HP gear. But my suspicion is you care a lot about what it costs. You want to look at the features and say does it have sort of the minimum set of features I expect? And then after that you're largely driven by questions like cost. If you are enlightened, if you've been doing this for a while you may care about the quality, you may care about the ability to acquire support, you may care about many other things that we think are very important in the products that we deliver to the market. But at the end of the day we have to find some way to differentiate ourselves whether it's by building better hardware, providing better services, better support options. In some way we have to figure out how to differentiate ourselves so that when there are three different similar things available to you you'll pick the one that we make. And part of all of this is building a sense of corporate reputation. Corporate reputation, if you talk to marketing folks in a big company they talk about the brand. They talk about the importance of building the brand, of building trust in the brand, of people admiring and appreciating the brand, the trademark. And what is that? That is building a reputation for the corporation. The reason this is an important distinction is that companies actually have a really hard time being enthusiastic about individuals who work for the company building and developing their personal reputations. It's not because they think it's bad, it's just because that's not something that immediately obviously leads to more revenue, more growth and differentiation for the company. And I think it's very important because the way the free software world works, if you go and ask Linus Torvalds how he makes decisions about which patches to accept in the Linux kernel, the element of reputation that matters is the reputation that that individual submitter of a patch has established over time as being someone who is clueful and delivers good content to be incorporated. He doesn't actually generally care who they work for. It's not important to him. He doesn't look at the part on the right-hand side of the email address except to recognize what person it is. And this is something that I think companies have to be conscious of and have to think about. It's certainly something we've had to recognize at HP that if we want to be able to successfully build corporate reputation in the free software world, an important component of that is to enable our employees to be able to build their personal reputations in the community. So let me talk just a little bit more about the whole revenue and growth thing. I tell people this and sometimes they seem to have a hard time understanding it but participation in the free software process for a company like HP is a business, not a hobby. What I mean by that is that publicly traded companies must legally, must morally, must pursue profit. It's the thing that we're expected to do. It's all about producing a return on the shareholders' investment and helping to grow the company and be more successful. So I think it's important as free software developers that we always ask ourselves what is it the company expects to get in return for their involvement and support in our project? Because over time, the expenses increase, the revenue has to grow to match, the companies are very interested in creating opportunities for their employees. So at the end of the day, I think it's important for us to remember that the motivations that a company has for participating in our project may be a little bit different from those that we have as individuals. And when it comes to this concept of differentiation, the problem is that technology companies really can't afford to compete only at delivering commodities. That drives the profit margins way down. If the only thing we can say is we make something just like those guys, but it's a little cheaper, that's a losing business to be in. You don't generate enough profit to be able to afford to invest and continuing to develop and continuing to innovate and to do exciting stuff in the world. So what companies really find themselves often striving to do is to figure out how to add value in ways that customers will be willing to pay us for. When it comes to things like servers, it's pretty obvious. If we provide the world's best remote management interfaces, that may differentiate our servers from somebody else's servers and make them more attractive, even if in some cases they're a little bit more expensive. I think, given our market share in the server world, that's a strategy that's worked pretty well for HP. But we are constantly having to look for ways to create something that is an industry standard that works just as well and plugs in just as compatible as everyone else's and yet has some differentiating feature that will cause people to be willing to provide more money to us than they would otherwise. And traditionally, the goal for doing this was to create control points. And often control points meant patents. If you have a patent on something and that guarantees that only you can successfully participate with that feature in the marketplace or you can force other people to pay you a little bit every time they do the same thing, that's clearly a model that can work for a company that wants to produce differentiation. But it doesn't work well in the free software world. So one of the challenges that we face in collaborating between large corporations and the free software universe is how best to create affinity for our products in an open source collaborative context where we don't have these sorts of hard control points. So I think there is something that we can ultimately agree on though. And that is that what we're really trying to do is deliver positive user experiences. As developers, we want to do this because we want others to be able to benefit from and use our work. At the sort of most fundamental level, lots of us write software because it solves some immediate problem that we have. And so maybe we're satisfied on some level if it works for us. And maybe we don't always care if it works well for other people. But I suspect that no matter what they say, almost everyone who actually participates in the free software process gets a positive feeling and appreciates the feedback that they get when other people look at what they've done, appreciate it and want to use it. As companies, I think it's all about how we motivate customers and want us to give us our money. Look at some of the most popular and attractive consumer devices over the last few years. The iPhone is one really good example. Why is it that it's so successful? It's certainly not because it's open. It's certainly not because it uses free software. It's because it delivers a compelling user experience. And so I think to some extent, what we can agree on is that at the end of the day, we want to build software that allows us to deliver really compelling, very positive, strong customer experiences. So what has this led us to think at HP and how do we try to engage with the community given this sort of context and the set of constraints? If you've heard me talk in the past, you've probably seen this slide. This hasn't changed in years because it works. It's just a very fundamental part of how we think about the free software and open source world and how we participate. We decided very early in our history of engagement that we wanted to participate directly as open source community members, that we would support existing community values and behaviors while developing robust enterprise capabilities and other things that are important to our customers. And one of the most important ways that we've done that is that we chose to use existing open source licenses. In the history of involvement of large corporations in the free software world, I think HP remains unique among sort of the major players as the only company that has not yet felt the need to create our own open source license. IBM has certainly flirted with different licenses. Sun has introduced a string of interesting and frustrating licenses. Our friends at Apple have introduced licenses that they thought were open. Even Microsoft has sort of said, well, hey, this open source thing's kind of cool, but only if we can have our own licenses. You know, great, fine. I'm pleased to see more free software in the world under good open source licenses regardless of what that license is. But I think it's actually a more genuine, more direct and healthier relationship with the community when we can figure out how to participate using the existing licenses and therefore the existing expressions of values and behaviors that communities want. And then of course we work with our commercial distributions and other ISV partners to take this innovative work that we've participated in the community and deliver that as solutions to customers. And as I've said a couple times, and this is, I promise, the only sort of real marketing slide I'll throw at you, this has been a very successful strategy for us. These are some numbers that the IDC analyst firm puts out on a regular basis. And what it shows is that, you know, if we combine the HP numbers with the compact numbers from before the acquisition a few years ago, HP's now had