Hey guys, what's up? It's Kinsey and welcome back to my channel. I'm getting comfortable Today's video. I just wanted to do a Q&A so we could catch up and talk It is January 4th as I am filming this if you guys are new here be sure to subscribe I've been posting and I'm about to be posting so many vlogs you guys liking the daily vlogs better Obviously not every single day and don't get ahead of yourself But like would you rather see a daily vlog as opposed to a weekly vlog like let me know what you think I don't know subscribe follow me on Instagram check out my podcast all of that That's on Instagram for some questions, so be sure to follow my Instagram I will have it on the screen and it's always linked down below also who likes my all-you-needs juicy t-shirt Me I had a lot of questions on how to manage money guys. I have no idea. I'm not good at it I listen to what my dad tells me to do but overall I still am not good at it And honestly like it's so weird right now. I was just telling you on this the other night But the two things that I was like the least interested in the world and it would be like cooking and finances I for some reason I am like wait I wouldn't know and be smart and invest and do all this stuff all the sudden like I don't know what happened to me It all happened in the past few weeks, so I bought a book on finances, and I'm gonna learn So that actually is one of my goals this year is to just be like way smarter with my money Learn more this kind of like understand it better because I still am like I know more probably than the most 21 year olds because I don't get my taxes taken out of paychecks like stuff like that But I don't know much. I just know like slightly more I think and maybe I don't even know more, but yeah And all the sudden I'm like super into cooking and I want to learn how to cook It's literally the weirdest thing that's ever happened to me. I don't know what's going on right now I know three recipes two of which I've learned from Joe, so I'm gonna be learning more this year. What kind of content do you want to create this year? I think I'm obsessed with Maggie McDonald right now I literally I'm probably annoying to her like I comment on everything I respond to everything I tell her I'm obsessed with it like every other day But I love her vlogs like and they're just a lot of the time like my favorite ones are her at home Just talking like nothing else not going anywhere. I just love those vlogs So and I think I like them because they're daily, so I don't know She's definitely inspired me to be vlogging like daily more. I love her my favorite youtuber probably ever I'm like literally obsessed with her so I want to be doing that I want to be doing a lot of videos like I really liked my 5 a in morning routine I just want to be doing more fun videos I really want to do a video where I do like a day in the life of like another youtuber I've already talked to like a few of them and I do like a whole day. I don't go a day in their life I do a day with them. I have this whole idea Whatever you guys have any youtubers want me to do that with let me know do you see yourself living in LA long-term? I know this is gonna shock a lot of you guys, but yes, I do if it wasn't for ZOA I don't think that I would feel that way, but now I just have such a strong like community and family here and Realistically just like career-wise and stuff like I for a while really thought I was gonna eventually go back to Texas And maybe I still will like I'm not against it, and I'm definitely not against having a house there I just love Texas, but as of right now I really cannot see myself leaving like I for the first time in my life can see myself like raising a family here Which is really really weird because I've never wanted that here I don't really want to raise a family to the past year to be fair, but But like now I can see myself doing it here and something in me just tells me I'll be here forever But I could be wrong so who knows what's one habit you want to incorporate into your routine for 2019? I want to be waking up earlier. I've always been like waking up kind of earlier, but I want to be waking up at like six Naturally minimum. I really like when I wake up at five like when I have those extreme mornings It's so nice to have that But yeah, if you guys have any tips for waking up early, please let me know favorite place to buy joggers I don't know I actually don't have many good pairs of joggers like any of the joggers that I like are actually my old merch So like those too long once I really like then I have these gray pair from H&M that I wear all the time Just like around the house or whatever. I wear them on public sometimes, too I probably shouldn't but they're really comfortable, but I don't have good joggers Let me know where you guys buy your joggers I Literally for like two years. I wanted a champion matching set. I need to just buy it and try out champion spots like the The ones from urban like though. I don't know what they're called. Why am I blanking out? I do know what they're called I'm just blanking on it So you guys let me know high school advice Enjoy it while you're in it. I think I didn't hate high school and when I was in high school I never thought I hated it, but I think I was just like ready to go do something else and I look back in high school and obviously I think looking back on things it always is like better than what you thought But I think that I could have just like enjoy the time that I had there more Don't be the person that hates everyone That's so annoying like it's and it's also like if you're the one person who hates everyone around you like the Comments and nominators you so just like people and try to enjoy your time there Like everyone has to do it and I know that it's not the best time for everyone and for some people It is but it really is what you make of it So yeah, for me personally, I would have just wished that I would have enjoyed my time more But I did enjoy high school and I loved the school that I went to like I loved my high school So I didn't like hate it But I was always like ready to go do something else because I was also really focused on YouTube when I was in high school I still am but yeah, that's just my advice. Please let us know how you're liking orange theory I recently signed up so if you guys don't watch my vlogs or follow me on Instagram You guys don't know this but I recently joined orange theory Maybe like eight days ago. I think at this point. It's January 4th. I've already taken six classes. I Love it. Like it is so fun. I love SoulCycle and I love everything else I think I might like orange theory a little bit more than SoulCycle Maybe like they're pretty up there the thing with like SoulCycle I feel like I get a better workout in orange theory and I feel like I'm kind of able to do more I love boxing so like I do miss that but with orange theory I pay 160 a month for my unlimited membership and if you take like five classes at SoulCycle It's 150 so like you save so much money and orange theory is just fun Like I really really enjoy it I can do more videos like later if you guys have like more specific things, but I like love orange theory so far Definitely I started going because Brooke and Daniel have talked about it for forever And so I was asking them so many questions before and I really love it like it's just so fun And I feel so much better once I leave the class like I worked out this morning I've been working out like pretty much every morning since I got back and it's just so good like oh my gosh It's so good. If any of you guys live in LA and you go to orange theory like let me know let's go together I'm serious. What are you looking forward to at ZLC this semester? So my when I'm filming this my orientation is tomorrow for this semester and I was just thinking about how much I've grown and how much things have changed in the past year and like I can't imagine More so I was just like it's just crazy. I'm just really excited to like see what I learn and stuff I love my school so much.  I mean this totally respectfully, but where'd you get the scar on your forehead? I have one too. So like the scars I don't you can probably see them. I don't know if you can see them for sure When I was younger I Well, I like love my dad my dad is an angel to me He can do no wrong cuz I fear person in the world, but when I was younger I was like daddy's girl to the extreme and He was like I actually I think both my parents were down there But like that's my point like this is like what I I love my mom too to death But I was just like obsessed with my dad when I was younger Anyways, I was just that's a kind of unrelated to the story But I just think that he was down in the basement watching a show and that's why I went to the basement But anyways, I had like the sippy cups you know Talking about like does anyone else call them that and I fell down the stairs in the basement like back We lived in st. Louis like this is I was like under two and I like didn't let go of it and it kept like hitting my head So I had to get a bunch of stitches and that's the story with that and apparently I didn't even cry I'm like I would cry now, but I was tough. We're your favorite youtubers. We've already gone through this Maggie McDonald right now I love Gretchen. I love I like all my friends like Keaton I really I just am super into vlogs like those are my favorite videos for sure What goes into planning for each podcast episode? Do you plan all of your questions? So? My podcast the I love you so much podcast it is always linked down below For each episode I make like a loose outline the way it look when a guest comes in I'm like if we go in a tangent and it's totally off topic. That's okay I have like key things that I probably plan on hitting and if we don't hit those It's fine because that just means that it's more conversational I don't really want it to be an interview. I want it to be like very conversational. I don't want it to be like Question answer question answer. That's not what I want So I have like a very loose outline I I do have my hot sea questions ready and then I'll outline like maybe three or four major points specific questions under there and stuff but If I'm cool like depending on how close I am with the person like if I'm not as close with them I probably stick more to the outline just so I know like more to say but yeah, I don't know I do have a loose outline, but I don't always like go like there's been times where we go completely off the outline So just depends what apps you use for devotion on your iPad Pro by the way, I love you. I love you, too I was just showing my grandma these the other day um I When I didn't have social media on my phone or just didn't do social media for like three weeks in like October or something I was in Georgia with Danielle and she's like What do you even do on your phone now because like I do see you on your phone sometimes But like what are you doing? And I was like, I'm literally on you version doing devotions like that is the point That is what I had gotten to like that was like