that that guy's taken care of a quote unquote hacker is see if this door and will not open a and let's avoid this guy for now it's not necessary, what's going on here blackmore that it for you you're a big guy for you are more like for you that's a dark night rises reference that it that that that I'm gonna take a shower yeah this game does not take itself very seriously which I really like whoops technical difficulties there okay let's keep going now we're heading into a battle with one of these hacker guys that has a gun once again if if you're under leveled like I am right now and you run into three of those you're probably gonna want to run because you're gonna die pretty easily should probably be at like around level six or seven by now I'm only at level three or four I can't remember oh now I'm at level four speak of the devil so now let's just of course uh... re uh... restock our our guy heal up our guy our robot larry larry and uh... let's see how to distribute the points I guess you just do that maybe put a little more into charge so it charges up a little bit faster good enough I think I'm a little worried about speed but no big deal anything to do here not really I do want to modify these eventually I do have a boss fight coming up I'm probably gonna have to grind a bit before I get there I just wanna show off with with these old cut scenes coming up here there are a couple other things I need to add here I just can't remember them off the top my head and I'm gonna look these up yeah in case you can't tell I'm doing this let's play in one big session I if you're leaving comments saying do this do that you're too late because uh...


Live from Barcelona, Spain, it's theCUBE! Covering Cisco Live 2020. Brought to you by Cisco and its ecosystem partners. Hi buddy, welcome back to theCUBE. The leader in live tech coverage. My name is Dave Vellante with co-host Stu Minim and John Furrier's here. We go out to the events, we extract the signal from the noise and of course it's day one of Cisco Live Barcelona. Very excited to have Prasant Chanois, the vice president of marketing, enterprise networks for IoT and the developer platform at Cisco. Prasant, good to see you. Good to see you folks too. So right now we're in the middle of the DNA center takeover in the DevNet zone. Network's getting more complex. You need a command center to understand what's going on. Give us the update. Why DNA center? Yeah, so this has been a journey for Cisco and for our customers for the last three years or so. A few things happened in the last decade. Like mobile, IoT, cloud and the world of security. All of those came together in one place and if you look at it, these are very network-centric technologies, right? There'd be no cloud without networking or mobile or IoT. So when our customers started investing heavily in the world of applications in the cloud environment, mobile and IoT, the network was slightly left behind. The network that they had created and built was meant for the internet era, not for this multi-cloud, mobile and IoT era. So we had to rethink networking fundamentally from the ground up to how do you help our customers design, build, scale, manage and deploy networks for this new era of digital transformation driven by mobile and cloud. And that was the genesis of our intent-based networking strategy, right? So that was like three years back when we designed a networking architecture that focuses on the business intent and lets you figure out the how part of it, the network figures it out. So the DNA Center was the command center, as Dave, you put it, to help manage, design and build this network from the ground up. And it's been a journey for us and it's been a very, very exciting journey for us where we're getting a lot of positive feedback from the customer, whether it's to deploy their access infrastructure, wired, wireless or moving to the wide area network, extending into data center and public cloud environment. So when we went from internet to the cloud, you know, we talked about the flattening of the network and now I know we're going to talk about it, the edge. Yeah. Are we going to need a new DNA center for that next wave or? No, it's the pendulum swing, right? Like it's always been interesting, mainframe centralized and decentralized edges, then again centralized in the cloud and now cloud moving to the edge. So this is always going to be an interesting phenomena and it's mainly because the world around both sides of the networking has become highly hyper connected and highly dynamic, right? Like users are everywhere, mobile devices are everywhere, applications are everywhere, a single application is split into 500 different pieces, running containers and microservices across four different public clouds and three different data centers, right? Like how do you manage this dynamic environment? How do you set the policy? How do you guarantee an application experience? So this has been a very challenging environment. So the idea of DNA center is to provide you that single command center, right? No matter whether you want to deploy it as a virtual service, a physical service in the cloud, in a hardware platform, doesn't matter, right? So how do you get all of your data? How do you get a single place to provision the system? Well, I'm glad you've mentioned scale quite a few times talking about this. For the longest time it was, how do we get the network people to get off of their CLI and go to the GUI? Well, I don't care if you've got the best GUI in the world. The hyper-connectivity, the amount of changes going on, people can't do this alone. So talk to us a little bit about the tooling, the automation, the APIs, connect all these things and make sure that our people don't become the bottleneck for innovation. Frankly, the complexity has exceeded human scale. It's just impossible. It's funny because I was talking to the CIO of a pretty large global bank, I can't tell the name. Who was saying like, hey, a few years back I had one IT person to manage around 1000 devices, all the devices, right? And then that year when I was talking, and this was 2016, he had one is to 10,000 devices, one IT for 10,000 devices to manage. And he said, I'm looking in 2020 to be one IT for 250,000 devices, going up to a million devices. I'm like, dude, you're doing some funky math here. That looks like that hockey stick curve, right? And I'm like, he was, right now I don't even know what's on my network, what's connected to my network, I'm flying blind. And that opens up a lot of security issues, that opens up a lot of operational challenges. In fact, for every dollar our customer spends on CAPEX for buying the network, they spend $3 on OPEX, managing the network, monitoring and troubleshooting the network. So that's the key point, saying that you can hire 100 more IT staff, you're just not going to be able to manage the complexity. So there has to be an automation world, right? We live in a world where repetitive tasks should be done by machines and not human beings. It's happened in the rest of the lives and networks operations is just one part of that. So the concept of controller led architectures, which was the genesis of SDN is now being applied to this world of internet based networking, but we also get the data to provide you insights on how things are behaving and how to take actions before it happens. Well, yeah, you brought up, you used to, how many devices the enterprise can manage was something we measured for the longest time and used to compare to the hyperscalers. And I said, well, here's the myth there. It's not that they're managing two orders of magnitude more equipment, they architect completely different. Exactly. They build the applications with the expectation that everything underneath is going to change, it's going to fail, it's going to be upgraded. So you don't have somebody inside of Yahoo and Google and all these hyperscalers running around, patching and updating things. It's, they build a data center and they keep adding environments and they throw things out in the wood chipper when they're done and they break things down. So it's a completely different mindset and part of SDN was the promise of it was to take some of those hyperscaler methodologies and bring it to the enterprise. So yeah, tell us how your software today is delivering kind of that hyperscale architecture and it's a little bit of a culture change for the enterprise. It's been a huge culture change, right? Like the concepts of like abstracting the underlay complexity of all the network physical connections and giving you an overlay, what we call a fabric. So underlying network works as a single integrated system, right? It's not like switches, routers, controllers, access point, all of that complexity is taken out. So you're programming a single fabric, putting the right policy and the controller will figure out how do I enforce that policy in this switch, that place, this controller, this access point, right? So that was the complexity the network operators of yesteryears were dealing with, right? They had to go and configure with CLIs and now API, since we are in DevNet, is the new CLI, right? And that becomes a culture shift for network operators. Like I've been in the networking space for like 20 years. I was born on CLI, right?  It was tough, it was tough to manage that as a single system, right? And that's why the role of controller to abstract the complexity away, to program the infrastructure and then expose this intelligence to other systems, whether it's IT systems, whether it's business applications goes a long way. So that's why this journey is very exciting for us. So it sounds like we're entering the era of self-driving networks.  Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I mean, see, there are new technologies that a lot of consumer markets and other places have used, like machine learning, right? Like we have so much data within the network. The network sees everything, right? Because it's the connection point from mobile IoT to applications and cloud, right? But we haven't really leveraged the power of the data and the intelligence, right? And now that we have all of the data and now we have things like machine learning, it can identify traffic patterns and provide you more insights around your business, around your IT and security, right? So that really takes the guesswork away. And the good part is with machine learning, the more data you feed it, the more it's learning from the data, not just your own local networks, but the networks across the world. And that makes it constantly adapting to changing conditions and constantly learning based on the traffic patterns and your environment. And that's a pretty exciting field, right? Because we've implemented that in the security field to predict threats before they happen. We've implemented that in parts of application performance. And now you're bringing it to the world of networking across access branch, run and campus to like help IT move from a reactive world to more of a proactive world to a predictive world, right? So they can spend less time looking for the needle in the haystack and focus more on solving strategic problems. So when you get into discussions about machine intelligence, oftentimes there's discussions about, oh, replacing jobs and blah, blah, blah, blah. And so it'll turn to a discussion of augmented intelligence, which very reasonable thing. What you just described is removing mundane tasks, nobody wants to do those anymore. Here's my question. You talked about your CLI experience over the last 20 years. Is that CLI sort of tribal knowledge still vital as part of the art of networking or does the machine essentially take over and humans go on to other things? Yeah, I think that's a great question, Dave. I call these next generation of network operators the unicorns. So you do need to have the tribal knowledge of networking, not necessarily CLI, but the concept of networking, how do these protocols work, right? This is not easy. There are very, very few network engineers compared to application developers and software engineers in the world. So this is always going to be critical. But now if you marry this knowledge and compliment this knowledge with programmability and automation and application, you got yourself a unicorn that is going to be very, very strategic to the business because now the world of infrastructure and applications are coming together so you can truly focus on your business, which is run on applications, right? How can your applications run faster, smarter, better with the network? And how can your network understand how the applications are behaving becomes a whole new world? So you seek new roles of network practitioners emerging, I feel, like the data scientists of the network, like the security defender of the network, the world of security ops and networks are coming together. So that's what is exciting for us because you get bored in your life if you're doing just repetitive task and not learning new, right? And this provides a new way of learning. So for me, it's not taking jobs away. It's like upgrading your skillset to a whole new level that's a lot more exciting. This is the secret of Cisco still. We've talked about this all these hundreds of thousands of network engineers with a growth path and come develop. What I found fascinating is really unlocking that data because for the last decade, we've talked about, well, there's the network flows and there's analytics in the network streams but what had been missing and what I think is starting to be there, as you said, that connectivity between the application and the actual data for the business, it isn't just some arcane dark art of networking and we're making that run faster, better, cheaper but what that enables for the business, the data and the applications that there is a tighter relevance there today. That's the key thing, right? I mean, everybody has been talking about data now, I don't know, for 15, 20 years. It's the new crude oil, if you will, right? But everybody has access to data, nobody knows what to do with it, right? Like this philosophical thing of data to knowledge, to wisdom is like what we are all striving towards, right? And now that we have access to this data and we have this intelligent system, which is a multi-purpose software that ingests data from not just networking but devices connected to the network, the security threats that we are seeing, the application data that we're seeing and provides this context and provides you very key insights around how does that impact your business? How does that impact your IT? How does that impact your security? It's a very powerful thing and you don't find that and you need to have that breadth of portfolio and system to be able to get all of the data and consume that at a hyperscale level, if you will. Yeah, and we often say in theCUBE that data is plentiful, insights are not and you need insights in order to be able to take action and that's where automation comes in. Prasad, great segment, thank you very much for coming on theCUBE, really appreciate it. Thank you, Dave. Thanks, Stu. Pleasure. Awesome. All right, and thank you for watching. This is theCUBE live from Barcelona Cisco Live 2020. Dave Vellante for Stu Miniman and John Furrier. We'll be right back.