over a decade of clear leadership in sales of Linux servers. And the numbers, the absolute numbers are actually fairly interesting. They claim that we've sold more than $13.9 billion worth of servers to people who want to run Linux. That represents more than 3.2 million servers. And in fact right now I'm told that HP builds and ships a new server once over 11 seconds, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And if we look at the percentage of those that we and the analyst firms believe end up running Linux, that means that we're shipping a new Linux server much faster than once a minute, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Those are pretty significant numbers. This is why this is such a significant part of our overall business and why it's important to the company to figure out how to be successful here. Okay, so maybe it makes sense for us to participate in the whole collaborative development process. Maybe it makes sense to do Linux, but why do we work with Debian? Well frankly, it's largely about the inclusive collaborative nature of this project. In some sense, I think Debian is perhaps the broadest, truest expression of the sort of fundamental expectations of what it means to be a free software project. And to embody the four fundamental freedoms that Richard and the Free Software Foundation folks have talked about for years. From a very practical standpoint, HP Working with Debian has enabled us to enter new markets that were not well served by commercial distributions. You heard some references to Telefonica and the telco industry in the first talk this morning. When we at HP chose to enter the market of carrier grade telecommunication servers, we went and talked to our commercial distribution partners, the Red Hats and Novels and other relevant companies at that time of the world and said, we wanna go do some hardware here, are you interested in participating with us? And they all said, that sounds like a really great market, but it's pretty far removed from what we're focused on right now. And if you HP want us to do this, feel free to give us lots of money and we'll be happy to go there with you. And we scratched our heads a little bit and said, well most of the work that we need to do is actually the platform enablement part, the part that we would have to be engaged in anyway. So at the end of the day, we ended up delivering something called a product that's called Debian plus HP Telco extensions. And in fact, we have shipped a surprisingly large number of itanium based servers running Debian and some Telco software that are used to do things like route mobile phone calls. In fact, I was told a couple of years ago that we were very close to the point where one third of all mobile phone calls in the world would at some point in the progress of the call touch a machine that was built by HP running Debian. That was a fundamental part of maintaining the call progress infrastructure for those mobile phone calls. I haven't kept up with this market. I don't know whether that number is still true, whether it's gone up or gone down. But I do know that at many times the number of itanium servers we have shipped with that particular software stack has exceeded the number of itanium servers that folks like the register believe have been shipped in the entire world. It's been a very big, very lucrative and reasonable business for us to participate in enabled by our relationship with Debian. Debian's also been a really high quality source of bits for us to build many embedded products that use Linux. There are right now well over 200 different products from HP that ship with a Linux kernel and related open source technology inside in such a way that it's completely invisible to the end user. They're buying a cool little network attached something. They're buying a blade server chassis and the fact that the processor that operates the chassis and does the resource allocation for all of the blades within that chassis happens to be running Linux is and should be irrelevant to the end user. They care about the feature set that that product delivers. And we used to laugh and say that the only way they would know what operating system that processor was running was if it was broken. And at the end of the day, it's interesting when I sit on our internal open source review board and I see proposals come by, even when they don't explicitly mention Debian, when they show us the tree of source code that they're gonna use and provide it to us to run through our analysis tools, I'm impressed with how often the version strings I see in the various sources and executables make it clear that they've grabbed a Debian source package to build that particular product from. Which isn't surprising because we discovered a long time ago that Debian was a great platform for internal developers to use. And it's not surprising that when people are running a particular distribution as their development platform that they might choose software from that when they're building products. Something that they're enabled to do in the free software world that's more challenging than other models. And frankly, I would be remiss if I didn't mention customer demand. The reason we ended up providing official support for Debian on our servers wasn't just because folks like me thought it was a good idea. It's because some of our customers said we really want you to do this. And some of those customers were important enough to us to have us listen and pay attention. So let me give you just a few highlights of the history of HP's relationship with Debian. Much briefer than I've done at some talks in the past. First of all, I don't know how many of you know or remember, but the first ever dedicated Debian server called master.debian.org is something I put together from a cast-off 48633 megahertz tower and probably be amused. Two, five and a quarter inch full height SCSI drives, a 330 megabyte disk for the operating system and a 660 megabyte disk which held the entire archive with lots of room for growth. I think our FTP masters or dams someone are gonna give a presentation later this week and talk about the current resource requirements and the way the mirroring network works and so forth. And Ganna fastened me the other day for some details about this system to paint a contrast. So you may actually hear a little bit more about that later in the week. At a certain point in history, it was very important to HP to have a Linux distribution for the PA risk processor architecture and then for our itanium two based servers. And so HP directly invested in ports of this. Some of you in the room today are people that I recognize were working for companies at that time that we contracted with to do some of that work. And so in that period, we were actually paying people to work on Debian and to help with the port of Debian to those architectures. Some of you may remember big flurries of in amused to fix porting problems and yes, those were being done by people that were being paid by HP to go make those architectures happen. And at the end of the day, the results from that I think were really quite positive. Another thing that Sam Hartman reminded me of a couple of days ago is that HP was the company that funded the legal opinion that finally allowed us to include crypto software in the US main archive. I don't know how many of you have been around the project long enough to remember, but this was a real problem for us for a while. We were contemplating the possibility of almost having to build two entirely different distributions. The one that we could put on machines in the US and not have to worry about it being exported from the US and the one that everyone would actually want to run in the rest of the world. And you know, there was a certain cry that said, well, gee, what's the problem here? Let's just host all the Debian servers outside of the United States and dodge this whole problem. The challenge at that time was that most of the bandwidth and most of the hosting resources that were being offered to the project were inside the US. And so to walk away from that would have been a big problem. The other thing was that we didn't really want to disadvantage all of the users of Debian in the US to having to use second class software. You know, short crypto bit strings and things like this. And so I was very pleased that in the end, it turned out to not be very hard to get competent legal help to analyze the situation and help us understand the process by which we could legally include crypto software in our US main archive. In fact, we gamed the system just a little bit by providing them substantially more documentation than we think they really wanted. And I was highly amused some amount of time later when they told us that, oh, yes, we were doing it perfectly and we were the example they held up to show other people how to do it. So some of these things are funny. Over the years, HP has donated a lot of hardware to the Debian project. To be honest, I've lost track of how much. But if you go look at the machine database part of db.debian.org, you'll see that there are an awful lot of servers that have come from HP over the years. And frankly, you know, we've been the largest single financial sponsor of