October 20th, and I was getting back from the 21st Right now. I'm doing one of the she reads truth app But yeah, like either you version or she reads truth you versions are free. She reads truths are like $2 What iPad Pro apps are your favorite so far Google Calendar? I've been planning digitally this year. It's very new for me. It's a very big deal You know, I've been on my passion planet for like three years if you guys want video Let me know I got the like pro create app whatever. I don't know I want to know I need to learn how to do like graphic stuff on my iPad Pro and do the thumbnails and like a little illustrations If any of you guys know and you're good at this or no good videos that can teach me I can probably do someone skill share actually maybe I'll do them on skill share Let me know because I need to know that stuff favorite songs at the moment Because I've been working out a lot I really like rap just in general because that's my favorite to like work out to And then besides that lately I literally have a jazz playlist that I like it's called 4 p.m. My office on my Spotify that I listen to all the time I love that like Frank Sinatra like that kind of stuff literally that's what I'm listening to right now It's either rap or jazz music from like the 60s So I'm literally getting so many questions about sex lately. I don't know where this is coming from Like what it's it's just like I Don't know um, I don't really have anything to say. I just have so many questions like I don't know why would you ever consider coming Back to Chicago for another meetup. I would love to I love Chicago. It is one of my favorite cities I've actually spent a lot of time there Love that city Um and the meetup there was huge. So I would definitely want to go back. How do you stay focused? Um, I think I get very unfocused too. I think like midday between like one to three thirty I'm kind of in this like weird slump, and I'm like tired or whatever Let me know if you guys have any tips for the midday slump, but I always have to do list I always have things planned out So I just kind of power through it and I just keep doing it like before I started filming all these videos just now I filmed a video before this and this one I was like I need to get in the zone and like focus, but I just couldn't and I went in my room I put on a bunch or I lit a bunch of candles listen to jazz music made a coffee, and now we're here Which music artists are you most excited to hear from in 2019? Always most excited to hear from Casey Musgroves. I don't know she's releasing anything this year She just maybe she is because she I don't know um Just Casey at all times. I love her. Also. I'm not that impressed Coachella's lineup at all But then I saw Casey is going to be there So I will out that that's all I needed like that's literally all I needed Imagine if Dua Lipa was going to Coachella though, and then it was Dua Lipa and Casey Musgroves Wow, hi, what impressions or feelings do you want people to get from you? I like first impressions. This is something that I've been thinking about for like ever But I think a lot of the time well first off I'm like very outgoing and very friendly and like I go out of my way to be nice people like I genuinely do and I'm also from Texas, so it's just normal um, but then like occasionally they'll be that person's like always really intimidated by you when I met you or Oh, I was really um, I thought you were like this or that or whatever And it's like I'm genuinely nice to people if I maybe if I wasn't like Sucking up to them or something when I met them or like whatever it is I think some people are if you're like comfortable with yourself. I Don't know how to say this without sounding kind of rude But I think for girls especially if you're a confident girl or someone who's like typically like more secure just in general We aren't like sucking up to this person and like I think people meet you and sometimes they just expect you to like Bow down to them. I don't know. It's like this weird thing Especially if you're a girl who has any sort of social media following and someone knows that before I don't know. I think people like oh, I thought you were this and that I think a lot of the time It says a lot more about them than it does about you because like when I meet people and Like maybe they're a little standoffish or whatever like my first assumption is oh like they're probably just having an off day Or like they didn't need like that. It was just taken like that or whatever I'm never like oh, they're this and they're that you know, I don't know I just think that it says a lot more about them than you But also like I'm sure I could be better at it and stuff But I feel like like I'm like very like hi nice to meet you and Kenzie whatever But I think like when you're a big crowd sometimes it's hard to like be like hey whatever So it's like kind of awkward when you don't know like interrupt something and you know what I'm saying So I'm sure it's like more situations like that But just in general like if you meet someone and you think like I don't know I Would like them to think to answer your question. I would like them to think that I was welcoming and friendly That's an asset. What are some of your resolutions or goals for 2019? Something that I want to be better about one managing finances and then two I Joe has said this before a billion times, but like as far as getting things done I will get things done left and right, but if they're like a miniscule task that doesn't really matter And it's like small and it's just like whatever. I'll put it off for forever So I want to be better about just like taking care of the smaller things as well because then it'll get to Something where I'm like I should do that, you know, how do you remain such a positive person obsessed with your podcast in your videos? I'm in a good mood right now, but I I wouldn't say I'm a negative person. I don't I'm gonna like twist this question I'm not a negative person But I think especially now like I am definitely going through a harder time And I'm not always like upbeat and like happy and whatever by any means But like obviously when I'm filming that's what like I want my videos to be upbeat So I typically like I'll I cannot tell you how many times in the past like month I've stopped a vlog and it's not done it because like I've crashed midday or like had a really bad day or whatever And I don't want to post something that's like super negative all the time So I am positive for sure, but I do go through harder times and I do have bad days I just don't post that or broadcast that this is like a highlight reel I don't want to say my YouTube channel is really a highlight reel because like maybe my Instagram is but I like I'm very open and like I tell you guys things I don't only show the highs, but I definitely show way more highs than I do Like lows don't you mean and then I got a lot of questions. Are you dating someone? No? I'm not dating anyone even though people keep asking me a question. I am not I promise you So that is it for today's video. I hope you guys enjoyed. I feel like this is a little bit longer I personally really like long videos because I love Maggie's long vlogs So I like long videos if you guys let me know in the comments down below How long you typically like videos like 10 to 15 15 to 20 20 to 30 you let me know if you guys Haven't already be sure to subscribe. I love you guys so much, and I will see you guys soon. Bye


Without further ado, I'd like to be able to introduce our guest speaker, Liz Warren, PhD, as a scientist for the International Space Station at NASA Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas. Dr. Warren previously served as the Deputy Project Scientist for Space Flight Analogs and later for the ISS Medical Project as a science operations lead in NASA's Mission Control Center. She was born and raised in San Francisco, California, probably not too far from our office here, maybe. She has a Bachelor of Science degree in Physiology and a Doctoral Degree in Molecular, Cellular and Integrative Physiology from the University of California, Davis. She completed postdoctoral fellowships in Molecular and Cell Biology and then in Neural Science. Dr. Warren is an expert on the effects of spaceflight on the human body and has been involved with spaceflight research for over 20 years. So I'd like to please welcome Dr. Liz Warren. So here we go. All right. So Time Magazine, is everyone back with me? Sorry about that. Yes, we're all here. Okay. So Time Magazine, late last year, actually late 2014, was kind enough to put Scott on the cover of this issue. But Scott is not the only one spending a year in space. Mikhail Kornenko, a Russian cosmonaut, is also staying the same duration. They launched together and they're going to return together on March 1st. Before I go into much more detail, I want to make sure you guys are aware that you can see the space station flying over in the night sky. If you've never done it, I highly recommend it.  And it is really something to see, something that humans built, big enough and bright enough to see in your night sky. So just how big is the space station? Well, we say it's about as big as a football field. It weighs about a million pounds. And it travels, of course, at orbital velocity, plus or minus, about 17,500 miles per hour. Just those three statistics alone impress people who aren't really, maybe they've heard of the space station, but they're not really sure what it is. And then when you mention that 16 nations are working together to have built and operate this laboratory facility in space with the intent of improving life for everyone here on Earth, it's really something pretty special. So NASA's goals aboard the space station include some of those things that I just mentioned. One, advance science so that we can benefit all of mankind. The things that we can learn on the space station enable us to improve life here on Earth. There's a second, actually there's four goals. The second goal is really to enable commercial companies to have access to low Earth orbit to conduct research on topics of their choosing. It doesn't necessarily have to be NASA mission oriented. The third, of course, very important is to enable long duration spaceflight beyond low Earth orbit. We're really a proving ground, if you will, for technologies, for human systems, and all kinds of things for living further out and for longer distances, longer periods. And then the International Space Station is a great model for international cooperation. We could not have done this alone in the United States. The Russians probably could not have done it all on their own. So by working together we really reap the benefits of using each other's strengths. So we generally say that at any one time there's about 250 science experiments ongoing aboard the space station. In total we're close to about 2,000 now adding up everything that we've done and it actually touches at least 95 countries and areas. Now some of those are involved simply by being in contact by a ham radio and educational event or a