And a very warm welcome to our attendees who have joined us this morning. My name is Ebony Holland. I'm a senior researcher with the Institute for International, the International Institute for Environment and Development. Welcome to the event today. Today's event will focus on biodiversity loss is an underestimated risk and we'll be looking at this from the climate development and business perspectives. So a warm welcome to all of you from us for this important opportunity to discuss risks arising from accelerating biodiversity loss. I'm Joe Elliott. I work for Fauna and Flora International and we are co-hosting this event with IID. We'd all like to thank the Understanding Risk Forum for hosting these sessions. And I'd like to thank our three speakers who I will introduce you to shortly in turn. They will each give us a short talk and then as Matt says we'll have an opportunity to do some Q&A and interaction and find out more about how our panellists are thinking about these different perspectives. A quick introduction from me before we get started. In the past 50 years, the populations of vertebrate species that we share our planet with have declined by more than two thirds, a dramatic depopulation of wildlife alongside a human population that has of course doubled to 7.8 billion people and we have extended our economic system that supports us as humans across more than 75% of the planet's terrestrial surface. And in addition to the decline in wildlife and biodiversity abundance, we're seeing a worrying acceleration in species extinctions caused by the way we're using Earth's resources. This scale of biodiversity loss presents us all with critical risks across multiple dimensions including development, climate and business. And our speakers today will explore these risks and their implications across these three dimensions. So with no further ado, let me introduce the first of our speakers, Dillis Rowe. Dillis leads IED's work on biodiversity and conservation. She focuses on the human dimensions with a particular focus on community-based conservation and on the links between biodiversity development and well-being. Dillis, over to you. Thanks very much, Jo. So yes, I'm going to talk about why biodiversity loss is a risk to development. And by development, I mean international development, human development in developing countries. I'm going to start off by just sort of touching on what we actually mean by biodiversity because it's a complex and technical scientific term that is misunderstood by many. And many people, when we mention the word biodiversity, if they know what it means at all, think it's about iconic species. Or it might resonate with people that are thinking about the Amazon rainforest or coral reefs and other iconic landscapes. But biodiversity is actually much more than that. It's about the whole variety and abundance of life on Earth. It's a term that sums up that variety and abundance of life. So it's not just about iconic species such as black rhinos and Sumatran tigers, but it's also about the boring stuff, the fish, the fungi, the insects, the soil microbes, crop varieties, and also their habitats. So it's the living components of nature. And those living components often underpin the health of the nonliving components of nature, water, soil, air, and so on. So WWF in the regularly produced living planet report refer to nature underpinned by biodiversity, which is a nice phrase, I think, and a way of kind of thinking about the relationship between the two. And as Jo mentioned, we are facing a real natural emergency. We're losing biodiversity at an unprecedented scale. She mentioned in her introduction various headline stats that have been generated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by WWF and by others. One million species facing extinction. Populations of vertebrates down by 60% since 1970. The global biomass of wild mammals down 80% since 1970. A third of global fish stocks overfished. A third of freshwater fish threatened. And not just at the species level, but also at the ecosystem level of 47% average decline in the extent of natural ecosystems since records began. And even greater in the case of wetlands up to 85%. Only 3% of the oceans now free from human pressures. And even genetic diversity, 75% of crop genetic diversity lost since the 1900s. So it really is a major, major loss of biodiversity at all its different levels. And perhaps the most worrying thing is that the drivers of that loss are accelerating. So this is a, this is a nice diagram that was produced by the, by it best the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. And it shows the main direct drivers of biodiversity loss of particularly emphasizing land and sea use change and over exploitation. And you can see that those direct drivers are themselves driven by demographics, by macroeconomics, by institutions, by conflicts. And as we've seen recently by epidemics such as COVID-19. So does this really matter? Are we really worried about it? Well, yes it does because we all depend on nature. It delivers a wide range of goods and services on which everybody depends, but particularly poor people. So this includes breathable air, fertile soil, raw materials, clean water, cultural, cultural dimensions and all sorts. And diversity really matters within that. Diversity underpins the abundance and the extent and the condition of nature. And so it secures the flow of these benefits to people in the future, particularly in the face of changing external environment, climate change and so on. So if we lose biodiversity, we see crop yields declining, we see timber production declining, fodder production declining, all sorts of declines. We also see that nature is more vulnerable and less resilient to climate extremes, to invasion by exotic species and to other external risks. And it has less capacity to deal with sequestering carbon and performing other basic ecological functions. So really, the biodiversity emergency and it is an emergency is also a development emergency. The global community has made significant gains in international development and poverty alleviation in the last 50 years, but biodiversity loss threatens to undermine those gains. And the impacts of loss are clear from a number of different entry points depending on your interests in biodiversity. So if we're concerned about it from the point of thinking about the SDGs and how we might achieve them, these two nice graphics developed by the Stockholm Resilience Center frame the SDGs in ways that demonstrate how biodiversity underpins the delivery of other SDGs, including the social and economic SDGs. So without achieving the biodiversity-linked SDGs, the others fall apart as well. From a development aid perspective, these are some of the priorities that aid agencies have been trying to deliver in their poverty alleviation efforts over the last 50 years. Economic growth, jobs, income, reducing hunger, improving health, reducing conflict and security, improving gender equality and biodiversity loss threatens to undermine all of these. I'm not going to read through this table in detail, but things natural resource sectors like agriculture, forestry and fisheries are the bedrock of development and all of these are, the productivity of all of these are undermined by biodiversity loss. On the health side, biodiversity loss means a loss of access to traditional medicines. It also means reduced options for future drug development. It means increased disease emergence and burden and so on. So all sorts of different effects that biodiversity loss has on these key development priorities. And from a poverty reduction perspective, it is the poor that will be the hardest hit. And they'll be hardest hit by biodiversity loss because they depend most directly on it for natural resources and the services that nature delivers to meet their immediate livelihood needs. And also because they often can't afford substitutes for things that were previously freely available from nature, such as food, fuel and so on. But quite often the poor are also hardest hit by some of the responses to biodiversity loss. They're vulnerable to displacement and human rights abuses in efforts by others, either to gain access to a rapidly dwindling biodiversity base or to conserve it. So just thinking about how we deal with this risk, one obvious thing is to really nature-proof any investments, any development investments. And this means building biodiversity safeguards and incentives into those development interventions. So at a macro scale, this might mean things like removing damaging subsidies, for example, for industrialised agriculture and fisheries, and at the same time introducing biodiversity-friendly subsidies for nature-friendly development. And at a project level it means thinking about possible impacts on biodiversity of interventions and screening for risks. I mean even things like the siting of refugee camps and the type of food that's provided can have an impact on biodiversity. Other options are to think about how to invest in people that are resident in biodiversity rich or vulnerable areas in order to reduce their reliance on biodiversity. So this means investing in their livelihoods and in things like improved agriculture in order to reduce the risk that they will overexploit biodiversity. It means recognising the real potential of biodiversity for development, for climate resilience and actively investing in that potential. If biodiversity loss undermines development, then tackling it can support development. So the nature-based solutions that it can offer can really generate multiple development outcomes. And finally it means investing in elements of biodiversity that are important to poor people. So yes, of course, we are worried about elephants and tigers and rhinos, but it's really the less iconic species, crop varieties and the smaller stuff that is important to poor people and that really requires greater attention or at least as much attention as we give to iconic species.  Many people in development agencies see conservation as being anti-poor. And indeed there's lots of protected areas and other types of interventions that have had bad track records of eviction, dispossession and human rights, other human rights abuses being meted out in the name of conservation. The same can be true for other forms of interventions in nature. So some things which are labeled as nature-based solutions aren't necessarily good for people, aren't necessarily good for nature either. So solutions that prioritise, for example, monoculture plantations of exotic species are not good for biodiversity. Solutions that mean land is appropriated for tree planting from poor people is not good for people. So we really need to think about ways that we can invest in conservation, in restoration, in nature-based solutions that empower poor people and at the very, very least do them no harm. We also need to think about the drivers of biodiversity loss, land conversion, pollution, over-exploitation, climate change, et cetera. And the underlying drivers, governance, conflicts, epidemics and so on. These are quite often, the drivers of biodiversity loss are quite often the same as the drivers of climate change and the drivers of inequality. So tackling those drivers can really deliver a triple win. And overall, as we approach 2021, I think the key thing is with all the various summits that are ahead of us and the negotiations are ahead of us, that we shouldn't be thinking about just biodiversity loss, just climate change or just development. These are interlinked challenges and they need interlinked solutions. So as we go forward into 2021, we really need to be thinking in a triple agenda rather than single agenda way in order to make sure that these challenges are addressed together and the risks of all of them are reduced in combination. Many thanks. Thanks, Dillis. So our second speaker today is Natalie Seddon. Natalie's Professor of Biodiversity at University of Oxford and Director of the Nature-Based Solutions Initiative, which is an interdisciplinary programme