Debian Conf going all the way back to Debian Conf 3 in Oslo. I personally have had the privilege of being a participant in every Debian Conf, since Debian Conf 2. I was really sorry to have to miss zero and one, both of which were in Bordeaux, which is a beautiful part of the world that I really like. But they conflicted with my family's annual beach trip and I had to keep my priorities straight back in those days. I don't know that my priorities have really changed much, but now I just bring parts of my family along to Debian Conf and it all kind of works out in the end. And finally, and perhaps most importantly to some people, HP was the first and I think still the only major server vendor in the world that has chosen to provide worldwide support for Debian on our servers. And I announced a year ago that there was this website that you could go look at hp.com.go.debian. That URL still works, but it actually points you to a new place now that I'll talk about in just a minute. So what matters to HP going forward in our relationship with Debian? Well, I've already talked about some of this. It's important for us to be able to increase shareholder value to focus on end user experiences and to be able to balance sort of the things that the company chooses to do directly and what we expect others to do on our behalf under contract and so forth. And I articulated last year in Argentina in my presentation about HP and Debian's relationship at that time that there are some challenges for HP or any company like us in working with Debian. And frankly, while we've made progress in some areas, these challenges all still exist. They maybe always will exist. One of them is that just, you know, Debian isn't a company. And so the way we do marketing and support of Debian has to be different than the way we do it with a commercial distribution partner. You know, Debian doesn't really care about non-free software vendors running on our distribution or not. It's not a principal concern that many of us have. And yet a lot of customers in the enterprise world who want to be able to run Linux as their operating system platform really do care about whether they can run Oracle, whether they can run SAP. And you know, frankly, until and unless something really fundamental in the universe changes, I don't know that Debian as a whole will ever care enough about that to cause the world to change in a way that makes those things happen. So in the meantime, there are some places where no matter how much we might appreciate Debian and want to support Debian, we do end up recommending other distributions to our customers because there's a support relationship or a contract situation that just works better for a customer. Another challenge is predictability. Frankly, we've gotten better about this. Last couple of stable releases we've done have been much closer to the times that we advertised we were trying to hit than we used to be way back in the past. But as I commented in an interview that I gave to somebody in the press a while back, one of the things that is important is that when teams are trying to provide official support for stable Debian, they have to be able to anticipate when they need to commit the resources to requalify, recertify, and do the related integration work around new releases. Sometimes we finesse this a little bit by having people that work for us be permitted and encouraged to be key members of various teams. Things like Dan Frazier's involvement in the kernel team is one good example of that. But at the end of the day, it's the project as a whole and the contributions that all of us make to trying to hit the release schedules that our release managers announced some period of time in advance that ends up constraining whether the project seems predictable to our commercial partners or not. And I won't get wound around the axel on the kernel driver and firmware issues. I think everybody is working to try and do the right things at the right times with this, but it is challenging to us right now that the economically and technically most viable alternatives for things like gigabit ethernet interfaces in our servers happen to be from a company that likes to deliver a binary downloadable firmware blob for their card. And so having a good solution for how we enable customers to be able to install on those sorts of systems is pretty fundamental to their ability to use Debian on our hardware. So at the end of the day, the point we've gotten to is this realization that by directly participating in and collaborating in the free software community development process, in effect, doing as much of the work as we can as far upstream in the chain of development as possible, that we end up enabling ourselves to be very broad in what we can support. And in fact, one of the things that's changed in the last year is we don't just provide a certain level of support for Debian in addition to our principal commercial distribution partners, Red Hat and Novell Suza, but we have realized in the last year that the things we did in order to successfully support Debian also allow us to successfully support many other community distributions of Linux. And so the hp.com.go.debian, that link still works, but it actually points you now to hp.com.go.communitylinux. And this is actually, I think, an improvement, not a retraction or reduction in the quality of support and solutions that are available for Debian. It's just a realization that a lot of the things that we had to do in order to make it possible to support Debian have also made it possible to support Ubuntu and CentOS and Fedora and so forth. And so today, I firmly believe that hp provides a broader and deeper level of support for Linux on our server systems and a growing amount of solutions for Linux on things like notebooks and netbooks than any other company in the world, and that's something I'm really quite proud of. So I'll wrap up with another one of my favorite quotes. In our relationship with Debian, one of the things that we were constantly reminded of is this quote by Margaret Mead, that one should never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world for Indeed. It's the only thing that ever has. Thanks to all of you for being thoughtful, committed contributors to Debian. I look forward and my company looks forward to continuing to work with you very productively for the future. Thanks for your time and attention.


What's up guys and welcome to Trendy Updates upper SPM buzz now and to the trending list today is a Babuowino's wife who is known as Frida Mothoni Ongili. Now you might have seen her just the other day trending on our video that she was requesting or rather pleading the government to release her husband Babuowino who had been arrested by the police and detained. Now in case you've been asking yourself who is Frida Mothoni Ongili. Now she is married to Babuowino the embeccastiest member of parliament and if they still think that what Babuowino brags about is his wife and his kids. Well Frida has been the woman behind the successful man Babuowino since the college days where they actually both met at the University of Nairobi and we all know Babuowino was the chairman of Sonu that is the student council and of course Frida has been with him all through to him becoming the member of parliament. Now Babuowino met Frida at the University of Nairobi and they say that they have been married right now for 10 years. Now this couple is blessed to have two kids and Frida is an alumni of the prestigious school Loretto girls and national school. I abasicamo in October Loretto just know that she is an alumni there. Now here Aliza study could study economics in the college for the University of Nairobi. Now in an interview back at center that Babuowino did he said that God gave him the best wife a woman without equal a woman with the head of a man. Now clearly you've known Aliza clearly come when they are panicking at this station and then of course Frida hasn't been actively involved in politics. However just the other day she launched her fashion line. Now besides her working as an operation manager in a bank a while back she is very passionate about fashion and design. Now that is Babuowino's half. Now that is Babuowino's wife of Frida Muttoni Ongili in case you didn't know much about her now you know. Stay tuned on SPM Bars and this is a trendy updates.