teacher and student investigation that flew. We do a lot of educational outreach activities. So that's pretty impressive though, 95 countries. And then in the six categories of research I want to mention as well. We do biology and biotechnology, Earth and space science, human research, physical science, education, and technology demonstration and or development. So mostly we're going to be talking about human research tonight because that is really the focus of the one-year mission. Why microgravity? Why is space? Why is this so different, this environment? Well life as we know it has evolved with a constant, constant gravity on Earth. And when you change that variable, when you remove gravity, a lot of aspects change. Everything from the way cells communicate to each other because now the cells are a little more spherical as opposed to a little bit flattened. So everything from a cell all the way to the whole human body reacts differently. I'm sure you've all heard that astronauts lose bone mineral density, their muscles atrophy, their hearts get weaker. That's just the beginning of all of the kind of maladies or mal-effects of space flight. So we'll talk about those next. So this is a kind of a creepy picture I always think, but it's also kind of a fun one because when else do you get to see an astronaut like this? So there's a whole spectrum of changes in the adaptation to space flight and then again in the adaptation to living back on Earth. But we'll kind of focus on those adaptations involved with living in space. So there are some neurovestibular disorders, the inner ear, the organs which tell us which way is up and help us with our balance are really thrown for a loop because they rely on gravity to operate. So without gravity they undergo quite an adjustment period, but usually it only lasts for a few days and we think that's why astronauts experience something called either space motion sickness or space adaptation syndrome, kind of a period where they're just not feeling themselves. And actually it can be fairly severe. People can be throwing up very low appetite, little dehydrated and on the space station where it's kind of work, work, work right away. That's tough to adjust to, but we have medications that help. Vision is really kind of a new thing within the past. I guess it's close to four years now. We started getting complaints from the long duration crew members that their vision over time was kind of getting worse. They were needing adjustments in their glasses or in their prescription and we are finding in some people that is not reversed upon return to Earth. So that's really disconcerting what is going on with the eyes. There's a number of hypotheses and I'll talk about that shortly. The cardiovascular system, our hearts and the whole cardiovascular system is really well adapted to forcing blood up. It takes a lot of work to move a unit of fluid from your toe all the way back to your heart and up to your brain and circulate it all around again and again and again, which is what your cardiovascular system does. Without gravity of course the heart doesn't have to work as hard. So it tends to get a little smaller, lose a little bit of muscle mass. It's not doing the same amount of work. Muscle and bone, you don't use it, you're going to lose it, just like calculus. So bone and muscle experience some atrophy. They lose bone mineral density decreases, very similar to osteoporosis in the elderly. Muscle atrophy occurs without exercise. There would be a bad situation in terms of people coming back, especially after a long duration flight. So we have countermeasures. Those are exercise and nutrition to really help keep the astronauts in shape. It requires close to two hours every day of physical activity and microgravity to maintain or mitigate much of the loss that we see. Immunology, this is a weird one. The immune system in space either goes a little bit haywire, too much active, so they're hyperactive, and some aspects are impaired and aren't as active. We have astronauts getting allergies where they never had allergies before in space. We also have some that experience kind of like over, so that's kind of an overreaction.  So that's kind of an impaired function. So the immune system is really a little bit wonky in space. Of course, there's the constant risk of radiation exposure. Fortunately, our Van Allen belts do a really nice job of protecting us in our spacecraft from really extreme radiation, but galactic cosmic rays are a constant threat. They're always coming in. Solar particle events, cosmic radiation. So our astronauts do get more radiation than they would if they were here on the surface of the planet, but it's a risk that is accepted with the job. We do monitor with radiation dosimeters. The amount of radiation that each astronaut individually is exposed to, and we track that over time and try to do an ethical justice of not exposing people to too much. So that's kind of a brief history, a sort of what happens to the human body in space. Most of what we know about the human body in space is all in six-month time frames. Most of the astronauts that go to the space station stay for six months. We also know that a journey to Mars is more like 30 months, 3-0. So we have to start expanding our experience, and that's where this one-year mission comes into play. Let's start learning a little bit more, and so that is what we're doing right now. To address any questions about gender, this slide does a comparison of what we know about what happens with males and what we know about females, at least with a six-month timeframe involved, and you'll see that the responses to microgravity and the responses to spaceflight are similar. There are some minor differences here and there, but from an operational perspective, from a NASA's perspective, there's really no difference in putting together a crew of people to stay in space. Men and women, there's no greater risk either way. You just put together a crew based on skill sets and what we need people to be able to do. So there's really no consideration of men versus women, which begs the question, will we do another one-year mission? And if we do, are we going to send a woman? Above my pay grade right now, we don't know just yet when we will do another one-year mission, if that's in the cards, and we'll get there in our discussion. So here's Scott and Mikhail. I want to tell you briefly that most of the science that we're collecting on these two gentlemen fit into categories like I mentioned before. There's bone and muscle. There's vision impairment. There's cardiovascular studies. There's a couple of really interesting functional studies as well. By that, I mean they're mostly post-flight studies. After these guys get home from space, like in just a week and a half or so, we're going to be doing some pretty intensive examinations of their functional ability. So what does that mean? Can they stand up? Can they walk in a straight line? If we close their eyes, can they still walk in a straight line? Can they open a simulated space craft hatch? Can they climb up a ladder? Can they climb down a ladder? These tests sound really hard after coming back from space after six months, let alone a year. But it's important to get a gauge onto what are their physical capabilities. If you watch a landing or if you watch on March 1st, watch these two guys come home. The capsule lands. There's another gentleman with them, Sergei Volkov. He hasn't been in space quite as long. He'll be in space for about six months. There's a whole crew of people that are there to help extract them from the spacecraft, put them in a kind of an easy chair and monitor them medically and take good care of them. When we go to Mars, there is not going to be a landing party that will help people out of the spacecraft and make sure that they're feeling okay. The folks going to Mars are going to be on their own. So it's really important for us to get a gauge as to what are the functional capabilities of an astronaut the day of landing. How about the next day? How about three days after landing? What we might find is that we'll be advising ourselves for the future. Maybe one of our findings might be after a landing on Mars, nobody gets out of the spacecraft that day. In fact, maybe not for a whole week or more. These are the questions we're trying to answer to inform mission planning for the future. Here's another interesting thing. We say it's one year in space, the year-long mission. As I said, it's actually about 340 days, so it's a little bit short, but you know, I wouldn't tease Scott Kelly about that too much. We've been collecting data on Scott and Mikhail for about a year before they launched, and we're going to continue collecting data for at least a year after they get back down on the ground. So the results, which everyone is very anxious to hear about, they're not going to be ready for at least a year. In some cases, some results might be ready sooner, but we're really collecting a lot of data, and the analysis of that data really isn't going to get going until we have all of the data points all together. So it's going to be a little while before we have solid results to inform us. People ask a lot about the twin study. So this is kind of an aside. We have this one-year mission going on, and serendipitously, because Scott has a twin brother who even more serendipitously is an astronaut and has been to space for about 50, 50 days total. Scott's going to have spent way more than that in space, but they have very similar experiences. They're both Navy jet pilots. They have the same DNA, and so we're curious after a year in space when we compare Scott's DNA to Mark's DNA, are there going to be any changes? And we don't expect anything crazy and significantly mutated, but we do expect we're going to see subtle changes. The telomeres, for example, the way that your chromosomes are packed in each one of your cells, there's something called telomere length. It's the way everything is packed together. The more stress you are exposed to, the more also the older you are, those telomeres kind of get burned up a little bit like a candle wick. And so just by looking at your telomere length, we can assess, well, how stressful your life is. We expect Scott's telomeres are going to be shorter than Mark's when he gets back from space because, well, living in space is stressful. Does that mean that he's a different person? Absolutely not. It just means that some aspects of his DNA and his genetics are going to possibly be transcribed slightly differently from the DNA to the proteins in his body. So that's kind of interesting. And those results, they won't be ready for a little while either, but we're looking forward to seeing those very much. And we expect that it will tell us some interesting things about how the human body really does react to spaceflight. I mentioned vision impairment. So this is not a very new problem, but a lot of people aren't aware of it. As I said, some astronauts, but not all, experience degraded vision in space. We don't know why. I'll repeat that. We don't know why. We