of research, policy, advice and education, looking at the effectiveness of nature-based solutions to global challenges. And Natalie will be focusing today on the climate dimension of biodiversity risk. Natalie. Hi, good morning, everyone. Thanks very much for this opportunity. So as Dillis very clearly explained, then there is growing evidence and also growing awareness that the global crisis of biodiversity loss and climate change are deeply interlinked. And it is now often claims that we cannot deal with one problem without also addressing the other, as again, as Dillis said. And in particular, in recent months, we've been hearing a great deal about the idea that biodiversity can support climate action in particular through so-called nature-based solutions. And this is an idea that has gained huge traction in government, in businesses, and among the general public. So over the next 10 minutes, I want to unpack this a bit. I want to discuss how biodiversity loss and climate change are linked. And I want to particularly explain why it is that the diversity of nature from the level of the gene to the level of the ecosystem is particularly important when it comes to addressing the causes and also the consequences of climate change. So we know that the main direct cause of biodiversity loss is land and sea use change, largely for industrial-scale food production, which drives an estimated 30% of biodiversity declines across the globe. This is followed by the over-exploitation, so overfishing and overhunting, which drives around 20%. Climate change, meanwhile, although currently ranked the third most significant driver of biodiversity loss, massively amplifies the effects of all the other stresses, for example, the fragmentation of landscapes. And it's predicted. The key thing about climate change is it's accelerating and it's predicted to become the main cause of biodiversity declines in the coming decades. Biodiversity changes in climate cause organisms to shift their geographical ranges, and often as a result of the way humans are managing the lands, those are nowhere to go. Also, climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of fires and storms, and this can destroy or badly damage entire ecosystems, undermine their integrity, so they can no longer function and support biodiverse assemblages. Now, at the same time, ecosystems on land and in the sea play a critical role in the global carbon cycle. So agriculture, forestry, and other land use activities account for around 23% of human greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, terrestrial ecosystems are estimated to draw down around, could well, between 20% and 30% of carbon dioxide emissions, and the oceans thought to remove around 30%. Therefore, in theory, addressing land and sea use change through the protection, the restoration, and the sustainable management of our ecosystems, in other words, through good nature-based solutions, should help slow warming and also arrest biodiversity declines. The other points, I think especially important for this particular webinar, this particular audience, there is also much evidence that working with biodiverse nature can also help address the impacts of climate change. Nature-based solutions underpinned by biodiversity can support human adaptation to climate change in various ways, and there are three main ways that I thought would be worth just very briefly describing. So first of all, and perhaps most obviously, nature-based solutions can reduce the exposure of communities, of agricultural lands of infrastructure to the immediate impacts of climate change. So for example, if we restore and if we protect our coastal habitats, our salt marshes, our mangroves and so forth, there is good evidence that this can really help defend against storms, against flood damage and so forth. Meanwhile, if we restore and work with our wetlands and our forests and our catchments, this can improve water security, reduce the risk of floods, soil erosion, and landslides that have brought extreme weather events. And green infrastructure in cities, for example, can provide cooling functions and can also help to abate floods and also bring countless mental and physical health benefits to city dwellers. So that's the first way. The second way is that nature-based solutions can reduce social sensitivity to the impacts of climate change. For example, by supporting the diversification of sources of income, of sources of food, and thereby providing nutritional and financial security when crops or all the usual sources of income fail during climate extremes. And of course, this is particularly important in the global south where dependency on nature for food and income is particularly high. The third way, and perhaps the less talked about way, is that nature-based solutions are working with nature, can really reduce vulnerability to climate impacts by building what's called adaptive capacity. So this is through the building social capital, in other words, through the process of being involved with designing and implementing the nature-based interventions. This empowers people and equips them with knowledge and resources that will enable them to prepare for future climate impacts. This so-called adaptive capacity in turn can improve or enhance the stewardship of ecosystems so that can then ensure the flow of benefits from nature to people. So in summary of all that, biodiversity loss in the form of the loss and damage to ecosystems is a big driver of climate change while climate change is fast becoming the biggest driver of biodiversity loss. So by restoring our ecosystems, protecting them, we can help reduce emissions and enhance carbon stores and thereby help to slow warming whilst also building the resilience of societies and ecosystems. But this is the basic idea of nature-based solutions, but I can't emphasise this enough. Nature-based solutions and biodiversity can only support people if we also decarbonise our economy. This really isn't an either or situation because warming damages ecosystems and their capacity to provide all these benefits to people in a warming world. So we need to therefore treat offsetting schemes with extreme caution, and perhaps that might be something we want to circle back to. But the big question is why specifically does the erosion of the diversity of life matter so much for climate change? After all, there are around 12 million species, probably more than that on planet Earth. Can we afford to lose the 1 million species predicted to go extinct in the recent Global Assessment Report produced by It-Bez? And the answer is no. Diversity matters enormously. Why? Basically, diversity is our insurance policy. And let me go on to explain what I mean by that. So, Andilus in fact touched on this in her presentation. But obviously for nature to deliver benefits to people over the long term, whether they're climate change benefits or other benefits, the ecosystems involved must themselves be healthy and functionally resilient to environmental change. In other words, they must be able to resist and or recover quickly from perturbations and from climate change. So in other words, functionally resilient ecosystems are the foundation of sustainable nature-based solutions. And there is now much evidence, much observational, much empirical experimental evidence that has been collected, particularly over the last 40 years, that the resistance and resilience of an ecosystem, the resistance of the people who depend upon it, is strongly determined by its connectivity to other ecosystems across the landscape, as well as by the diversity of genes of ecological traits or species contained within its communities of animals, fungi, plants, bacteria and so forth. Connectivity is really important. Connectivity is a property of biodiversity and connectivity is very important because this allows species to track their preferred ecological niches in the landscape under climate change. Meanwhile, diversity, species richness across all those different groups that I mentioned, buffers ecosystems against perturbation via so-called insurance effects. And this is variation in space and time, some complementarity between species in their ecological functions. In other words, if you have lots of species, when the environmental conditions change under climate change, there is a higher probability that a subset of those species will be able to continue functioning and support ecosystem services and the people who depend upon them. So there's lots of examples of this and obviously I'm not going to go into all of them, but just relevant to this particular conversation. There's lots of evidence that natural forests and mixed species forest plantations have much more stable carbon stores during climate extremes compared to species poor plantations. And as we saw in the same findings with grasslands as well, low diversity grassland plots have much less resilience to droughts and other climate extremes than high diversity grassland plots. And similarly, compared to low diversity plantations, very biodiverse natural forests and areas allowed to regenerate naturally have lower resilience to fires, to pests and diseases, all of which are becoming much more common under climate change and that they also support a wider range of ecosystem services. And it's not just found in plants. We also found the findings of these patterns in all sorts of different groups as well. More diverse coral reefs, for example, have more stable ecosystem functions, more community stability, and again, greater resilience to disturbance. But it's very complicated. Increasing native and that's key, natural biodiversity is usually associated with improved ecosystem functions and services, but the relationship is nonlinear and its direction and strength can vary among different types of species. And this is really important to bear in mind. For example, the removal of a keystone species from a habitat through overhunting or overfishing, which commonly happens, has a very negative effect on ecological functioning. Whereas if we lose species that share very similar traits with other species in the community, then their loss would have less effect. The problem is when it comes to biodiversity loss, it's usually the keystone species that go first. An ecosystem may appear to have lots of species in it and they appear to be buzzing with life and thriving, but if it has lost the main species that dispersed the seas of large tree species, for example, that health is an illusion and the ecosystem will eventually collapse and its carbon stores and so forth will then be released into the atmosphere. So to conclude, the maintenance or enhancements of natural biodiversity needs to be considered a critical element of successful, sustainable nature-based solutions to climate change. As Dilla said, biodiversity is not wildlife, it's just, it's not a luxury or a nice to have, an additional benefit of working with nature. Biodiversity is that which secures the flow of all that we need now and into the future. It ensures the stability, productivity and resilience of our ecosystems and in a rapidly changing world, that's absolutely essential. In other words, if we don't ensure that biodiversity is supported or enhanced as we design our nature-based solutions, then nature won't be able to provide any benefits to people at all. Thanks very much. Thank you very much indeed, Natalie. So thanks both to Natalie and Dillis. Let's have our third speaker before we move on to a, hopefully a rather interesting and solution-focused discussion of some of your Q&A. Our third speaker is Liz. Liz Rogers. Liz is Vice President for Environmental Technology at BP International. She has led the development and deployment of new technologies there, including those related to carbon capture She supports broad engagement in climate science, including natural climate solutions and she's currently working on the development of BP's sustainability frame. So Liz, thank you very much for coming to share your thoughts with us. Pleasure, Joe. Thank you very much and good morning everybody. It's great