He ripped this guy in half.  We're here on the whole elevator Oh my god, it's a piece of this. Oh, no, it's like it's a tipi Um, I forgot his day back. All right, whatever. All right, you guys I did try you guys yesterday. Oh god, then I am gonna be doing a giveaway Which I will pick um, I'm gonna say 10 people to win a robux gift card worth a thousand robux Thanks to roblox. I'm able to do all this stuff. So shout out to roblox man. So I will be uh picking I'm still setting up the giveaway you guys. So I'm just giving you guys more detail to it for now But it's gonna be sometime this week with maybe thursday or friday So that should be that and let's begin with this gameplay. Okay, so let's see what's going on with this dude. Oh Oh, he's trying to get these people. Hey, get out of there, man. Oh my god, it's not moving All right, man, whatever. Okay, and we got glitter omega coins super slam three-point Unicorn rocks jaden and joe mojo one. Oh god. Oh, yeah, I got the saxophone too This is that marvelous Okay, I think it's just getting out of hand now. I'm gonna stop with the saxophone All these kids need some milk and just they do tonies. All right. Hey, oh look jaden. I remember jaden Oh god We got a Thanos right here. Oh my lord. Okay, um, what is going on here?  Oh, oh my god. Was that is that like a killer bunny? Oh, it's like a killer duck. Oh my god. I'm out of here, man Dude, what's up at this hallway? It's like endless. Oh never mind.  Oh, no, you got unicorn Okay, he's stuck behind the elevator. Nice. This shirt right in this face.  Hey Are you gonna play a song for us? We got the last guys right here playing the saxophone.  Oh my god. It's so funny. Hey, this boy's getting lit over here. Oh, what happened? Uh-oh, we're like in a rusty elevator Wait, I think this thing's gonna open up from the bottom you guys. I would not stand in the middle Yo, get out of there, man. Why is he just standing there? Get on get on the edge, bro. You're gonna fall down Okay, there he goes. Nope. You're not gonna make it. There you go. Yo bacon. Come on. Get up here, buddy Okay, nice. We should all be safe now Hopefully no jaden. Don't do it boy My tiny head it works for now.  Uh-oh What was that noise? Hello, why is it bloody? Oh Oh That was terrifying yo What was that thing? Kind of looks like this little baby right here. Need some milk a man child Oh god, okay. Oh That screen though. Oh my lord Right, so I think we're safe to go back in here. Yes. We are. Okay. Nice So as we can see this how this elevator is breaking down Which is not a good sign and why is there bloody paper?   Oh, that's the little boy That's a little cat boy meow Meow at us boy Why is this saying anything? Just walking at us slowly I mean it is creepy, but Oh They just got Tony Uh-oh Wait, so where's the grudge? Oh Oh my god, I just not want to get jokered by that thing Oh my god. Okay. This is scary right here. This gives me the creeps. Oh my god. No. No. No. No. Here he comes Boy, you're never gonna get me Oh god, I'm gonna take him up here to Thanos You know He got Thanos I'm sorry. Thanos. I had to sacrifice you for the stones. It's your turn. No wait for me. Oh They just left me. Dude, so you guys are just gonna leave me hanging here From the elevator Dude, okay. We'll just wait here until the next round.  He creeps me out. He gives me. Oh my god. There's a dead body there. Um, why didn't you hear loud? Uh, loud stopping Uh guys Uh, hello? Oh god. What is that? Oh my god, okay. There's two dead bodies Three dead bodies. Four. Dude. Why am I turning around? Okay, there he is On all that weird thing. He's super fast.  Oh god. He's coming. No Okay, nice But I don't think anybody even survived that round. That was hectic, man Okay, hey, hey Okay, so who we got here is then What is this shirt tape master dad? Oh, that's on my yazi, right that youtuber yazi. He also does roadblocks Okay, hey, hey, there's a dancing spike cranberries. Never seen that before in my life Uh-oh, let's see who's next. I'm getting lit. Oh god.  His arm is ripped off. Oh my god. And then what's going on? Dude, there's bodies everywhere There's a skeleton with a beard Uh, what was that? I think it's like a werewolf or something. Oh god. What is that thing? Oh, no, it's like a demon Oh, I think it's crampus because it has horns I get it because it's like snowy But oh my god, dude, he ripped this guy in half. Oh my god. Yeah, the boy you good Yeah, I don't think he's doing so well Dude, his body was split in half That is savage, man Oh lord All right, so that was pretty cool.  Oh, like can you relax? Why is Daniel spinning like crazy? Oh my god. How's he not throwing up? Okay now there's two people spinning Oh lord. Oh five nights at freddies. Uh-oh wait, we can't go in there We can't go in the pizzeria. Why? The pizzeria is a lie, man. Or maybe when it starts please I was you I would move from there JD because Either chica or freddy fast bears gonna come out of there They're gonna jump scare you right away Okay, so I guess we really can't go out anywhere just out here in the office Whatever man. I'm gonna stay in the elevator. I'll be safe Where's the killer at? They haven't even come out Uh, no Anybody home? I think they all left Oh my god, that looks creepy Oh, there he is.  Oh Dude, the bodies were stacking up on him Oh my god, I would not get close. Yep. There he goes. I knew he was gonna launch at us Dude, that was funny. Yo, you fell over and then the bodies were stacking up on him No, don't do it. They knows Don't do it Actually sacrifice yourself.  No, we made it. Yes Okay, so that deserves a song for you guys.  Oh god. It's so dark. Oh, it's been drowned. Oh my god This is a dead body. Oh matured mask. Oh lord. No way that one. Okay. Can you stop chasing me, Ben? I guess not, man. You just murdered us That is not cool.  What is this?  Oh god. All right. Nice Dude, you guys saw that one. What's that thing? I have no idea what it was. Um, oh my god. Who is that? Hey wake up It's time for breakfast. Why are you just standing out? No, get off her. Oh my god. It's the exorcist Okay, can we go to the doors? Can I go to the restroom? I know the restroom's behind this door right here. Hello, open up Please. Oh my god, there she goes.  Okay. I'm gonna get jump scared by her. I just want to see her jump scared Take me. Oh That's pretty hideous. Not as hideous man. Oh god. That was that was something else I am no longer In need of a nap anymore because if I go to sleep, I'm gonna have nightmares After seeing that that image that has to be a cursed image for sure, man Okay, hey, I like that little piano music Okay, I guess we're doing a remix with the saxophone Hey, hey, hey Right, let's see who we get next Who's ready to rumble? Oh god, please. Don't I want to I wanted to be someone new that we never got him before But then again, I've never played this elevator in such a long time. Okay, so This is the library. Hey, this is the library. Uh Okay Who is here? Oh, it's uh annoying. No, I forgot his name. Oh my god.  Oh, he's trying to get these dudes behind That's why he's climbing there. Oh come over here boy He breaks the man goes. Oh, there you go. Oh, there you go. Oh my god He just knocked him down That guy's a savage man.  All right, you guys. Well, thank you guys for watching Thank you guys for the amazing support If you guys enjoyed the video make sure to slap the like button If you're new to the channel make sure to subscribe and turn that notification bell on and I will see you guys in the next one. Bye


Your Essential Guide to Hiring and Retaining Top Talent In 2024, the most critical challenge in a volatile job market will be hiring and retaining top talents to grow the business. What can you do to be more successful? Prioritize culture before hiring and afterward. Provide competitive compensation. Develop employee recognition programs. Emphasize work-life balance. Constantly talk about career progression. Create a safe environment. Engage in regular pulse-taking. Provide the freedom to innovate. Although not the primary factor influencing employee retention, salary is essential for many employees. It is critical to promote the idea that well-rested employees are more productive and engaged, as well as to support proper working hours, discourage persistent connectivity outside of office hours, and promote regular working hours. Salary evaluations, promotions, and responsibility remits must be accompanied by open, clear talks that emphasize an employee's worth and potential.


I'm the director for East and Southern Africa from EFAT and we are very delighted to have here our country office in Ethiopia. This is the third fully-fledged office we are opening. We have one in Tanzania and one in Kenya where we have all our professional staff and the support staff based in country and for EFAT that means a big step forward. In the past we used to have only staff in Rome but you can imagine that having staff in the field makes all the difference. It is better to understand the poverty situation in a country based on which we can have better design of programs and we can do better support and supervision activities with our programs and projects. And that is often resulting in much better results and impact in the field improving the livelihoods of the rural people. In addition we have embarked on a huge activity related to knowledge management. We want to capture from the base of the projects the activities and what they impact on how it is working, what is working, what is not working so that we convey that elsewhere trying to improve on situations. So our country officers stand at the base of these efforts and including using the officers for partnerships. Because EFAT alone would not be able to do all the things needed to improve on rural livelihoods of people. So we are seeking partnerships and also being in Rome finding partners in Ethiopia would be extremely difficult. So now with our office here and we see an enormous impact and improvement on the partnerships at both the relation with the government but also other development partners and NGOs with whom we can cooperate and work together for better programs in the field.