know why bones get weaker. We know why muscle gets weaker. We know why the cardiovascular system deconditions. We don't understand what is happening with astronauts' eyes. That means we're going to spend a lot of resources trying to figure this out. And we are. We're spending a lot of crew time and a lot of resources trying to figure out, just characterize why some people lose vision, not go blind, but certainly change their prescription by a few diopters. And others do not. Why is this not reversible in some people when they get back to Earth, but is in others? There's two theories. The leading theory is that that cardiovascular system I mentioned that's really good at pumping fluid up in the upper body. Well, it still does that in space. And you'll notice that astronauts, their faces look a little bit puffy when they're in space. All of that is fluid. It is building up in the upper body. And there's nowhere really for it to go. We might see some increased pressure in the brain or in the back of the eyeballs. We're using a lot of resources to try and figure out what's going on. And it's an area of, like I said, really a lot of research going on. The other theory is that it's related to actually the way the astronauts metabolism work and who is going to be more prone to experiencing vision loss than others. We're not sure about that, but well, when we figure it out finally, it'll possibly change the way we do spaceflight and who we send on long duration missions. So one of the important studies that we're doing in the one-year mission is called fluid shifts. Again, that fluid shift that we see into the upper body, we're trying to characterize. Is it related to changes in vision? So Scott has publicly said, he has noticed that his vision has gotten a little worse over time. So here in the picture, we're using an ultrasound to measure flow through his carotid arteries and jugular veins to see if we can track where the fluid is going, where it's staying. He's actually wearing a special pair of pants called chibis, the Russian vacuum system, essentially.  It's actually lower body negative pressure, but it pulls the astronaut into the pants. It even causes blood flow to return to the lower body almost like gravity. Will that help? Does that make the fluid shift less extreme? Does that improve vision? These are things that we're finding out. They're pretty cool experiments. Also on this one-year mission, we grew some lettuce. This was the first crop that we grew in a new vegetable facility. It's not the first plants ever grown in space, but it was the first crop grown specifically for eating. Some of the lettuce was sent home for microbial testing, but the crew was able to eat some of it as well. People ask, why is the light pink? This is a cool thing. It was figured out by the scientists who designed the veggie facility that of the spectrum, of the light of the full spectrum, roigy biv, plants really only require red and blue to grow. Put red and blue together, you get pink light. It's less, it's more cost effective and energy effective rather than having the full spectrum of like a white LED to just pick the spectrum that the plant needs. Hence the pink light makes it kind of psychedelic up there too. CubeSats. We've deployed CubeSats quite a bit during the year in space. We have a deployment next week actually. CubeSats are where technology is moving. You would be amazed. These CubeSats are pretty small. They can be four inches by four inch cubed. Some of them are bigger as what is pictured, but the technology that is being fit into these small CubeSats is amazing. Commercial companies are launching their own satellites. They get a free ride up to space and get a free deployment from the space station. It's a great deal and all kinds of technologies are being tested. One example is a company called Planet Labs. They're sending satellites to take pictures of Earth and their goal is to have a whole fleet of Earth observing satellites so that at any time, anywhere, instantaneously they can take a picture of something on Earth. Pretty neat goal. They're not there yet. They still have to launch some more satellites, but pretty cool. 3D printing made a lot of big news last year. We tested a 3D printer on orbit. Printed out a working ratchet wrench, which is shown there. It's kind of our first step in being independent of Earth. On the space station, we're close to home in a bad day, bad situation. Get in your escape vessel. You're on your way home. That's not going to be the case when we go to Mars.  You're going to have to be able to be pretty autonomous and having a 3D printer is one of those first steps in being autonomous from Earth. Some of you have heard about our rodent research program. We do have on occasion rodents that are flown to the space station very often by pharmaceutical companies. They test a pharmaceutical drug, maybe in development, on these mice and so what is shown here in the upper left part of the slide, OPG is osteoprotegrin. It's a bone preserving protein which occurs naturally in your body, but the company Amgen was interested in adding extra osteoprotegrin to a pharmaceutical to see if it works and maintaining bone in space. So you can see there's three x-rays there. One on the far left is a mouse that did not receive any extra osteoprotegrin. The normal mouse which received or actually which had normal levels of osteoprotegrin, the mouse on the far right received exogenous or extra osteoprotegrin. All of them were flown in space and you can see the results. The mouse with the extra osteoprotegrin had better bone mass. You can just see it in the x-ray. Amgen, so this is a little bit of an older study. This drug is now available as an osteoporosis drug and get it in your pharmacy. It's called Prolia. So this is an example of a drug that was tested in space on rodents which now is on the market for you and me. Speaking of bone loss, I mentioned that Scott is doing at least two hours of exercise every day to maintain his heart, bones, and muscle. We have, I don't want to say we've solved the bone loss problem, but we have a really good handle on it now. A red is that big kind of gold and blue monstrosity that this astronaut Kevin Ford is working out on. It's able to provide enough loading by using vacuum cylinders as opposed to lifting weights because in a weightless environment. But what we have found is with proper nutrition, some vitamin D supplementation, and intense exercise only possible with A red, we're kind of beating the bone loss problem. We've pretty much mitigated it and that makes us very, very happy and gives us some confidence in going to Mars. However, our next challenge is to make a smaller exercise device that could go to Mars because A red is really big. By the way, A red stands for advanced resistive exercise device. Another topic that we're studying involves fluid behavior. Fluid and fire, they're the most visually compelling examples of why we do research in space. Kind of a stronger force, if you will. It allows us to move fluids without the use of pumps or vacuums or pressure. Fluid will move on its own with surface tension and we're just learning how to do this really well. It may be important for designing fuel tanks for going to Mars, but there's an earth benefit as well. Portable medical diagnostics that don't use power or use very minimal power and very minimal amounts of samples. They can be deployed in the field, medical field, in army or I guess fields of war, but also in areas with third world countries don't have access to very adequate medical care. Portable medical diagnostic device that moves fluids across sensors without power. That's a pretty nice thing and actually is in use today. It's not entirely based on spaceflight research, but we're able to contribute to the mathematical models of how to move the fluid. So that's a good thing. I mentioned combustion as well. One of my favorite pictures is in the upper left here. A candle flame on earth and a candle flame in microgravity. Totally different, amazingly different idea. Without buoyancy driven convection, a candle flame doesn't look like a candle flame. It burns more like a sphere. You'd think we know a lot about combustion. We've been using fire since, you know, caveman days really, but we don't know a lot about fire. Because of buoyancy driven conduction, because hot air rises, it's kind of turbulent and it makes combustion events hard to study. In microgravity, you take away that buoyancy driven convection and you can really get at what's happening at the molecular level. How is the fuel burning? How is the fuel extinguishing? We're learning things about fuels that we can potentially use to make combustion engines less polluting and more efficient. Something called cool flames is a great example of using a combustion facility in space to learn something about fuel mixtures and maybe about how to actually ignite fuels so that they are, like I said, either burn more efficiently or produce less pollution or both. Protein crystal growth is also being done in the urine space. We're pretty proud of the way we can grow crystals in microgravity now. They're much more perfect. You may have heard of this. We've actually been doing protein and crystal growth for decades and way back on shuttle days. Why is it important to have a quiescent microgravity environment? In the upper left, you see a crystal grown on earth. This is of a particular protein and okay, it's pretty crystal, but that same crystal grown in microgravity, totally different, bigger, more perfect. We can study the structure of the crystal to understand the way the actual protein works in our body. In this case, there's a disease called Duchenne muscular dystrophy. We've now got an inhibitor to that disease because of spaceflight research, which our fingers are crossed. It's still got a ways before it becomes an actual pharmaceutical or an actual drug that can be used on people, but it's an animal trials now and it's on its way to being proven for human use. The same is true for several other diseases as well. The robot arm on the space station, we cannot have built the space station without the cannon arm. It's an amazing, wondrous robotic machine. The technology that was used in the construction of the cannon arm is now being applied in robotic surgeries all over the world.  