to be here at this important event and thanks to our other two speakers. That was a great, great presentation. But now let's turn to why biodiversity loss matters to business and I'll be talking about of course why it matters to BP in particular. At BP we recognize that there's an intrinsic link between the need for global action on climate change and biodiversity and of course as we've heard this morning the strong link to society. Why does global biodiversity loss matter to business? Well we've heard quite a few examples this morning already but it's clear and we all know and it's worth reinforcing this the world is on an unsustainable path Biodiversity loss is happening now and we not only need to avoid the risk of biodiversity loss accelerating but also focus on how we stop biodiversity loss happening and help regenerate nature. There are a number of points on this slide I'm not going to speak to all of them but why global biodiversity loss matters to business I'm just going to highlight a few one in particular around financial institutions increasingly there's great interest from investors on environment and social and governance issues they're sort of abbreviated to the sort of ESG issues and those also include how we're managing biodiversity risk these usually show up as ESG ratings or ESG assessment of companies performance and these are increasingly informing investment decisions. Another key area is the private sector's role in providing input as well as obviously delivering international policies goals and targets and also managing compliance with new and emerging regulations in this area and I'll come back to that at the very end and as we've just heard from Natalie as well in particular there are huge opportunities for us in business to learn from nature and just building on Natalie's presentation as an example understanding the importance of natural carbon cycles and how to conserve these and perhaps even enhance them particularly in part with nature-based solutions so those are just a few reasons why biodiversity loss matters to business but what does this mean from a BP point of view earlier this year BP announced a new purpose to reimagine energy for people on our planet and we also announced a new sustainability frame which includes these three interconnected focus areas getting to net zero improving people's lives and care for our planet now our ambition is to get to net zero by 2050 or sooner and help the world to do the same and that's all about our ambitions to reduce emissions not only from our operations but also from the products that we sell we've launched our new business strategy in August this year that will reshape our business in BP within a decade as we pivot from an international oil company focused on producing resources to an integrated energy company focused on delivering solutions now over time of course our wide-ranging approach to sustainability has brought benefits but often at a local scale and now we believe we can do more by being focused on all priorities to drive our activities around the world and of course one of these priorities is to promote cleaner environments enhance biodiversity and promote natural climate solutions and just as a reminder as we've talked about this is because the continued decline in biodiversity and the degradation of our environment poses serious risks as we've heard about this morning with the natural environment and the natural resources upon which we all depend and it's reducing the ability of ecosystems to take carbon out of the atmosphere as an example which makes it harder to tackle issues like climate change BP is making significant investments in natural climate solutions and we're also working to strengthen and unify existing environmental standards and principles of climate solutions and the co-benefits that they can provide including those to society now we launched these in September and we are working together with different organizations including FFI and IUCN and others to really help think through how we deepen these into a series of objectives and targets and workshops to help us think through those and we'll be reporting on progress on those later this well actually early next year so let's move on to the next slide and what we're doing in terms of enhancing biodiversity and the recent position that we announced in June because managing biodiversity impacts and risks of course is nothing new in BP and biodiversity management has been integrated into our internal processes including risk management procedures for a long time and over that time we've learned a lot both good and bad and we realize that we need to upscale our approach to biodiversity again for all the reasons that we've heard this morning as I mentioned in June we launched our new biodiversity position and this slide talks to and a few things I just wanted to pull out in terms of our new position here we've committed to that there'll be no new oil and gas exploration or production in the most sensitive protected areas and we've defined those as World Heritage sites and the IUCN category 1A and 1B sites we will, we want to have a clear pathway and setting out our actions to help restore maintain and enhance nature which includes these other three points having a net positive impact on biodiversity from our new projects enhancing biodiversity around existing operating sites and supporting biodiversity restoration work in countries where we work and support the sustainable use of natural resources by local communities now working to help us develop that position we've been working with a number of people but in particular Flora, Fauna and Flora International and we're pleased to say that in September we signed a new agreement with FFI to launch a new five-year collaboration and partnership and in particular some of the priority focus is really helping us work on metrics around net positive impact that will help us demonstrate progress so we need to, we believe we need to make transformative changes, I think we've heard again quite a few reasons why we need to make transformative changes and in particular through collective action across all sectors, government, businesses non-governmental organisations and civil society alike of course governments have a vital role in creating the right conditions and incentives through long-term and coherent national policy frameworks and allowing the private sector to also play a big role and businesses such as ours are forming new partnerships, I've just talked about our partnership and long relationship with FFI but another example is work we're doing at T-Side in the UK where working with our partners we're working on how to bring biodiversity management as an integral part of one of the UK's decarbonised industrial hubs now in conclusion businesses I think need to upscale real action for biodiversity conservation increase the use of nature-based solutions and at BP we'll also be supporting major conservation projects in countries where we work and we'll provide more details on that next year we think we need to integrate the importance of biodiversity into business decision-making and I think a lot of organisations including the World Economic Forum have also sort of pointing at this and just as an example what we're thinking about is how to include biodiversity into our business decision-making into our capital allocation processes so going beyond the normal risk assessment processes that are in place today we need to work together of course we need to work together to solve some of these problems and we absolutely need to be opening to listening be open to listening, really listening not just with the people we agree with but with people who can provide solutions but also who have maybe opposing views because we all need to come together to solve some of these really complex challenges and we need to encourage others to pursue opportunities for these collective actions as well for example raising standards across sectors and we're working with IPCA which is the trade association for environmental and social issues in the oil and gas industry and the cross sector biodiversity initiative and of course we need to work with some of our partners to adopt similar approaches so the need for action is clear and why this matters to business is very clear it's critical that we get on and deliver real tangible progress together for biodiversity but for climate people and the planet and do that in an integrated way and I completely agree with the other speakers this morning and I think that's exactly in the integrated way an approach is very important but also so is the need to take action now thank you very much everybody much appreciate the opportunity to share that with you marvellous can we reassemble our panel please and we'll have a I think we've got a few minutes that we can actually have a bit of Q&A and I've had a few questions come through let me look forward as the world comes out of the pandemic and as we head for this critical biodiversity and climate year 2021 that we hope will set the frame for looking at risk through a different lens what measures, let's keep this fairly short if we can because of time but maybe one or two measures what do you hope for as measures of progress over the next period that will actually ensure that nature is in its appropriate place in decision making as it moves forward what would you hope to see over the next 12 months or so let's start with then Dillis perhaps on that one thanks Joe so I guess I'll start with a major concern as well as what I would hope for I mean my concern is that despite all the rhetoric about recognizing that the pandemic is partly related to our broken relationship with nature and the need to mend that relationship that economic priorities will override that sort of brief moment of enlightenment and the sort of talk about green COVID recovery will just turn into talk about let's just build back as quickly as possible in order to restore our economies you know and sod the environment again as it was before so I think that is sort of my major fear and my major hope is that that doesn't happen that we really do get serious about green investments and green recovery not just recovery at all costs but that does require a huge political shift and you know that is really transformation at the scale that we need it but that at a scale that we know is a political hot potato so yeah that's it will be interesting to see how much that does come to all this talk this year comes to bear next year thank you and Natalie how hopeful are you with your role at COP26 we're expecting great things yeah I mean there's a slightly different question I mean what do we need what do I believe we need to see in the next 12 months and that is signs of real systemic change so move from pledges and everybody talking the talk about nature based solutions to actually backing that up with solid sustainable flows of finance with verifiable action plans and in particular all those entities across business and government that are committing to investing in so-called nature based solutions are only doing they also have credible and ambitious pathways to achieving net zero and credible ambitious pathways to removing loss and damage to biodiversity in their supply chains because if they are instead offsetting their damaging their activities that are harming the biosphere and harming the climate by investments in nature based solutions then we're going to be toast because unless we keep fossil fuels in the ground we're going to be very warm beyond the environment so much that we you know that the sustainability of humanity and biodiversity on the planet will be compromised and that's the bottom line everything else otherwise is rearranging theirs on the Titanic yeah let me let Liz let me ask you if you want to respond to that before maybe we ask our panellists to talk to one another about this Liz what's your sense of that large scale measure that might enable a response along the lines of those that Dillis and Natalie have called for well I think I think it's very important that we're