Hi everyone happy Valentine's Day We got 2020 2021 Panini Immaculate basketball coming at you a one-box random team break number 15 Yeah, it's a very high risk high reward, but These are some of the rewards those could be nice and a one-box break big. Thanks everybody who bought their spots straight up I appreciate that and congrats again to the winners of the spots right here Thanks for taking that risk And there are the teams right over here So let's roll it randomize names and teams three and a five eight times one two three four five six Seven and eighth and final time Yeah, that Mark is talking about he had the Rams, but Had the Rams minus four that extra point really came into play as soon as I saw that Me my friends look to each other and it's like somewhere somewhere in the world Someone's gonna be losing a lot of money or winning a lot of money three and a five eight times for the teams one two three four five six seven and Eighth and final time Just in saying bangles to draft it in completely the entire offensive line. Yeah, I think I think they know what to do That's for sure Suns Grizzlies The thing is the bangles are actually I think in a pretty good position all of a lot of their skill position guys either under contract or Or on rookie deals, I think they have a lot of cap space So they're actually positioned pretty well. I want to say Josh with the Phoenix Sun. So let's see if I did this right three and a five eight times There's eight times right there. So it's Suns down to Grizz Suns down to Grizz Got it. Okay. So Josh You got the Suns kind with the Nuggets Julian with the Clippers kind with the Hornets Josh with the Sixers Matthew with the Rockets Brian with the Raptors Andrew with their magic Jacob with the Warriors Michael with my Lakers Anthony with the Jazz Russell with the Pistons Robert with the Bucks Josh with the Knicks Gregory with the Pacers Mark with the Bulls Russell with the T-Wolves Orin with the Pelicans Anthony with the Kings Russell with the Heat Michael with the Nets Suranyu with the Trailblazers Brian Clay with the OKC Thunder Ryan with the Celtics Bashir with the Wizards Mark You got the Atlanta Hawks Steven with the Dallas Mavericks Michael with the Spurs Bjorn with the Cavs and Orin with the Memphis Grizzlies So let's sort this alphabetically by team We give people a little chance to trade remember this is the last box and I actually don't think we have any more immaculate basketball Laying around so that pick your team 15 is the last one for now We may get some more so keep it on the website jazby's case breaks calm I'm gonna pause the video for the trade window when we come back We'll see if there's any trades and then we'll have the break so stick around be right back All right, welcome back a little bit of trade chatter, but in the end no deals were done So that list right there remains the same Thanks, everyone for getting into this on a Monday We mark that random team 15 so we know it's all from the same case Which means the blade on that knife after this break So let's see what we got in here boys and girls. Thanks once again for joining a really thick card right there Look at that with that slider box ready. We use a blank card right here to slow play the hits So I'll be surprised. Hopefully There's the Angelo Russell seven out of 25 Timberwolves that's gonna go to Russell might be a sneaker swatch Justin We've got a deer and Fox Fox in the box 27 out of 99 piece of his jersey. I guess now we're It's with with the Super Bowl in the books. I Guess I guess maybe my sports focus is gonna be shifting towards more towards the NBA now and The big thick card is a Mari Stottemeyer soul of the game one out at 25 That's awesome. That is really cool. And that'll be for the Phoenix Suns Josh with a spot that he won. That's really cool next one is Marcus Howard 92 out of 99 rookie introductions autograph for the Denver Nuggets kind of the Nuggets Yeah, Suns fan Joe P. Needs that a Mari Stottemeyer pieces at the bottom of his shoe The tread it's a cool looking card a couple more here. We have Shadow Boxingters Ricky Rubio Timberwolves 95 out of 99 Another T-Wolve for Russell and the RPA Killian Hayes 9 out of 25 three-color patch and autograph for Motor City Different Russell Russell N with this one and there you go gang. Thanks very much for working through this case with us One box at a time keep an eye out for more on Jaspies case breaks calm I'm Joe. I'll see you next time for the next break. Bye. Bye


Thank you very much for the introduction. So hi everyone. I'm Lisa. I'm happy to be here today to talk about pseudo-random Correlation generators and why they're useful. This is joint work With the lead ball jufra couteau Nifkeboa, Yuval Ishai and Peter Scholl So the setting we're in is secure two-party computation where Alice and Bob want to securely evaluate a function on their inputs Without leaking anything more than the function output And this is great. We know how to do this for a long time, but the problem is always efficiency so one one way to deal with this is to push the expensive cryptographic part to an offline computation phase which can be Done long before the inputs are known and then one once the inputs are known the endland phase is very efficient and Has lots of nice properties But the problem is like or now we kind of shifted the expensive part to the pre-processing phase So in particular even though the parties can Generate like generate this correlated randomness that they need long ahead They have to store it for a long time and it requires lots of communication. So what we do in this talk is Or what we did in what we did in this in this work is how to significantly reduce the cost for communication and storage and The correlation I want to focus on today's oblivious transfer transfer We already seen it in all the talks before today briefly. So just to briefly recall Alice and Bob execute a protocol such that Alice learns exactly one messages of Bob and Bob doesn't learn anything about which of the two she learned and the Correlated random strings will look then something like like the blue parts that you see here where you have the input and the output of Alice in Bob and Those strings have to be long typically to compute circuits because what why is that for example if you consider the GMW protocol And you cry to OTS per end gate so for like a huge circuit you will need a huge number of those correlated OTS and So the problem so this is theoretical if you have OT we can do this, but this is very expensive It's computationally expensive because OT is lives in the public key vault So it's expensive and this is already this already has a solution So the solution towards this is as we've already also seen in the first talk today is a hybrid approach Where you use a few basaltese and then the rest you do with cheap? Symmetric key cryptography and This is super nice this solves the problem from like a computational viewpoint But still what I said before we still have the problem that the communication and the storage Required is linear in the number of OTS. We want to we want to generate and of course This is inherent if we care about chosen OT were actually Alice and Bob and chose their messages But for for the setting we're in for secure computation we actually we actually we actually find we just need this to be random and As you like for example, if you if you think about computation Communication for communication if you just care about random messages You don't need communication linear in the number of messages. You can just exchange a short Seat for for PRT and then you can locally extend and this is exactly what we did in this work We got rid of this part of the communication. So and This is what we call silent OT extension where the extension is local So and which will make the communication in the storage sublinear in the number of OTS to be generated And how how do we do this? What's the tool to achieve this? So this is so-called pseudo random correlation generators where Alice and Bob have short correlated seats that are correlated in some way and Then they can locally expand them to get long correlated pseudo random strings And how does this help us for what we want to achieve? Well If you think about it because the seats are only short a Few OTS are sufficient. We only need a few of these to exchange the seats and then the parties can locally expand them So without any Communication and then if we if the correlation we have a PCG for is the OT correlation Then what the long strings will be will be many many OTS that then can be used in by the online phase that then can be used for efficient online computation and What I want to stress in particular is that a PCG have the silent feature So the the only thing communication is necessary for is the short seats so in particular and the storage and the communication now only and Only depends on the seat size and not or not on the And there's no for expansion. There's no more communication necessary. So you can even for for a multi-party For protocols you can even you can even do this with many parties even if you're not sure if you if you will engage in a secure computation in the future because all you have to do is to store this very short seat and There has been some construction of PCG's around for very simple correlations like multi-linear correlations from one-way functions already and since 20 years ago and There has been also for more complex and correlation there were constructions but But but but not but not really practical and the first one that was like a complex correlation and practical was Was from from last year a vector oblivious linear function evaluation from the learning parity with noise assumption and