So that's a great achievement. Those robotic devices are deployed all over. Scott Kelly has taken some amazing pictures of Earth. If you're not following him on Twitter or Instagram, look him up. But there's more than just pretty pictures. The pictures that we're seeing can actually be used in some cases for disaster response. Astronauts flying over can serendipitously see say a volcano eruption, as shown, or flood plains, disasters like earthquakes or tsunamis. Because the space station covers about 95% of the populated areas of the planet and we fly over not geosynchronously, so we have different lighting effects that we can see, daytime, evening, sunrise, and of course night, we get a great perspective that we can compare pictures to. And lastly, education. Very important to the space station program that we're reaching the next generation of explorers. And so this number is actually a little bit out of date. At least 42 million students in at least 44 countries have been involved with an educational program, whether it be a ham radio contact or participating in a real spaceflight experiment. So we're real proud of those numbers and I think that's a really good thing that we do. I wanted to show you another picture of the flowers that Scott grew up in the cupola. This was a neat story. I know I'm kind of running a little bit short on time, so I'll hurry. But this is a great story. Scott Kelly was growing flowers and he was following the instructions very well. But they started to grow mold. They started to not do as well. They weren't thriving. And so Scott suggested to the ground team, hey, why don't you just let me take care of the flowers, give them water when I think they need water and don't water them when I think they have too much water. The ground agreed and said, sure, go ahead. You're the man on the scene, so you have a better perspective. And indeed, Scott pulled them through. He saved the plants. He equated it to, you know, looking out on his lawn and just by feel, knowing when that needed more water or not. So he saved the flowers. That was a great thing. They bloomed and he had a nice bouquet for Valentine's Day. For those of you who are going to download this presentation, there's a lot of really nice, there are about four to five minute videos, hey, there's my cat, that give us really nice examples of benefits of space station research to humanity. These are nice to show people at your planetarium or in your museum or just to watch on your own. So those links, I know it's a little bit hard to copy from a PDF, so I apologize for that. But you can probably just type in benefits for humanity to YouTube and or look up some of those titles and you'll see some nice usable content for yourself. And then, of course, we've got a blog, we're on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Always trying to put information out there about what we're doing on the space station. And with that, I think it's time for questions and answers. Thank you very much, Liz. That's really quite a story with Scott Kelly up there and with his brother down here, and I'm looking forward to hearing about the comparisons, as I'm sure you are as well. Very much. So we do have a couple of questions. And so one of the ones, and I have to admit that this that I share this question is, I don't know if you want to, I guess we could leave that up for the screen up for a minute, then it'd be nice to get you there so that everyone can see it. But here's a question that I actually had how do you work with a fluid plastic for 3D printing in microgravity? Okay, so this is going to be kind of to the extent of my knowledge, I might not have the full story here. This was indeed a challenge and it was why we tested this. We've actually tested a couple of different 3D printers on orbit. The first one we tried, the temperature is a little bit off. So there's no convective cooling, of course. There's only radiant cooling. Well, there is convective cooling, but it's not quite the same. It's not as effective as a cooling mechanism because heat doesn't, well, doesn't radiate away in the same way. So it wasn't liquid plastic, obviously 3D printers work by extruding a solid plastic through a heated tip and building layer upon layer. At that point, I guess the plastic is basically liquid. There was some adhesion issues. In fact, the tip was a little bit too hot and adhered the print to the base plate. It was really tough to get it off. So Butch Wilmore had to kind of pry the 3D printed object off of the base plate. They made some adjustments and the next print they did was a little bit better. The next print a little bit better. They ended up printing, I think, about 20, 25 or 30 objects. Some of them had overhangs. Basically they were testing all kinds of properties of 3D printing once they figured out. They knew that convection of heat would be an issue. So I think there's probably a fan, a better fan than in most gravity-bound 3D printers have and that probably helped cool the system. Hopefully that's an adequate answer. If it's not, Google our 3D printer and maybe there's a little more information on there or go to our website. Thanks. Stewart has a question. He says, Has anyone considered sending up a centrifuge that a person could get into to see if exposure to artificial gravity can mitigate the effects of microgravity? Any comments that he would imagine an hour or so in such a centrifuge each day perhaps would be beneficial? So Stewart, this is a question that is near and dear to my heart. I actually worked on a NASA artificial gravity program and we did just that. We took volunteers and we put them in bed rest where their head was slightly lower than their feet. This is a commonly used analog for space flight. So after those people were in bed for about 21 days, every day we gave them about one hour of artificial gravity. We used a big centrifuge. Their head was at the center of the centrifuge, close to it. Their feet was out at the spoke, the end, and we spun the centrifuge around.  And that dose of gravity every day helped with mitigating bone loss and muscle loss and cardiovascular deconditioning. We didn't get enough an opportunity to really study everything that we wanted to. It's pretty expensive to do these studies. However, NASA is currently developing protocols and accepting proposals to do another artificial gravity study. This one is actually being done in Germany, I think. Somewhere in Europe might have the location incorrect. But we're doing follow-on studies to find out if artificial gravity might be a good idea. I think the general consensus is that artificial gravity is a really good idea if we're going to go to long-duration space flight. You're bringing your own food, water, oxygen, light. Why not bring your own gravity as well? But it is a very difficult technical challenge to spin a spacecraft, for example. You probably saw the movie, The Martian. And part of that spacecraft was spinning, part of it wasn't. That is pretty tough on the vestibular system to accommodate to going in and out of gravity fields. Is it feasible? Yes. Is it a challenge? Yes. Do I believe we're going to use artificial gravity? Some form of it? Yes. Unless we have a much faster way to get to Mars. Build a better propulsion system. Maybe instead of six months to get to Mars, we get there in a week or two, then maybe you wouldn't need artificial gravity. So one of the ongoing themes of science fiction shows is probably not particularly practical. As a follow-up to the one I just have to pass this on, Tucker, Emily, Ezra, and Mary, who had asked the question about the 3D printing, says thanks for the explanation. It's so cool.  We're learning about plants as we go as well, and they're tricky. We've been growing plants in space for actually like 30 years, and we're just now getting to the point where we think we have our ducks in a robe, not always. So plants, just like humans, have multiply redundant systems.  Up and down are relative, of course, right? But if the plant screws that up, dead plant. So there's multiply redundant systems to make sure that the root goes toward resources like water and nutrients, and that the shoot goes toward resources like light. So there's something called phototropism in which plants will grow toward light. There's something called gravitropism, which plants will grow opposite of gravity, a gravity vector. There's also something, and I'm blanking on the name, but essentially it's that the root will grow toward resources. So in the lack of gravity, other things become more important, like light or water and nutrients. And plants, believe it or not, can actually forget about the need for gravity. Not all plants, of course, but the ones that we've been playing around with, and they're effectively growing plants without gravity. That's kind of not a plant biologist either, but that's about the extent of my knowledge. Kind of back to our fluid question and the need for gravity. Andy asks, if someone cuts a finger, is a band-aid a simple solution as it is on earth? Does blood clot the same way in space as it does on earth? Yeah. Fortunately, blood pretty much clots the same way as it does on earth. Now, none of us ever wants to see a severe trauma where there's significant blood loss. We expect, well, actually on the vomit comet, NASA's parabolic plane, we have done some studies, not with humans, but potentially with cadaverers or other organisms that can bleed like a human to get our bearings and understanding. And in a trauma situation, we all expected that blood might kind of go everywhere and it really doesn't. It just, remember, fluids without gravity, surface tension becomes a really more powerful, I don't want to call it a force, but a really powerful process. Fluids are very sticky. Fluid molecules, water molecules stick together really well. And so, in a severe blood loss situation, the blood pretty much sticks in a big blob around the wound and doesn't go everywhere. Okay, good. Which of the studies that you mentioned were you involved in yourself? Ah, boy. You know, directly, I haven't been involved really with any of those except for the artificial gravity. I kind of started making sure that other people's science went well. And so, I worked in mission control for actually about four years to be kind of a conduit between the scientist and mission control. Because they speak very different languages. Engineers and mission control, it's all about operations and go or no go or do we have KU contact or not? And the scientist just like, hey, can he move the ultrasound probe so I can see his heart better? So, I was someone who kind of was the go between kind of like a CAPCOM person, but from a science perspective. So, I had to understand what the scientist was saying. And then I had to turn that into something that mission control could understand and turn into an instruction to the astronauts. So, I really enjoyed that job. And so, I was actually involved in a number of those studies. Fluid shifts, the VIP, the eye study, immune studies, bone studies, nutrition studies, all of them. It's been pretty awesome. Okay. So, we've got, we'll go for the last question here. We're at the top of the hour, but since we had our glitch earlier, we won't worry about going just a little bit late. But this is Tucker and Emily et al. I have a follow up to Stuart's question. And this might be more of an engineering question. How do you prevent a reaction wheel type effect occurring in the centrifuge? Would you have two centrifuges? Well, you'd have to have a really good isolation system. And we have learned quite a lot about having good isolation systems because our exercise devices have to be really well isolated from the space station structure, the treadmill. This thing about that one example of someone running, pounding on the structure, that would really put a lot of wear and tear and damage to the joints and solar panels. So, we develop isolation systems, vibration isolation systems. They're passive mostly, gyroscopically controlled or gyroscopically powered and isolated from structure. A centrifuge probably similarly have to be pretty well isolated to prevent any torque or reaction wheel issues, like you mentioned. Okay. Well, that's great. If you could perhaps stop screen sharing, please, Liz. Yes. And that's all for tonight. I want to thank Dr. Warren for coming and sharing with us. I found this to be tremendously fascinating. And I think it's very cool to hear about all this research that's done. And hopefully, I think it would be very cool that my question might have been how many doctors or actual research scientists have actually flown.  