you know we recognize that we're in a world of transition you know we're moving from absolutely a world of fossil fuel based energy systems and it's you know it is going to take time but actually signs are encouraging that we are sort of and we're sort of learning by doing that we I completely agree we need to be in action we need to remind ourselves about you know what the benefits and that there were benefits of you know people sort of people in lockdown which is I mean you know there were lots of disadvantages but one of the benefits was people realize the true value of nature you know cleaner air the opportunity to benefit from nature particularly from a mental well-being you know and it really connected people back to nature so going forward in building back better building back in a more resilient way understanding the benefits of nature and how we can sort of bring those in to accelerate our transition to cleaner energy and cleaner energy systems is really important and so I do think that's quite critical and having the commitment to building back better decarbonizing our energy systems having targets and making real tangible progress and demonstrating progress will be essential and as I mentioned in my talk I think it's all of us have a role to play governments non-governmental organizations businesses and we've got to work together but I agree you know we do need tangible action and if we focus specifically on the question of risk which was the topic of this discussion do we see ways in which risk could be better measured better integrated into decision making I keep hearing that the finance sector is getting on top of this and that we're getting some really good much more objective and verifiable sense of how nature could be built into monitoring and decision making and so on and I think the panel's view of progress we're making on risk Liz maybe I'll start with you on that one first there's our corporate representative do you think there's ways in which the whole sector can better understand and disclose risk it's one of the questions that have come up in the chat box yeah I mean that's the journey we've been on on climate and over the years I've been working in this industry for 30 plus years and actually you know the journey we've been on particularly on climate and climate related risks and disclosing information not only around you know emissions and emission numbers but also how we understand adaptation and resilience and now it's linked of course to the transition pathway metrics are important to the business decision making is important as I mentioned in my talk and incorporating aspects of biodiversity and nature-based solutions and so on that is all now in play and will be an important part of the discussion in terms of measuring performance but also helping people understand why it's important to actually include this as an integral part of your business processes right up and including board considerations board level discussions Natalie what's your sense of risk and how what mechanisms are out there to better manage the risk side do you see that as being a tool that will be used more effectively well I think so I think there's sort of widespread acknowledgement including this being pushed up by the World Economic Forum as well that you know the loss of biodiversity and climate change presents all different categories or different types of risk opportunity risks and risks to asset risks to supply chains there's all sorts of different types of risks and there's an acknowledgement that you know that this is happening but so long as corporate strategies tackling risk are based on this idea of net biodiversity you know no net loss or offsetting which is another way it makes the assumption that it's okay to have some damage somewhere when it really isn't so we need to get I think away from this idea of no net loss towards certainly when it comes to biodiversity no loss at all so I would say that we're under the corporations are underestimating the risks to their operations and their profit margins by thinking in terms of no net loss that would be my view on that lots of very interesting stuff to unpack there among the science and the decision making and so on anything you'd like to say well just only to say that it's great that biodiversity risk is finally getting the attention it deserves it's been something that has been flagged by others you know probably for 10 if not 15 years and it's something that's you know constantly being pushed to one side and I think it applies not just to corporate sector and the finance sector but also to development organizations you know just thinking about you know that's what I meant in many ways in terms of thinking about how we nature proof our investments that you don't just go along and I mean we've got some kind of screening for climate change impacts currently is fairly mainstream for development organizations but we do routinely need to look at you know what are the biodiversity risks of these planned developments as well as what are the climate risks and how strategies in place to deal with that are much better mechanisms better metrics and systems across the board in order to be able to manage that but at least sort of acknowledging that this is now an issue is a major step forward yeah very much so lots to unpack there be great to understand more about the task force on nature related financial disclosure as well which we know is one of the opportunities coming forwards that might actually help with making this a little bit more transparent and visible and monitorable but we are starting to run out of time so I thought we might just have one final question which somebody is posed to us in the chat which is sort of exemplars of good work are there might you each have one example you could bring to us of something that you think is working and the others can draw from as a you know an example of how how biodiversity and nature risks are being better addressed and thought about whether that's a project or an initiative or just something you read recently you know is there something which gives you a sense that that there are you know there are good ideas out there that we can and we can enhance and maybe lift up to a higher scale Dillis you're nodding well I think there's so many good ideas out there it's difficult to pick a few one of the things that I idea is interested in is thinking about how we can use debt swaps for improved climate and nature performance recognizing that developing countries have a lot of debt before COVID-19 they've now got even more debt asset managers are the holders of a lot of that debt and are beginning to build in climate considerations so you know in many ways debt relief can be a way of fulfilling some of those climate commitments so I think that sort of whole area of debt swaps is an interesting one but I wouldn't be IID if I didn't say that really I think that the most a lot of the innovation is happening at the local level so these are global challenges but development is felt at the local level climate change impacts are felt at the local level as is biodiversity loss so it's really those local level solutions of which there are hundreds of different types of solutions so I'm going to pick out a couple but how we kind of pick those up amplify them scale them up so that they can have the kind of impact that we need beyond the local level I think is where you know is really exciting and interesting good brilliant Liz any any suggestions from you yeah well just a sort of a parochial one but but I do think this is absolutely right for solar power with which is now actually 10 years old as of 1st of December and one of the things that I wanted to sort of mention is you know in the energy transition as we transition to cleaner forms and decarbonized energy we've got to keep the pressure on making sure we manage that responsibly and we actually you know learn and make sure from an environmental and social point of view that actually we don't cause more harm light source BP just a small example where they're putting their solar arrays on land they're also integrating wildflower conservation or planting wildflowers to encourage pollination and bees and beekeeping and honey production so it's a small contribution to conservation it's a small contribution to pollination and bees and so on but also with sort of local input from sort of livelihood around honey sales now it's a tiny sort of piece in a much bigger issue but actually the CEO of light source BP the fact that they've done this and committed to it and then can scale it up and sort of influence others thinking about renewable forms of energy what more can you do in terms of additive to bring in that connection with nature that is I think really important thanks Liz and Natalie can it close us out with an idea that you've you appreciate what I wanted to say was to strongly endorse what Dillis said in fact she said exactly the kind of thing I was going to say there are thousands of projects and I you know one of the best bits about working in this space is sort of finding out almost on a daily basis about other new and amazing ways local communities across the world whether it's you know women leading mangrove restoration projects the Cameroon and the Philippines to farmer led rewilding on the coast and then the highlands of the UK to all those that are bringing wildlife into cities and green spaces and improving you know the quality of life for people living in cities you know whatever it is there's a huge amount of innovation there and you know in a lot of knowledge at the local level and the best sorts of nature-based solutions are those ones the ones that come from the communities because those are the ones that will scale out and will spread fantastic examples of all these projects happening and I think it's very effective of the chaos that might be going on you know in the government and administrative level so we can spotlight those and I think it will really an important thing for us to do in the next 12 months is really spotlight those projects and point to governments and businesses and say this is the kind of thing that we need to federate and take to scale and I think what we really need thinking about you know there's an awful lot of potential finance out there for all these projects creating these boundary organizations that enable the channeling so to go back to what I said before the investors that have strong and verifiable credible decarbonization plans with those projects that are led by people that support biodiversity and there are so many of those so we need to match this up we need to work together and those boundary organizations are you know people from all sorts of different disciplines to ensure that all that funding isn't poorly invested and doesn't do more harm than good thank you very much and I will then add a final comment from an FFI point of view as well which is this exact we have a campaign moment called our one home and it is calling for channeling new funding down to local initiatives recognizing that these local initiatives are where we can make it make all of these things come together so thank you very much panel we're out of time I hope you've all enjoyed it thank you participants and please enjoy the rest of these sessions thank you and goodbye