Yeah, and this work actually builds on builds on builds on this work. So what we did in this work Was we defined? pseudo random correlation generators. So and we formally defined it for general correlations We gave connections to homomorphic secret sharing two-way connections And we concrete constructed like concrete constructions for oblivious transfer from the learning parity with noise assumption Or more generally I'm constant degree correlations We gave construction for one-time truth tables just based on one-way functions and For low-degree correlations in the two-party in the multi-party setting from either the multivariate quadratic assumption or again the LPN assumption together with learning with errors or rings or the symmetric external different human assumption and in the talk today I Want to focus on giving the definition of PCG for general correlations and on Oblivious transfer from the learning parity with noise assumption Okay, so Yes, so How can you define and pseudo random correlation generators? So you have two algorithms you have a Key-generation algorithm that that generates short correlated seats and then you have an expansion algorithm that you can use to That you can use to expand like locally expand those seats to long correlated strings and of course we want correctness so we want this Two strings to be correlated in whatever like for example satisfy the OT correlation that we care about in this setting and We want security and how we define security and is that we want Basically how we define security is is to say that either party can can learn nothing more From from from their own seat that they can trivially derive from knowing that the long That the own long string will be in correlation with the other party string and This is not the most natural definition that you can think of because we said we want to use this As a as a as a replacement in in protocols for secure computation. So more natural definition would be a simulation based Definition to say like for every protocol you can you can plug this in but unfortunately, this is impossible To achieve we showed this even even for deterministic functionalities, but we also show that the definition we give the indistinguishable base the definition is good enough for like a lot of protocols and That satisfies slightly stronger Security requirement. This is the case for example the GMW protocol that I mentioned also the speech protocol so in many you can actually just directly pluck out this this this in and Yes, so we talked about the definition and Now The now now I want to give you a construction. How can you actually instantiate this? for the correlation of of oblivious transfer So what we actually will give is not a PCG directly for oblivious transfer, but a PCG for Correlated or to oblivious transfer, which is exactly the same like oblivious transfer, but instead of having two Two unrelated messages Bob will the messages of Bob will be always the first message The second message will be always the first message plus some constant offset and Yeah, then you can rewrite Alice messages as as being as being the first message plus either this offset or not and As Ishae, Kylian, Nisim and Petrank showed if you have correlated OT and you have a correlation robust hash function This actually gives you OT so the idea is basically just you can hash and then this breaks the correlation And then you have just a normal OT that you want And So if you look at this and if you rephrase that like another way to saying what correlated OT is is saying so now like Putting many together so having like a random vector We can say so so Alice and Bob get a secret sharing of this choice bit of Alice times this offset Delta So this is another way So what we have to generate is actually this kind of secret sharing additive secret sharing So in order to to to get a get a PCG for that we need a compression of the vector So we need a compression of Q and B for Alice and we need a compression of the vector R for Bob such that Q plus R is this Delta times B and We will show how to do this in three steps So the first step is we use so-called distributed point functions to get a PCG whenever B is a unit vector then the next step is actually The next step is Is just we show that you can locally like it's it's super straightforward to go from a unit vector to a sparse vector And then the interesting part is once we have a sparse vector. How can we get to a pseudo random vector? And so as I said The main like the main tool for the for the first part are distributed point function So what is the point function? A point function is a function that is zero everywhere exactly except at At one single point where it will be some some some value y and the distributed point function is just Distributing the function between two parties such that the parties Alone don't learn about what the value alpha is and what the value y is but together they can recover So they can locally evaluate every input x on the keys to evaluate the output of the function And if you like write this graphically then then then if Alice has this key k0 and and Bob has this key k1 They can expand it and by expansion here I mean evaluating the point function on every point of the input so here We assume a polynomial input space so that you can actually do this So you evaluate on every point on the input and then if you add it up you get it you get the unit vector times times the y at exactly the position alpha and Why why are distributed point functions a good a good starting point for two reasons first? There's if there exists efficient constructions from one way functions and second by Dana and she'll add It's it's possible to efficiently Do a distributed setup which will be necessary to set up the seed that we actually need to expand and Once we have distributed point function then the PCG for unit vector you can it's it's it's very straightforward So all you give the parties is the keys for the distributed point function Alice additionally gets this point alpha So she knows where where it's punctured and she gets the value delta Blinded by the by the point of the distributed Point function and this will be good for her to replace the output value of the distributed point function by delta And so what the parties will do? So this is the this is the this is the seed and then the expansion is simply evaluating the distributed point function at every point Alice will add at the green part at the alpha part She will add this y plus delta and then because of the properties of the distributed point function We will have that if you add up q and r this will be delta times the unit vector And so so B is this unit vector that is that is alpha at this point So we have a PCG we can expand we have a PCG if B is the unit vector But of course we want more like we want B not to be the unit vector We want B to be a random vector in your so how can we go from a? How can we go from a unit vector to a to a random vector? Well first a sparse vector and if you take a look at the correlation again This is a this is a linear this is this is a linear term everything is linear so all all terms So we have a secret sharing all linear operations can just be performed in the shares So the addition if we want we can just repeat the sex same procedure t times and then add it all up Alice etcher output up Bob etcher her is output up, and then we get we get the same for sparse vector and Then the interesting part is to go from the sparse vector to the pseudo random vector and for this we use the learning parity with nice assumption Which basically states that if you have like an over the determined set of Linear equations, or you have this matrix product with a small secret vector, and then you add the sparse noise So the noise is zero except for a few points then this will look this will look random and What we actually need is the dual version of this where you multiply the The left kernel of this pink matrix And then you will see here in this equation what it will do It will take a random sparse vector and it will shrink it a bit But then you get something you will get something to suit a random, and this is exactly what we what we want And why why why this is so useful for our for our construction because again matrix Multiplication is something linear so the parties can perform this linearly. There's no no no communication required and The main challenge you have here is now in terms of of computation because this because this matrix is big It will be linear in the number of OTS and often if we're interested in in generating 10 million OTS Then this will this will be a big matrix So what we do is we use quasi cyclic codes where the multiplication Basically becomes a polynomial multiplication. So quasi linear in the in the number of OTS and The security that we get is similar to post quantum crypto systems like bike bike or HQC and Something something like I also want to mention so LPN is is is some kind of symmetric style assumption for two reasons So first of all it does not Imply a public key encryption for certain noise rates also noise rates were for our like Which you can use for our construction and second of all it's it's very efficient So so again, we get an OT extension where it like we only use symmetric style cryptography And I'll just putting everything together And the last step is is to multiply so take this this matrix and again Just locally apply it to to to to to to the the results We have from the previous operation and then and then we get the Q and the B and the R This will be actually the output of the of our PCG and bike because we have correctness of the distributed point function and Addition is linear and and the matrix multiplication