I would love to fly. You can get out one of the 18,300 people that applied. That's remarkable. That's remarkable. So, you can find this telecon along with many others on the Night Sky Network under the Outreach Resources section. Just search for webinar. Tonight's presentation will be posted on the Night Sky Network YouTube page and the dedicated research page, which should be up by the end of the week, hopefully within the next day or two. And the last thing is that I want to put up kind of a teaser for the next time. Our next webinar will be, let's see, where did he go? There we go. And so next month, we are tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, March 16th, where we'll hear from Dr. Orkan Umarhan from NASA Ames Research Center on New Horizons and Pluto. So we're looking forward to hearing from him. So thank you very much, everyone, and have a great evening. Thank you very much, Dr. Warren. Absolutely. We look forward to seeing more adventures in space. There's a couple of questions on chat. Can I stay and just answer a couple more? Oh, sure. By all means. Okay. So I'll stay and answer those extra questions on chat if people want to hang in. So go ahead, so we won't stand on ceremony here. Okay. Well, that was a lot of fun, guys. I enjoyed that. Yeah. So we've still got, everyone's hanging in there. We've still got 32 viewers. So we've got a couple of good questions here. And so we have Darian asked, how do you analyze the eye problems of the astronauts? What sorts of tests do you conduct? So that's what I'm typing in right now. Or should I just verbally say it? Regarding those eye tests, we use a variety. Many of them are the same tests you might get at your own doctor, except some of them not so much. We have an ultrasound, which we're using to look at blood flow and fluid flow. We have something called a fundoscope, which we use to image the retina.  Some of the astronauts, instead of fundoscope, they just call it the fun-o-scope.  Fundoscope. We use tenometry, a little portable pen that measures pressure within the eye. Tenometry. We have something called OCT, which is an optical computed tomography. That is a high-powered scan, kind of like the fundoscope, but it looks at a really high level at the structure of the eye and the back of the eye, in particular, the retina. Some of the changes that we're seeing in some astronauts are that the retina is getting folded up. Some of them are getting something called a coroidal fold. We're seeing some people with cotton wool spots, which are just fuzzy spots in their retina. I'm not sure what those indicate if it's damage to rods and cones or what. It's obvious. It's actually a pretty serious issue, especially because we don't understand it. When we understand a problem, we know how to go about preventing it. This eye thing is really disconcerting to people. Hopefully, we can get a better idea of what's happening, how to prevent it, and then, well, we'll be in much better shape. Let's just put it that way. I see another test here about cadavers flown on the KC-135 or the vomit comet. I sometimes hesitate to talk about animal models, but the Air Force, I think, did these tests for us. It wasn't necessarily NASA, but sometimes animals that bleed similarly to humans are pigs. We've actually flown some live pigs, which are anesthetized, and we can study some traumatic injuries on pigs to make sure that we know that if an astronaut receives a traumatic injury in space, what we can expect. It's not something we do lightly, obviously. It's not something that we do very often, but it was important to do at least once so that we know what to expect. Hopefully, that's an acceptable answer. There was one more artificial gravity question. Not necessarily involving spinning the whole spacecraft, but just spinning a centrifuge within the spacecraft. Same thing. It is simpler engineering-wise, like you say, Stuart, but still you would need to isolate that small centrifuge from the rest of the structure because, like you said, there may be some torque issues involved or some vibration. We actually, the space station at one time was designed with a small centrifuge for rodents and other organisms like plants. Over the years, the space station structure and design was altered as we went. That centrifuge accommodation module, the CAM, was eventually canceled, unfortunately, but hopefully in the future, maybe we'll be able to have something small again, a little centrifuge that we can test. Let's see. I think that pretty much takes care of all the comments and questions. I want to thank you again for staying a little bit late. It's very gracious of you. Thank you very much. I know it's getting late there in Houston much later than here in San Francisco anyways. No problem. Thank you again. We'll be signing off and we look forward to seeing everyone next month for hearing about Pluto. Maybe someday this research that you're doing will enable people to go out there and even beyond Mars. I think that that'll definitely not be within my lifetime, but hopefully the little kids.


Live from San Francisco, extracting the signal from the noise, it's the Cube, covering VMworld 2015. Brought to you by VMware and its ecosystem sponsors. Hello, my name is Edward Hledke, I'm with the virtualization practice and I run the virtualization and cloud security podcast. Normally a video podcast done whenever we wanted to actually these days and we're up to episode 160 or something like that. Mike's been on it as long as I have, almost. Actually, his funny thing, Hema was one of the original podcast members. Hema Profichandra. Yes, I'm Hema Profichandra, I'm the CTO of Hytris. And several other things. And several other things, yes. And Simon Crosby's been on the podcast before. I have pleasure to be back, founder and CTO of Bromium. And Mike Foley is my compatriot of recent years. Yep, Mike Foley, I work in vSphere technical marketing, I'm the author of the vSphere hardening guide. Yes. And you used to work at RSA and several other places that deal with security. Yeah. You're going into those. The vSphere security guide. We love the hardening guide. Believe me, we really do. We do. I think we all have a tool for the hardening guide at one point in time or another. Group hug every time. Simon doesn't need it though. Simon's, I mean, his stuff doesn't need it though, right? Right, right. It just does it for you. I'm all for it. Hotend, server, stuff, good. Yeah, clients, town too. Actually, I think they count a little bit more. I mean, one of the things that came out of the keynote was putting security on an untrusted platform. I'm a little confused. I personally don't think that's possible. Can you put security on top of an untrusted platform? So we've been doing that for years and years and years. But we've been doing it. It's really a question of risk management. It's not a question of security. It's a question of risk management. I mean, if you think about traditionally what we've been doing with firewall products, right? It was on hardware. Nobody actually said that the hardware was validated. So, software is always being placed that provides security functions on hardware that may have come from a different vendor. So, you know, I think it's a model we're used to. The question is, are we going further? Are we actually changing that model to improve the? I think we have to because now we're finding malware inside a firmware and we're getting hardware delivered to us that has like... It's not only that. I mean, we've done work which shows that it's very straightforward with a bunch of JavaScript. It's a drop in the web page. And then from there, just brute force. Yeah. All your way down to SMM and stay there forever. And once you're there, you own it. Yeah, but you can do that from the web. So it's not like your supply chain has to be compromised. malware can do this from the web, get down through the OS and drop into SMM and then you're toast. So it's a big deal. It's a scary world. It's a scary world out there, but how do you, if I don't know that's happening, how do I protect myself?  I really don't. I want a trusted platform. Yeah, but even if you have a trusted platform, that's not going to absolve you. Everyone wants the security easy button. Everyone wants the silver bullet, but security isn't an action. Security is a practice. Yeah. And you can't just say, okay, bang, that covers me for all security. Because it's just. It's a layer. It's just going to remain. Unless you're Simon, then all you need is him. Yes, you do. All you need is Simon. True. You're absolutely right. That we need him. With the danger there is that it sounds like a get out of jail free card to the person who's been buying the same old useless stuff for years, which doesn't work.  