hello everyone. I want to tell you about a problem, but maybe let me start by the short version of my talk. A few days ago I saw it on Twitter, this is a tweet by Dimitrius Koukulopoulos, who is in my quarter, kind of summarizing my talk, so I thought it would be nice to share it with you.  ואני חושב שזו איזה פונדמנטל קונספטים סייאנס, ואני חושב על זה, קוראות, בין צ'ארס דאבין, בבקר כריגי ספיסי, כשהוא חושב, שאם יש איזה קונפלקס אורגנט, שזה ערדוסי, אז היסטיוריה לא יהיה...  כי אנחנו יודעים בבקשה בבקשה בבקשה, פולינומיאלים ידעים להפתעת. וככה, ככה, אני אומר, אין משהו גדול על ה-1. אנחנו יכולים לתת בבקשה בבקשה, כשאנחנו יכולים לתת ל-0 ו-1, ככה, ככה, או כל מיני פולינומיאלים. ומורכזו אם לא יש סוג, אנחנו חושבים שהפולינומיאלים נדעים להפתעת בבקשה בבקשה בבקשה. אז מה זה יכול להיות סוג? ככה, שאם אנחנו תחתים פולינומיאלים של 0 ו-1, ואז בבקשה של פתחה, באחרית הנדעת היא 0 וככה פולינומיאלים נדעים להפתעת. רדיאסיבור, אז אם, for example, we take the model with zero one coefficients, we need to condition on the events that a free coefficient is not zero. Okay, and how we treat this conjecture, so we treat differently small degree and large degree divisors. So let me try to illustrate the machine, the tools that we have when we want to rule out small degree divisors by considering degree one. So I remind you the conjecture is that the polynomial is reducible with probability that tends to zero. And instead of checking whether it's reducible or not, I check something much easier, what is the probability that it has a divisor of degree one. And in this case I can combine two arguments, one argument is algebraic argument, very simple algebraic argument, and the other is more analytic in nature. So the algebraic argument, the algebraic input is that if I have a divisor over the rational of degree one, so if t minus alpha divides a polynomial with plus minus one coefficients, then alpha must be an integer. This is just the rational root t or m or gauss lemma if you want, because the denominator of alpha must divide one, so minus one, so it must be an integer. So this is the first input, this is the algebraic input, very simple one, and the analytic input is also very simple, it's just geometric series, let me explain. If alpha is a complex root of this polynomial, then its absolute value must be in the annulus between half and two. Why? For example, if alpha is bigger or equal than two, then the term alpha to the n will dominate all other terms just by geometric series estimates. So alpha must be between half and two in absolute value, and if we combine these two arguments together, we get that there are only two possible alphas, because if you are an integer and you are smaller than two, you must be either one or minus one. So we just need to check if we want to rule out degree one divisor for polynomials with plus minus coefficients, we only have two options and then we check specifically for each of these options. For example, if I want to check whether t minus one divided by the polynomial, it's the same as plugging for t one and see whether I get zero, and then I get a random work because I plug in one, so it's the question whether some plus of independent random plus minuses equals zero, and this is just by random works, we see that it's roughly one over square root of n, and minus one is the same argument exactly. So the last step, we use some kind of combinatoric argument like random work estimates, and in fact you can push this argument to larger degrees. So I'll do a degree two and then you will see that you can push it to something like degree log n or something like this without any trouble. So with degree two I have a polynomial t squared plus 80 plus b, so if I combine the algebraic and analytic arguments, I get that a and b are integers, and they are at most four, so I have only, finally, many polynomials that can divide a random polynomial, and what is the probability that, for example, t squared plus one divides my random polynomial, it's the same, the random work argument, but now instead of in a line in the plane. So the probability that t squared plus one divides my polynomial is one over m. Okay, but it's possible that the polynomial will not be cyclotomic like t squared plus one, but if I have a non cyclotomic irreducible divisor then the probability that something like, for example, t squared minus t minus one divides my polynomial so the, the golden ratio is a root is even exponentially small. This is also something very easy. So we see that cyclotomic polynomial give us some error term and the other polynomial give us a very, very small probability, and you can push this, it's kind of easy to push it to something like log n, but if you want to push it very far, this was done by a Koneagin in 1999 when he tried to study this problem that I'm talking about and he managed to push these arguments all the way to divisor of degree n over log n. But to get a divisor of degree n over log n, you need to put more effort into it, not just naively extent. So are there any questions so far? Feel free to ask. So this is the theorem of Koneagin from 1999 and he dealt with the coefficient zero one rather than plus minus one, but his argument were general. So the same argument works for this model. And to go so high, Okay, it deals the cyclotomic polynomials in a way that I mentioned, but to deal with non-cyclotomic irreducible divisors, you need to use a minor measure to show that there are not too many of them. And Koneagin tried to solve the conjecture that I mentioned for zero one coefficients after a paper of Poon and Odleitzko. So I will not get into more details in this direction, I will go back to. So this is small degree divisors, so this is very successful approach. And let's talk about a large degree divisors. Here we have a two approaches. One approach is to use small primes. And a theorem I had with a Gadi Cosma, theorem that we proved recently, that we published recently, is in the following model. So we take polynomials of degree N, where the coefficients are random variables, independent random variables that uniformly distribute model of the product of four primes. And the smallest product of four primes that I could find was 210, because it's two times three times five times seven. I'm saying it slowly because I met too many people in a number theory that they got a when they multiplied the first four prime got all kind of numbers. I'm pretty sure that it's 210, I have a method. Anyways, so once you choose the coefficient to be independent model of four primes, we managed to prove that the probability that it's irreducible is one, so we saw the version of this conjecture, we saw the conjecture in this model. Okay, and what was the argument, I mean, we already know that we don't have small degree divisor, we need somehow to kill large degree divisors. And let me give you a simplified version of a proof of a simple, of a weaker theorem. I will give you a proof for 12 primes because it's slightly less technical. Okay. So instead of proving it for independent model of four primes, I will prove it for a random variable that are independent model of product of 12 primes. So first and notation for each prime I denote by API, the polynomial, the random polynomial model of PI. So I have 12 independent uniform random polynomials, model of FP1 up to FP1 up to FP12. Okay, and so I have these 12 independent random uniform random polynomials. And then I check what is the probability that a uniform random polynomial model of PI as a divisor of degree K. And this probability is K2 minus delta approximately, where delta is this magical number 1 minus 1 plus log log 2 over log 2. For this part, or for this talk, the important thing about delta is that 12 times delta is bigger than 1. This is where the 12 comes. Okay, because 12 times delta is bigger than 1. So by independence, since for each prime, we have the probability that I have a divisor model of P of degree exactly K is K2 minus delta and I have 12 primes, then the probability that if I have a device over the integers, then it must, then I can just reduce the equation that D divides A, model of P, then I will have a device of degree K, model of each of the primes. So the probability that I have a device over the integers of degree K is smaller than K to the minus 12 delta. Right, and then I just sum it, since 12 delta is bigger than 1, I can sum it. I just want to get rid of large degree divisor. So it's a tale of a converging series. So since 12 delta is bigger than 1, we can sum it over a large K. And as a tale of a converging series, it will tend to 0. And again, small K, we just apply a cognac. So this is the proof for coefficients that are a uniform model of 12 primes. I will not get into what you need to modify in order to reduce from 12 to 4, just a technical thing, but I don't want to get into it. But if you have questions on this, feel free. Maybe I'm talking too fast. This is why there are new questions, so I'll take something, sorry. Okay, so maybe I'll ask a question. There you go, yes. So I think I'm going to embarrass myself. Good. But I never, it never stopped me. Where does this number delta come from? Maybe you said it. So what is about this delta? Thank you, Igor. I mean, people will think that I pay you, but I don't know. But I actually attended your previous seminar on the same subject, maybe it was planted in my head. So you knew? No, I didn't know, but I didn't remember, but I don't remember what I asked you previously or whatever. Okay, okay. I'm not going to get into it too much. I will just say where it appears and I will not get into it too much. So this number delta comes in several instances. So at least in three different setups, it comes in the setup of what is the probability that a random uniform integer as a divisor of size roughly two to the K. And it's about K to the minus delta. This was proved by Erdash and an actual asymptotic formula for more general thing by Ford in 2008. It comes also in group theory, in the theory of random permutations and the probability of that random uniform permutation as an invariant set of size K. It comes also in group theory, in the theory of random permutations and the probability of that random uniform permutation as an invariant set of size K is K to the minus delta. And let's go back to the work of Wuczak and Pivir about invariable generation, but in a precise way it was established by Pimentel Paris and Riven in 2016 and by Jaguar Ford in 2015. And in polynomials of finite field, this was done by Meisner in 2018. So I don't really want to get into more details about that because it will take me to a different direction. Maybe we can discuss it after. But if you look on these three cases, I mean you think about these three cases, then it gives you some way to connect between factorizations of integers. I mean, okay, to go from integers to polynomials, it's kind of straightforward, but it gives you a way to connect it to permutations. And if you want to learn more about that, I mean, there is this nice book by the prime suspect. And I think, Shantan, I think this is you, right? And I think this is the meters, but I'm not sure exactly. That's correct. From the author. And who's playing the guitar? I'm not sure. I mean, this was already difficult. Let's have you a Thirwello playing the guitar. Andrew is here. This is a... Okay, so I suggest that you read this book. It's very nice and it actually includes the mathematics at the end. Not just during the comics itself. Okay. So... Yeah. So this was one approach. I mean, using a few primes, but yeah, and another approach, a different approach, is not using a few primes, but using many primes, but there you need to do some kind of a trick to change the problem because it's very difficult to say something about large... Let's say your polynomial is with plus minus one coefficient and you look modulo the prime 100 and something. It's very difficult to... Let's say 101. Yeah, if it was not a prime, I would know about it by now. So if you reduce the polynomial with plus minus one coefficient and you look modulo 101, it's very difficult to say something about its large divisors. It's a very difficult problem. I will discuss it later a bit, but it's because it's a very sparse subsets of polynomials. So it's very difficult to say something about, for example, the probability that it's irreducible. So you need to do a trick and this very nice trick was done by Brouillard and Varyon. So they introduced a different method using many primes and then they managed to prove the original conjecture. But they had, in order that this trick would work, they had to use the extended Riemann hypothesis. So maybe I'll, again, not to get into too many technical details, I will try to explain how you use the Riemann hypothesis to change the problem from large primes to small primes. Sorry, from large degree divisor to small degree divisor.  