is linear This will actually give us what we want and even though this might look I mean a bit small now on slides what we get in the end I mean, this is is a is a big compression like we have a bit of shrinkage by the LPN matrix But but so instead of having if the output here is n the the keys and What we need to exchange so the keys are only are only lambda mal Times log n so we have we have a we have a big achievement here and Yeah, to come to a comparison to to previous OT extension protocols I said in the beginning that what we have I Forgot that if you do it with the addition you actually also have to factor t because I have to do it t times but yeah If you compare it with previous OT extension protocols, I said it's linear in the number of OTS But it's actually even worse if you look at the concrete numbers and the communication and Is like for a single t even a bit or t you you get something like 70 at least 70 78 bits per per or t and we bring this down with this approach to to 0 to 3 bits per random per random or t so so significantly less and Like maybe on the downside of having a logarithmic in the number of n in the number of output lengths number of rounds We don't have active security, but actually both of this we solve in a in a follow-up work We together with peter Rindal where we get it down to two rounds So actually the first efficient to round OT extension and we back up the communication with a with an implementation So there we get 0.1 communication per random or t for generating 10 million OTS and we also get an get an active get active security and What does it mean for the GMW protocol that we had at the beginning? So If you use the GMW protocol with for example the IKMP you get more than a hundred bits per end gate So with all previous approaches and we bring it down to four So four is actually the cost of the online phase. So we make and pre-processing almost for free in terms of communication and On the other hand so talking about computation. So our approach needs we can generate about a million OTS per second So this is slower than IKMP, but over slow networks because we have huge this huge saving in terms of communication we we we outperform IKMP and So to conclude this talk So the random correlation generators are useful. So they give Secure multi-party computation with silent pre-processing We have a silent OT extension from the learning parity with noise assumption, which is concretely efficient and the idea is you take few base OTS and then you locally expand and the only thing you need is symmetric symmetric style crypto and we Also achieve like we improve this to actually get the two-round OT extension and also malicious security with with the same techniques But but getting a better better setup phase basically And from what is also interesting to mention What this line of work gives it gives new feasibility results and practical instantiation from learning parity with noise and and this is interesting because and Because because In particular for the practical instantiation We're not we don't know how to do is from from from strong from seemingly stronger assumption like you like learning with arrows so this is actually gives something new and Yeah, as this is there's lots of things to do There's lots of operand problems to work on so and we have we in our paper we give construction For beaver triples for oblivious linear function evaluation And but they're not as efficient as the OT construction that I showed you so like can we can we use similar techniques? Can we do things to get to get it actually as efficient as the OT? construction what would be super cool to achieve is a PCG where we don't have to expand it all at once but only expanded like however much much we need to extend and Because like a big part or like a very central part to our construction is learning parity with nice So so so further further study the learning parity with noise assumption, which code noise combinations are friendly our LP and LP and friendly What is what is the best way of implementing learning parity with noise in large scale because generally like people look more into when you have When you have a smaller smaller than smaller matrix, but we really interested We want to have like as big as possible because then we can get more OTS What is the best way to do so computationally efficiently and more from the theoretical side? giving a a generic LPN model because our construction and it's of course not a black box construction But it has some black box flavor and maybe giving a model where we can capture the black box Flavor of our construction. So yeah, that's it for me. So thank you very much for the attention and Any questions? Thanks for the talk. So I was wondering and if you apply this protocol to the GMW You get very small communication in the preprocessing. Can you comment on the local computation cost for the parties? So the as I said, so the local computation cost you have you have you have a Million OTS per second. So we studied so for the so for So for a T extension, like if you just consider the if you just consider the OT extension part For in our follow-up work if if you do this over like over over wide area network with 10 megabit megabit per second you get Almost a 50 times improvement. So even if you if you factor in the the the computation you you can get improvements over like replacing Can I add a second? So you mentioned that for the LPN you use the quasi-cyclic code for the improvement So I was wondering like a why does it not add another coding theory like a code-based cryptography assumption So does your protocol security still reduces to LPN itself with with no additional code-based cryptography assumption I mean we have to do to assume like like for that that is secure for you using this kind you for using This kind of code. So as I said, it's it's similar to the assumption that that people post-quantum like post-quantum crypto system. So it is is it equivalent to playing LPN or is it not It's It's not it's not so for for random matrices. So that's not Equivalent, okay, you know, okay Thank you. Yeah, let's thank the speaker again and


Welcome back to the channel, everybody. Today we're going to be doing another reaction video or injury reaction video. This time it's going to be about my favorite comedian who suffered an injury recently. I was going to do a video on this injury and kind of describe it after it happened, but Brian Sutterer, who's also a YouTuber and physician, did a very good video on that and you know, I can't compete with that. However, recently, Tom Segura brought his trauma surgeon onto his podcast to discuss his injuries and he ended up posting a ton of different radiologic images. It has left me no choice but now to react to this video, although these videos are usually just snooze-fest videos. Nobody watches these videos. The last couple of reaction videos I did to accidents got like five views, but you know, I'm here for it. All right, so let's go ahead and get started with Tom Segura's injury. Let's go. All right, so first and foremost, if you haven't seen Tom Segura's injury, the first thing we're going to do here is watch his injury, which is pretty painful to watch, but I've seen it before and those of you who haven't seen it, I apologize in advance because you don't like squeamish things or broken bones. Close your eyes, trust me. He's armed, he's armed. I've seen this a whole bunch of times and it is still terrible every time I watch it. And also his friend and comedian, Bert Reicher, who basically flipped his arm back from this to this, did a very good job there, but that's for another video. All right, so now we got that out of the way. Let's get into the actual video or the actual video podcast where Tom Segura had his trauma surgeon and they discussed some of the stuff from this injury and his surgery. And then I remember I was sitting with you where you came in and I was like, yeah, I actually have no video. And you were like, oh, I'd like to see that. And it always helps to see how the injury happened when you're about to treat the injury. So I mean, that makes sense. I would have done the same thing. When you see them as the surgeon, what hits you, I mean, like when you see the two, I have two like pretty severe injuries, right? So since most of you all don't know what he actually did, he actually ended up with that fall, his patella tendon snapped, and then he also fell on his left arm and he broke his humerus. He also has radial nerve palsy from that stretching of that nerve when his hand was to the back. So those are essentially here's three injuries that trauma surgeon had to fix. So I think in the interest of time here, so this isn't like a 45 minute video, I'll skip forward to some of the images and kind of go over that as they go over it. All right, so just by looking at this X-ray, so I have this light in the corner of my eye, so I can't really see it very well. But if you look to see at this patella here, the patella is actually very high when it should be down here more, closer to the distal part of the femur or the proximal knee essentially. So this patella is just by looking at it. I know that it's high and we would call that patella alta. Now there is a whole equation that you can do to essentially measure the patella alta and I always forget it, so let's look it up. So we'll talk about patella alta real quick. So I just put up this radiopedia article here. So patella alta, also known as high-riding patella, which is what we usually say when we're talking to other physicians or whatnot. It's characterized by the position of the patella when it's considered high, usually idiopathic, but it could be secondary to patella tendon rupture, which is what Tom's a grad. So on sagittal X-ray, which is what this is, we use a something called the insol solvati ratio. So basically on the lateral, you measure the patella and then you measure the distance from the inferior portion of the patella to the tibial tuberosity. The mean normal is around one. So if that ratio is greater than 1.2, you have patella alta. It's less than 0.8 patella baja and the normal is the 0.8 to 1.2 range. So that's a little bit about how we can tell on X-ray. The other thing we can do is look for soft tissue swelling about the knee. Now usually on X-rays, you'd be able to window this and see the soft tissues a little better. There's a little effusion up here as well. I can't really see it on this particular X-ray. Soft tissue, swelling, effusion, a high-riding patella or patella alta, all signs, especially after an injury, I'd be concerned for patella tendon rupture. Just saw this one X-ray image of the lateral or sagittal part of the knee.  