You don't mean this traditional stuff just doesn't work. And there are better ways of achieving security by design. Yes. And I think so hardening out is good, but in general, you know, I divide the security world into two categories of vendors. Vendors who are building stuff that makes the world more secure and vendors who bleed about what they think is bad. Okay. All three here are vendors that try and make the world more secure by design. That's just a much better way to go. Yes. What you see emerging, I think, across all of the major infrastructure vendors is a set of ways, most of which use virtualization, surprisingly, to make the infrastructure vastly more defensible. And it's time to get rid of all the old crap that is sitting in the network, sitting on the endpoint, because it doesn't help. Yeah. Just doesn't help. So when we talk about, I mean, going back, something actionable, is TPM, TXT, and the follow-ons that are actually in all the processors, is those good enough to attest my hardware now? Yeah, it's good enough. Well, certainly with TPM 2.0, you can get to remote attestation. Yeah. But the problem is that there are no devices really shipping with TPM 2.0 yet. So that, look, in the endpoint world, hardware-based security comes slowly. It comes slowly because there's this vast array of different hardware out there, and the OEMs. It takes a long time to design all that stuff, too. Well, it's, yes. And assuming that the current generation of hardware is great, it still takes a long time for that to filter into the enterprise. Yes. By the way, Intel was not our friend here for a while. Intel charged 25 bucks more for a V Pro feature set, which was just unforgivable, you know? It should be part of it. Why does it do that? I mean, it's like, just get people the most secure stuff. Fastwall, please. Right? So they're now doing the right thing. Yeah. For Skylake, it gets better. Well, in some of the sort of OEMs, right, where Cisco, HP, Dell, almost all of them have least hardware that is TXT, TPM enabled now, but you have to order. So it's a further line item. And I think Cisco's the only one that's decided that their ECS, going forward, all their blades are going to have TPM TXT because they don't want to go retrofit those. Well, only in the US. Oh, so there you go. Only in the US. So again, you know, if we're trying to seed the market with the right approach, none of the hardware vendors, right, from the processors to the OEMs, right, are actually enabling the automatic choice. They've all made it way complicated. And ultimately, it's way hard for the customer to figure out what to do. That's the challenge. So we need the hardware vendors to actually make it easy. They need to make it easy, but ultimately the hardware features just get consumed in a software stack. And ultimately, that's what the customer buys and needs to know is good, right? Yeah. So again. But we've even seen situations where the hardware has failed, right? So while... And the BIOS is a terrible... And the BIOS is a terrible. There's so many moving pieces here. And so rather than getting to the point of... What I'm afraid of is that people are going to be listening and hear the point solution of, oh, I've got to have TPM 2.0. That'll solve my problem. Yeah, I agree. Really, it's much more along the lines of having a solid security practice that gets you, that allows you to take care of the unforeseen. Yes. I agree. It allows you to adopt the right technologies at the right time and the right place. And also retire the old technologies at the right time and the right place. Yes, I absolutely agree. And if you don't do that, if you're just looking for a... Make it secure, then you're not hiring a security officer, you're hiring a compliance officer. And there's a lot to do with maturity, too. So we have a number of customers that actually have enabled their infrastructure with TPM TXT-enabled hardware. But what's interesting is that they do a measured launch, right? So they're still allowing the launch to continue, even if the measurements are not in compliance to what they want, right? They're not saying, don't stop booting if the bits are not right. They're like, let me know, I just want to detect if the bits are not right. Yeah, but even then you can do a measured launch into something where the malware then is the first thing to come up after you've done your malware, measured launch, and then you still stack, right? So my issue with measured launch is the two words, measure launch. So only measured at launch time. And when you have up times of 30, 60, 80 days slash months, then at some point that launch measurement gets stale. I'm sorry, if you have up times of greater than... That's a whole other issue and I'll address that in my session later. Well, I'm going to address it right now. That is not a badge of honor. Right. That is a really just don't do it. You got to upgrade these machines, upgrade the firmware, the software, and you got to upgrade the software pretty easily, at least with the security patches, folks. I know, but with virtualization, you can easily evacuate all the VIPs and reboot more often. I mean, you can, that's what virtualization is allowing you to do, but nobody wants to. That's right. I do mine every quarter, at a minimum. Yeah, but nobody likes that. I mean... You're in the extreme. You're in the extreme category. With that, we knew that coming in here. But this will know it coming out. Come on, I'm going to practice what I talk about. Yes, of course. And for each and the thing is, is that, I mean, I run a lot of products in my environment. Yeah. I run a lot of security and management products and I do role-based access controls properly. Yeah. Most people don't. These are the simple things people can fix without costing anything. So here's another one. Here's another simple one. So 90% of enterprise breaches stop with a compromised endpoint, right? Yeah. So, simple. Move distrust every PC in your org. Yeah. Don't trust the damn things, but don't worry about the line of business. That'll continue. Move it out, right? Yeah. But it will, because if I don't trust anything outside of my trusted component, end tops, best desktops, why trust them anyways? So you're not advocating VDI, are you? No. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we're going back to a very long conversation many years ago. I love the VDI thing, I mean, it's most, a lot of malware I see just lives on the user profile and comes back every time you reboot your VDI desktop. And then it loves being in the data center too, right? Right. And being on the same VLAN as all the other VMs which can use to bounce around. So, VDI doesn't solve a security problem, it also solves a compliance problem. It's better hygiene. It doesn't solve the patching or any other problem. No, it doesn't, but you need to, you said the right word. You need hygiene. You need to be able to think about your environment, whether it's a server, a cloud, a hybrid cloud, holistically. You can't just look at it as a point solution. It's like, oh, I got an iPad, I better do, I better secure it. No, it's like, from here to where it's going and where it's talking, figure out what your users are doing. Once you know that, then you can figure out a policy around it to say, what should they be allowed to do?  And whether they're admins or just- Or extental. I mean, classic one that I've seen recently, admin, user logs on as admin to administer Windows, server instance, and this decides to browse the web. That. With admin credentials, right? So, it's not toast, right? In the same system. Come on, I really like doing that. You know, I use it in a captured VM. As long as you throw away the VM, it really is. Exactly, throw away everything, yeah. Take that laptop, get it wherever. So, I've been presenting at VMworld now for a couple of years, and what I'm finding my role has turned into is one of educating the VI admins on how to just step back and think of what their actions may have as far as a consequence goes. Yes. And that what I've also found is, I did last year a session on hypervisor security, and I had 500 people in the room. If I had done that session in 2010, I would have had 10 or 15 people in the room. So, what's happening is that the security industry and the security professionals are now starting to come out of their post-911 bunker, and they're looking around and realizing that the whole infrastructure has changed, and now they're worried about it being secure. And I think that then puts the onus on the IT admin to be coming up with better security practices and then educating the security folks on how these practices then affect security. Because the security guys just looking to, you know. I'm also seeing in the industry, given the recent data breaches, right, that there is mandates coming from the top. So, like, I was talking to a major insurance company just over lunch the other day, and they were like, we've got this requirement that says, encrypt everything. And, you know, it's like, no new budget, just encrypt everything, right? That's like coming up from top down because the CIOs, the CISOs, right? Well, so now- It says encrypt everything, but it doesn't say how do you manage the keys. Or, where's the right level to encrypt, right? Given that you're going to encrypt everything, how are users going to get access to the data? And when it's decrypted, then the bad guy shows up, right? It's about the use case and the threat surfaces, right? It can't be about just encrypt because the suggestion was storage level. And they're like, well, my facility is very tightly, nobody's going to walk out with a drive from my storage system, right? So if I encrypt at that level, is it really going to solve my problem? In the virtual environment, even in most cloud environments, you can encrypt in 10 different locations and they still encrypt at the storage level. So, you know, encrypt everything. I've never been a fan of that. I actually think it's a waste of resources. Some things just need to be digitally signed, some things you don't care about. So I think that whoever said that on high needs to be educated. No, no, no, but this is the mindset that- Yes. But wait, it's a little bit like the HTTPS everywhere mindset, right?  Net scalers and F5s, all they love this stuff.  The whole thing around encryption is all about data leakage, right? So it's a brute force approach to solving the problem of data leakage. But data leakage, if I'm someone with access rights to sensitive data that I bring up on the screen, oh, I can't take it out of the building because it's encrypted. But I can take my phone out and take a photo of every single piece and have that synced up to a cloud service in seconds. So it doesn't really address the problem of data leakage. That's really an education of the end user.  I would agree with that, yeah. The guy who pulls out the disk drives and goes and sells them down at the- Or the people that are supposed to dispose of the drive, you send it back to the manufacturer, they send it over to Africa to pick apart. But before they do that, they read it. Exactly. That's what those policies are there for. They're really to stop that. But at the end of the day, if someone is determined enough, they will get past a lot of those things. And that's when you really ought to be thinking about- So you're just raising the bar, right?  Yes, absolutely. Rather than just, it's in the clear and they just take it. But at the end of the day, when something like that happens, and you have a breach or you have data leakage, you really have to have a disaster recovery plan for security in place to deal with the outcome. And that's what I was going to get to is, you really need to have those plans, a library of them, all those incident responses for everything. It's not just disaster recovery. It's an instant response for a breach. It's an instant response for an encryption of key missing. It's an instant response for someone couldn't unlock their laptop for whatever reason. Well, someone's inconvenience is another person's disaster. So I'll just stick with disaster recovery. Okay. It's a disaster, it's a disaster. Oh my God. But you need a library of incident responses. There's a point of which some of the stuff is risk becoming too complex for an organization which gets IT, but not a lot of it, right? Yeah. So I mean, it's easy to talk to mature, scruity organizations and they get it. But the mid-market guy who's under-resourced in IT, anyway, and IT is not the business. For him, this is a lot of work. It's a huge amount. But that's why maybe what needs to happen is instant responses need to be shared and made available so that people have a library to go to. Okay, we're thinking of another product for somebody else to make. But still, I think you're right. But it's not just- It's a difficult problem to solve, right? So there's the process by which you can address an incident and you can have a supply chain of renders that can help you with the mitigation piece of it. But that awareness and training piece, which is a challenge even just with the, even today in the basic, don't click this, right? That piece becomes even more complicated. So if it's a- I mean, I think the business of don't click on stuff, honestly, I think that that one is, I mean, there are lots of ways to solve that problem. But it's, I mean, I think it's in the category we've solved, okay? That is, we know how to make operating systems extraordinarily secure nowadays. The problem is the legacy. Yeah. Okay, so, you know, number one thing is, you know, just move on, people. Move on, right? Move on, move on, move on. It's like- You move on and use something you guys created. So I had this meeting with CISO, the Federal Reserve Bank, right? Daddy, Windows XP, everywhere.  