Then the prime ideal theorem tells you that the number of roots the polynomial has modulo p. So p is a random polynomial between X to 2X, so it's roughly the number of irreducible factors of A. So this is the prime ideal theorem. So each irreducible factor of A give you one root on average modulo random prime. And I mean, this is a formalization of the prime ideal theorem. And on the other hand, but we don't have a fixed polynomial, we randomize the polynomial. I mean, in our case, the polynomial is random. And if we randomize the polynomial and we fix the prime p to be, then what we are going to show that the number of roots the polynomial has is roughly one. I write roughly without explaining exactly what I mean here. So the point is that, I mean, if you are allowed to randomize both of them, then you get the answer because you get that, I mean, on the one hand, it's the number of irreducible factors of a typical polynomial and on the other end it's one. So you get that a typical polynomial is irreducible. And in order to randomize both of them, you need error terms in both results. So to get a good error term in the first result, this is exactly the extended Riemann hypothesis for the splitting field of A. So you need the extended Riemann hypothesis for the splitting field of A. And, well, you know, you need it slightly less, but let's not get into this tip. And here you do random walks techniques and you get some explicit version of this. And there are a lot of technical details that I don't want to get, but essentially what we want is to change order of summations. And this is where we need to make sure that the error term will not dominate everything. So this is how they change the problem to, and you say this is a problem about the number of small degree divisor AS. Model P. And I want to mention as an advertiser resolved that a student of mine did recently, רויש מואלי, recently took their argument and tried to lift it to QP and he got a kind of explicit, a very good argument for the number of periodic roots. I will not discuss it too much, but this is a paper that recently appeared in the archive. It's master piece. Okay. So let me tell you about new results that we just put on the archive recently with Dimitrius Hukulopoulos and Gadi Kozma. So we are going to talk a little bit about it. We are going to talk a little bit about it. So first of all, we treated disability. So what we managed to pull, we managed to get rid of the arithmetic condition of the size of the interval that Kozma and myself had. So we managed to prove that if you take H sufficiently large and you choose the coefficient of uniform in 1 to H, then the probability that the polynomial is irreducible tends to 1 and sufficiently large is explicit in the sense that it's at least 35. So our proof gives that if H is at least 35, then the probability that A, and you choose the coefficient in an interval 1 to 35, then the probability that it's irreducible tends to 1 and sufficiently large is explicit in the sense that it's at least 45. So then we managed to get this H so that it's at least 35. And we managed to get this H so that it's at least 35, so that it's at least 35, so that it's at least 35. But we managed to get this H של פרוף ובשפחת כוסמה כדי להכוונת המוחפט שאלה ללבי פרופסים האקרידיסטרוביישי, בלי פרופסים האקרידיסטרוביישי, ושאנחנו עוד כמו שגדול את זה שתכף את זה. ולמה אנחנו עובד על זה בלבי פייביג פוריה האנלאסיסטי וכדי בלבי שהם גדולים.   If you leave n over 2, then you would get something on the right-hand side, and I presume it would get, if it wouldn't be right. We would not get this nice thing. So you would get something worse, which is not sufficiently good? Yes. Our proof is either it works or it doesn't work, and if it doesn't work, I don't know what it gives. Thank you. The thing that we can play with is the level of distribution, not the right-hand side. But I presume you can play with both of them? Maybe, but the other proof is 0-1 proof. Either it works or not. Every proof is 0-1 proof in this sense, but it's okay. I don't want to waste the time. I'll just turn into philosophy. But for other measures, we get different level of distributions that also give us some results. Okay. Another result that we get is for general measures, and we get that there are no small-degree divisors, so namely, we extend the Kuniagin theorem. So, for example, if you take the model of plus minus 1, we show that there exists theta such that the polynomial has no divisor of degree bigger than, smaller than theta of n, with probability tending to 1. But this works in general, and for this result, we need to prove level of distribution slightly bigger than theta in the previous slide. And this works for general distribution, and you can choose the way that you pick the random coefficients, and for each measure, you will have this theta. And this is, as I said, strengthens Kuniagin result. I don't say that it generalized it because we use a lot of his ideas in his proofs, so it's a continuation. And the part that I like the most is about Galois groups. I call it more irreducible. I mean, it's a nice name, I think, for Galois groups. So, we have a finer invariant than the polynomial being irreducible, and this finer invariant is the Galois group of the polynomial. So, what do I mean by Galois group? I take the polynomial, I take the complex roots, I look on the field q, alpha 1 to alpha n. This is the smallest subfield of the complex numbers that contains the roots. This is the splitting field. And then I look on all the automorphism of this field. And this is the Galois group of the polynomial, as probably many knows. And Galois proved that there is connection between the roots and the group theory of this group. So, when we view this group as a subgroup of SN, we are the action on the roots. So for me, when I have a polynomial, this Galois group is a permutation. For example, the polynomial is irreducible even only if the Galois group is transitive. So now let's check what is more irreducible. For example, if I have a polynomial that is irreducible, I can add the root of this polynomial to the field. So I add to q, one of the roots, say alpha 1. And then the polynomial will factor over this bigger field. I can factor by x minus alpha 1. And then I can ask whether the new polynomial that I get, whether it's also irreducible. I wanted to say the conjecture, sorry. The conjecture is that the Galois group is SN with high probability. And this means that, so this means that the polynomial is irreducible every time that I add another root. So what do I mean? Think for example on this formula when R is 1. So I add one root to the field. And then I ask whether this polynomial 80 over T minus alpha 1 is irreducible but now over the field q of alpha 1. So for example, the Galois group will be doubly transitive if and only if the polynomial is irreducible and the polynomial after I do one step remains irreducible. And the Galois group will be SN if I can do these steps of adding more and more roots and still getting irreducibility n minus 1 times. So the conjecture tell us that they, I mean the conjecture is about the Galois group. So the Galois group of A should be SN with high probability. This is a naive conjecture, I mean a natural conjecture. And in terms of irreducibility, it means that the polynomial is the most irreducible, the best irreducible that there is. Okay. And why this conjecture is, why it makes sense to conjecture this? We have a theorem that goes back to Van der Waarden that says that if we take a different random model and what some people call the large box model where you fix the degree and you let the coefficient grow. So for example, you look on polynomial of degree 101 but you let the coefficient go in a box. So this is in some sense easier model for this problem. And then in 36 Van der Waarden showed that random polynomial where you let the coefficient grow and the degree is fixed, random polynomial becomes, I have a maximal Galois group SN, and then in the years after the error term, the rate of convergence was improved. And yes it go. Well, actually, how did you know that I wanted to ask something?  But anyways, yes, I do have a question. So I don't understand the conjecture just the line after that. This means that AT divided by, this is irreducible, over which field? So each time over the field it is defined over. I see, okay. When R is 7, so over the field Q alpha 1 to alpha R. Okay, this makes sense, you remove every time. Every time if you add a root then of course you can divide by this root, and after that it's still irreducible. Otherwise, like, it cannot possibly reduce over Q because it's not a polynomial. It's not defined over Q, yes. That's what confused me anyways. So this theorem makes us believe that also in a different model, although there is no real connection between these models, but we believe and also of course numeric computation makes us believe in this model. And then the theorem that we have is that if A is a random polynomial that we choose uniformly in an interval, the interval should be with at least two elements, then the Galois group is SN or AN with probability 1. A condition on the fact that it's irreducible. For example, if H is, if it's an interval between 1 to 35, then the Galois group will be SN or AN with probability 1. Yes. Yeah, is that a relationship between H growing and N growing at all analogous to, let's say over function fields Q limit and a degree limit or it's. In some sense, in some sense. Yes. Because you have a lot of primes. When you let the box grow, then you can take large prime, you can take product of primes and you are almost uniform model, so you have a lot of primes. It's not exactly the same, but morally, yes. So here do you assume that H is greater than 35 implicitly? The theorem as I wrote it is correct, but here I conditioned that it's irreducible. No, you will come with a theorem that for H equals 30, the probability that it is irreducible is one, then you will get this theorem. You will also get it. Let me say briefly how this goes. So the point is that by lifting the forbunius element, this gave us a connection between the factorization of the polynomial module P and elements in the Galois group. More precisely, since the polynomial is here it's written approximately, but I meant is because it's uniform in an interval. So here I have one prime that it's actually equidistributed module P. Because the polynomial is uniform, the coefficients are uniform in an interval, then module P, the polynomial that divides the length of the interval, the polynomial will be uniform. So module P, the polynomial will factor like a uniform polynomial. And when I will lift it back to the Galois group program, here I will get an approximately random permutation in the, I will get a permutation which is, which factors are approximate like the, everything is approximate because there can be a מפיגש, but the factors close almost like, I mean the factorization of the permutation is like the factorization of the polynomial module P, which is like a random permutation according to the connection between permutations and integers. So just by looking, by lifting the Frobenius module P, for P that divides the interval, I will get a random permutation approximate random permutation in my group. And then I'm going to use a, a version of a theorem of Rochak and Piber. So Rochak and Piber show that the probability that a random permutation lies in a transitive subgroup of Sn other than A and or Sn goes to zero as n goes to infinity. So in other words, if you take inside Sn, you take the union of all transitive subgroups that are not Sn or An and you divide the size of this set by n factorial it goes to zero. This is a theorem of Rochak and Piber. Here we need a version of it that you can replace random uniform permutation by approximate uniform permutation. And then since A is irreducible, this translates to the group being transitive, and then we have a random permutation, so the group must be Sn or An. Are there more questions? So yeah, this finishes the talk. Thank you very much.