Which is in the wrong place? Yeah, so it's sitting really, really high. Yeah. It's sitting a lot. See, it's exactly what I'm talking about here, high-riding patella or patella alta. Most patella tendon ruptures at the inferior portion of the actual patella and there's usually associated with a little fragment of bone there too that you can see when they rupture it. But his actually wasn't. It was more central in the tendon, which is very odd. You don't see that very often, which means he had some crazy amount of force to rupture the center of the tendon. Usually ruptures at its weakest points at the attachment, not the actual center of the tendon. This is a very strong tendon, by the way. Here's the MRI. This is a sagittal or a projection looking at the lateral part of the knee or like this. Coming in that way. So you have the patella up here. This is the femur. This is the tibia. Patella up here, which is very high, mind you. And this ripply tendon, which is the patella tendon. Now this should be very nice and straight. The problem is this one's very wavy, which means it's very lax and ruptured in this case. This is very a tell-tale sign. Think of like a bungee cord that's attached or pulled and attached between those two bones. So if the bungee cord were to rupture, it would get very saggy and kind of just like wave around because it's not taught like it should be. And I'll show you an image of what the patella tendon should look like on MRI when it's not ruptured so you can see the difference. All right, so this is a lateral or sagittal image of a T1 MRI here. Here's the patella again. Notice how straight and taut this patella tendon is as my mouse goes over it. This black line is the patella tendon taught, not ruptured. Now let's go back. Let's look at his again. Look how wavy and loose this patella tendon is. Classic sign that it's ruptured. There's also a lot of fluid out here too, which you'll be able to see better on a T2 sequence or a fluid sensitive sequence. So like, yeah, this is a ruptured patella tendon. It's likely somewhere in the middle here because you can see actually this part is still attached to the inferior patella. And down here at the tibial tuberosity, it's also attached, which is very strange in a patella tendon rupture. So let's keep going. So if you look at the MRI, the resident was like, yeah, the ultrasound says that it's ruptured in the middle of the patella tendon. You know, all of us are in comfort. So me, partners, we're sitting in there and we're like, that never happens. It's so, it never happens. What are you talking about? Dude, this is classic. They're already just bashing the resident off of what he saw on the MRI. And even before they looked at it because they're right, that never happens, but doesn't mean the resident's not right. And he's like, no, no, no, that's what it says. Then we get the MRI and we look at the MRI and we're like, it looks like it ruptured in the middle of the tendon or at least, you know, you see how that thing is like folded? The little black line that's folded. Yeah, that right there. That should just be a straight line going directly to the tibia. So that's the tendon. Yeah, so that's the tendon. Yeah, you can see this portion of the tibial tuberosity is likely pulled off a little bit. It's not completely ruptured off of the tibial tuberosity, but it does look like it's de-hissed a little bit. Usually since the tendon ruptures off the inferior or lower portion of the patella, you essentially just suture through the patella into the patella tendon. In this case, you can't do that because it's ruptured in the center of the tendon. So you kind of just have to suture the tendon together. So normally you make some drill holes through the kneecap and you pass stitches through the kneecap and you tie them over the top and that just repairs that tendon. So let me show you what he's talking about. So this is just a diagram of what he's talking about here. So usually the patella tendon will rupture at the inferior portion or the lower border of the patella and you just basically suture through the patella and drill some holes, suture through the patella and into the tendon, kind of tighten it back up. But his patella tendon ruptured around here so you can't really drill holes in the patella or the kneecap and suture that in. So this is why it complicated to a little bit but I don't do this surgery, so I'll let him finish. It's just the opposite of what we usually do. I've had to do that twice in my career. Wow. A lot of times when people tear their patella tendon it's because they had some tendonitis like either at the top or at the bottom of the tendon that's been there for a while. And so it just speaks to how much force you're able to generate. So I'm super strong. You're super strong. Yes, I am. Yeah, so it takes some power to literally just rupture that tendon. Again, this is one of the strongest tendons in your body. To rupture that is take substantial amount of force. All right, so now we have the T2 weighted sagittal MRI of the knee. So this is still the lateral projection of the knee. This is T2 weighted or fluid sensitive sequence which means that any fluid is going to be very bright on this sequence and you can see all of the fluid in the joint space here between the patella and the actual femur. You have tons of fluid in the edema which is blood products, just reactive swelling edema, fluid, synovial fluid, all out here in the soft tissues. And this tendon is essentially just frayed and not connected anymore. There's no taut black line going from the patella to the tibial tuberosity. It's just wavy soft tissue, no connected tendon. This is a pretty solid tear here. If you look really closely, you can see some edema at the lower portion of the patella here because maybe the patella when it ruptured the patella hit on the femur and caused a little small contusion in that bone. But yeah, pretty crazy, I'm right here. Go to the, I think there's an x-ray of the humerus. So now we got the arm radiograph here, the arm x-ray. So this is the scapula here, clavicle and acromion here. And this is the humeral head, the humeral shaft. And as you see, it is broken and sheared off and laterally displaced here on this particular PA image. The elbow joint is immediately angulated. So this is a nice displaced, maybe minimally comminuted fracture. It looks like a pretty clean break with some fragments out there. So you can fix this with a plate and screw internal fixation which they did. And I remember a resident coming in and I was like, oh, where's the incision gonna be? And he was like, oh, it'll be along your tricep. And I was like, okay. And I woke up and it's on the bicep. And I was just curious, like... The resident's always giving incorrect information. Well, in this case, it's not incorrect, but... Like you cut through the muscle, I guess, right or no? So you don't, you kind of spread, right? You do. Yeah, you don't actually cut through the muscle. They would cut down through the skin. They would essentially just use forceps and kind of spread those muscles open so they can expose the bone. You don't actually have to cut through the muscle. You spread through it in a point where there's nerves that come in from both sides and they're two separate nerves. So you work through that area in between them. So, I know it's, it's not, it's bananas. It's so crazy that you do this. It is weird when you think about it. We do this so often. I don't do orthopedic surgery, but in my line of work, interventional radiology, we do these procedures so often that it's like second nature to us.  It's just like making a sandwich or whatnot. But when you tell people this, their mind is blown. You forget how crazy it is, the stuff we do. So here we have the, these are intraoperative films. This is just the C-arm images in the operating room. You put the first humeral plate in a few screws and it'll probably add a stronger one too at the end of this. You can see these little bony fragments out here too. Then we put a big plate that actually allows us to, to really kind of protect your arm. There we go. So they extended the plate, a nice beefy plate here. Screws everywhere. This thing isn't doing anywhere. All right. So I hope you all enjoyed this video. The reason I went over his injury, even though it happened a while ago, is because he had so much imaging on this particular episode of his podcast. So if you learned something, let me know in the comments below. If you want me to do more videos like this, also let me know. Hopefully it's not a snooze fest like the other videos have been in the past. On that note, smash the like and subscribe button. Follow me on Instagram and TikTok if you don't already and I'll see you all on the next video. Peace.