Diversity Medical Center holding a Veterans Recognition Ceremony, the Medical Center employs more than 40 active duty, reserve and retired active duty team members. The ceremony honors both current employees and volunteers for their military service. Today we're celebrating Veterans Day where we remember the people who served in the military, those who came back and those who made the ultimate sacrifice. It's very important to all of us who were in the military to remember our service. This was Hackensack University Medical Center's sixth formal service honoring its veterans.


Electricity consumers from Rigasa, the largest community in the Igarbi local government area of Kaduna State, staged a peaceful protest at the headquarters of the Kaduna Electricity Distribution Company over epileptic power supply in their communities. They decried the two-hour power supply per day, which they said have made life and business difficult. We have been facing a lot of hardship. Small businesses have been collapsing. Not long ago there is a fire incident at Kasombachi. There is another fire incident at Hain Damani. All these are the results of the excess use of generator and the lack of light in the community. A lot of young people who are engaging in crimes as a result of they don't want small businesses that will co-opt them so that they will be safe reliant. You cannot run businesses buying one liter of oil, 514 era. The solution that you can get is to have anti-pay power supply, which you can pay for so that you can be able to sustain a living. We are ready to pay for this light, and they don't have the capacity to give us light. They are not to be bought. 40MT and the GMB, they said they can't make any single commitment to that effect. So do you expect young people to every day be arrested by student agency for idleness, for drug abuse, for crimes of snatching force and perpetrating violence in the state? Where we peacefully demonstrated to express our displeasure around the lackadastical attitude of the management of the Kaduna Electric, on lack of a provision of electricity to people in our community. I'm having done that a commitment with the Kaduna Electric, which was duly signed by the area manager of RIGASA stating that he's hereby pleading because we cannot call this to an end, not until we get to the end that we should suspend this peaceful demonstration and agree to convey another meeting with all relevant stakeholders in the community to hold next week Wednesday on 14th, 2023, and this commitment card is duly signed by the area manager of RIGASA. But to come on the attention of every stakeholder in this country, we just concluded a peaceful election in the country from the President, Senate, House of Representatives, Governorship, and all politicians, all stakeholders, student unions, everyone that knows that he wants the growth and the development of young people of this country to call out and actually listen to our cries. It is service before pay. Once Kaduna Electric supports supply in cities it's like we assure them they will get a 60% to 70% payment despite the hardship. We cannot survive unless they want us on stage like so as light.


This is stock number 9743. We are here at Summit Automotive in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. You're new and used Ram heavy-duty truck headquarters. Remember we are the guys with the trucks on 41. Today we are checking out this super clean 2015 Ram 2500 crew cab short box tradesman. This vehicle has the 6.7 liter Cummins diesel. From this HD video you will be able to tell that this truck is extremely clean all the way around inside and out. I believe the color is Delmonico red on this truck and we shoot all of our videos in 1080p so if you have HD capabilities on your computer tablet or a smartphone device turn them on right now because it's like you're right here looking at the truck with me it has the Enfab side steps method race wheels they are in excellent condition it has Nitto Terra Grappler all terrain tires these are LT3 2565 R18s and they have looks like a really healthy amount of tread left I'd say 85 90% of the tread very new tires on here they might even be a little bit more but very very new tires they might even be brand new but anyway there's no denser dings on that front fender really nice condition the hood is an excellent condition as well didn't see any denser dings on the front bumper the lower valence is in nice shape as well passenger side rim no scuffs or scrapes on that looks like it has brand new brakes in the front take a look at the suspension here it does have a front end leveling kit in it frame and underbody is very clean and as you go down this side of the truck you can see just how clean the body is how reflective and mirror like that paint is we take these HD videos so if you are far away or even if you're close by and just cannot make the trip down but you're still interested in purchasing the truck you can still see the truck hear the truck and have confidence in the vehicle that you're looking at before you even get here so you can make a smart buy and decision from the comfort of your old home as we do sell a lot of these trucks out of state we want to make sure that all of our customers are getting the most accurate representation the vehicles possible so that when they get here there's absolutely no surprises back rim no scuffs or scrapes on that the back tires have just as much tread as the front tires you can still see it has a little wear knobs on the side that's why I say it's probably brand new tires frame and underbody very very clean underneath and it looks like it has all the remaining factory exhaust so it hasn't been altered in any way like that as you see frame and underbody very nice and clean lower rockers are a nice shape and we'll take a look at the back here rear bumper is an excellent condition no dense or dings on that tailgate is in really nice shape has a locking tailgate backup camera has an access soft tonneau cover there are no rips or tears on that tonneau cover really nice shape and it has a very nice spraying bed liner the bed itself is an excellent condition only a couple little dings on those wheel wells there but other than that very very nice condition and as we go around this side of the truck just as clean as the passenger side box is in really nice shape back rim for full disclosure is in nice shape too and that tire is just as much tread as the rest you want to make sure you get the most accurate representation so when you get here there's absolutely no surprises it does have the heated fold-out tow mirrors they also fold in like so inside the tradesman package gives you the gray cloth interior there are no rips there are no tears on these seats very very nice condition factory floor mats throughout and it does have power windows power locks and power mirrors does have auto headlamps and we'll hop inside here see that this truck has 47,120 miles you get a compass and outside temperature display as well as mileage display on here and it does have a digital speedometer as well steering wheel is in really nice shape you get cruise controls on the right bluetooth audio controls on the left and information center controls comes with the six-speed automatic transmission and the Uconnect five-inch touchscreen radio this one does have AM FM and serious XM capabilities this is also where your backup camera shows up you have your turn dial four-wheel drive factory brake controller stability control tow haul factory exhaust brake and your backup sensors you can turn those off you can see just how clean the carpeting and passenger side floor mat is passenger side seat no rips no tears this truck smells very clean inside I don't think it's ever been smoked in the headliner is in nice condition and you do have map lights up there this one does have bluetooth audio controls as well we'll take a quick look at the back seats and then we will check out under the hood back seats are just as clean as the front seats no rips or tears back here it does have the latch child safety system for car seats has a fixed glass rear window no rips no tears stains very very nice and clean you got a nice storage area underneath those seats and behind or on both sides you get an in-floor storage with removable bins for easy cleaning so you can put ice and drinks and dump them out nice and easily in there it's like having two extra coolers with you wherever you go I personally like thank you for checking out the video today hopefully from this HD video you will have been able to tell just how clean this truck is all the way around under the hood we had the 6.7 liter Cummins diesel engine bay is very very clean runs very smooth this truck has been fully safety Dan inspected by a service shop has a fresh oil and filter change all the fluids have been checked and topped off the truck has been gone through mechanically 100% has four like new tires brand new front brakes and is 100% ready to go to see more pictures of this truck or one of our other 450 new and used cars trucks SUVs minivans Wranglers half tons three quarter tons one tons you name it we got to go to our website www.summitauto.com full pictures and descriptions of every single vehicle on our lot videos of every single used vehicle that we have all at summit auto.com if you want to check out just our used inventory you can go to truckson41.com that's trucks on 41 the number 41.com and check us out there goes right to our used inventory page and if you want to make this super clean 2015 Ram 2500 years give us a call right now<PHONE_NUMBER> ask for one of our sales associates to make this Ram 2500 years today once again that number is<PHONE_NUMBER> and if you'd like to check out more HD videos like this one you can go to youtube.com slash summit auto remember to like subscribe and share on this video and all the vehicles that you see there in fact in a second you will see a link to subscribe to our YouTube channel on your left a link to more heavy-duty truck videos like this one on your right if you have not been to our website conveniently on the bottom a link to this vehicle on our website click those check us out and we really look forward to helping with this super clean 2015 Ram 2500 crew cab short box Cummins diesel tradesman thanks again