By the way, you're supposed to be the leader. You know?  It's the long Windows XP, you know? Just move on. Yeah. And then the world gets better. Same with the US Navy.  That's vulnerability in itself, okay? Well, okay. It's been actually a pleasure talking to everybody. We're almost done with our time. So a closing thought from everybody, Hema? Well, so I'll build on what Simon said. Definitely deploy the new emerging technologies and actually adopt it because it will make them safer and more secure. Yeah, I mean, for me, you're vastly more secure if you use virtualization and if you use the cloud. Just get there, right? Humans tripping on ethernet cables, bad idea. Just get out of physical infrastructure and the same stuff is coming on the client. You know, virtualization is about to transform security of endpoints and it's all going to be much better. Just move forward. Faster. Quit resisting change. That's number one. And then I agree with this key requirement, get planned for the bad things. So I guess I would say when you're adopting all of these new technologies that we want you to move to, don't apply the same old rules because if you apply the same old rules to the new technology, you're not gonna reap the benefits of the ROI of that new technology. If you're just applying new technology just to say we're running virtualized, that's not going to help you. You really need to sit back and understand the impact of the business that new technology is going to have and your rules may change. Well, and my last thought is this all is going to start. I mean, Mike and I were on a panel one time and someone got up and asked like where does everything stop without start? And without even looking at each other we said with architecture, if you're going to sit there and adopt a new technology, come up with an architecture, please. Sit there and at least think about how security is going to be impacted by those and change how you're looking at security to fit that environment. You mean, the stuff we're talking about encrypt everything, it may not actually be worth doing. It may actually have such a high overhead because of what you have that you may be adopting the wrong platform. There's a whole lot of factors here that we're not thinking about today as we go forward. I think that's the key is you've got to start thinking about them at the beginning and as you move, you can't just say, oh, I moved and let's go bolt on some securities. Like, no, think about it, think about security and then move forward. Yeah, so it's almost like, you know, the empowered CISO is the way forward and empowered sophisticated architecture sensitive CISO is the way forward, right? And the CISO for too long has been, you know, subordinate to the CIO and everything else. They've also been reactive. They're feeling the compliance. But they've been reactive. You've got to break out of the reactive on both security and later. They're not brought in at the design time. Yeah, yeah. So get out, break out of the reactive mode. Yeah. But I think it's also the responsibility of the CISOs, the security engineering teams to actually take a more active role. They can't just be focused on the ongoing maintenance of what they've already deployed but actually spend the time with the business units and say, what are you doing? And my big complaint about security teams is they need to get ahead of the technology changes and not react to the technology changes. A perfect example would be things like Dropbox, right? If you can't provide an alternative solution that your customers, your employees can use that works just like a Dropbox, for example, if you make it really, really hard for them, they're just going to go around you. Oh, absolutely. Right now, I think the final thought is that, let's tie it back to VMworld a little bit, is that security professionals now have a chance to really get ahead by looking at the photon platform and tools like that because now you've got something that is not in every data center. You got a chance to think and plan around it. Yeah. And architect how it's going to move into your environment and be part, the security folks just have to be part of the discussion. Yes. Get there. Yeah. So I mean, if you're a CIO, the message is let the security people lead from an architectural perspective and don't try and call them in later and say, hey, we're about to do this, how are you going to secure it? And allocate the budget as well, right? So not just design an architect, but allow the budget to be there for the security and compliance controls that are necessary. Well, thank you, Hema, Simon, Mike, for being on the virtualization. Thank you. Security and Cloud Podcast.


Hey everybody, what's going on? I am Greg Susman, joined today by Jeroen Dijkmeijer of dailyrotor.com. We're here to break down tonight's NBA Slate. What's happening, Drew? Just three games on the slate, but still plenty of plays for fan dual players out there. So hopefully we can find the right ones tonight. Yanis being out is certainly going to open up some value. We'll get to that in a moment, but we'll begin with the Atlanta Hawks taking on the Charlotte Hornets tonight. And Tray Young is in the lineup. Certainly someone that's always worth playing. He's one of our top stars on the board tonight. Yeah, it's obviously a good matchup in the sense that Charlotte's not an elite defensive team. They do play slower, but I think more than anything on a three game slate, you want to think through what types of game environments are going to be the most compelling ones. And Atlanta and Charlotte are two teams that are not playing on the second night of back-to-back, whereas the other games have teams playing on the second night of back-to-back. So I think the upside is really strong for this to be the game that it stays competitive and gets the starters deep into the 30s and minutes. And Tray Young is certainly that guy for Atlanta. So I think both Tray Young and John Collins for Atlanta tonight are quite interesting at the top of the board in terms of pricing. Absolutely. Both make sense here tonight. But Tray Young for Atlanta is going to go off and always has the ability to put up 50 real points, which translates to so many fantasy points. Tray Young, a lock for Linus tonight. Up next, we'll get to John Collins. He's teammate. Atlanta is a fast-paced team. Again, Charlotte, as you said just a moment ago, not exactly lighting the world on fire with their defense. John Collins makes a lot of sense, even though the price is high. Yeah, the price is high. But for John Collins, these matchups where they play smaller teams, where John Collins can get some more minutes as a true center, really impacted his rebounding rate. And Charlotte is one of those smaller teams. They've been trying to get four to six minutes a game at center with PJ Washington or kind of these smaller ball lineups. I think John Collins will really flourish during those moments on the floor. And I think in general, there's a lot of value on the table tonight. So you can adequately spend up for both of the Hawks studs as building blocks in your lineup. And that's certainly the case with John Collins pricing the upper 8,000s tonight. Building our lineup with studs, including John Collins, makes a lot of sense on the smaller slate. And in Collins paired with Young, well, it's going to add up for a lot of points for the Hawks and a lot of points for your fantasy teams. Finally, we'll move on to Milwaukee and the player that is probably going to benefit the most without Yanis in there. And that's his teammate, Chris Middleton. Yeah, the two guys that have typically benefited the most without Yanis are Chris Middleton and then Eric Bledsoe. And so with Chris Middleton, he's priced a little bit higher. We project him a little bit higher. But both of those two guys have averaged around 45 fan dual points per game in the games without Yanis this season. If they can hit that mark, they'll easily pay off their price tag, not only becoming one of the best overall scores on the board, but also one of the best values. So I think Chris Middleton and Eric Bledsoe, two names to keep in mind tonight when building your lineups. Both Bledsoe and Middleton should be on your radar. Their fantasy points just increase by a whole lot without Yanis. They need them to do the box. Both Bledsoe and Middleton to step up to make sure one or both are in your lineups tonight. Up next are three value plays. And we begin with Norman Powell for the Toronto Raptors. Powell has played very, very, very well as of late. Tough match up tonight against a slow defensive jazz team. Why do you like Powell? Yeah, I really like the price tag on Powell. He's still priced in the mid-5,000s. And we saw him play over 40 minutes last night. Certainly a challenge on the second night of back-to-back, again, playing in altitude here in Utah. But I think it's a pretty good opportunity to beat that price tag with Fred Van Bleet still sideline. Powell's just been playing heavy minutes, seen a big usage uptick as well, and just honestly playing really, really well. So shooting guard position has a lot of options tonight. But Powell is one of the better values on the slate. Even with that tough defensive match up, Powell's still under price. Let's take advantage of how well he has been playing as of late. Let's get him in there. Up next for us, Drew, we go back to Milwaukee and Brooke Lopez, another starter that we haven't mentioned yet. The big man for the box in a good spot tonight, again, taking advantage of no Yanis. Yeah, and a match up with Nikola Jokic that will require a true center on the floor most of the night. I know Milwaukee at times will place in these smaller ball lineups with Erson or Marvin Williams at the center spot. I don't think they'll be able to do so tonight against Nikola Jokic and Mason Plumlee. And so the minutes should be there for guys like Brooke Lopez, Robin Lopez, Brooke Lopez, priced in the low 5,000s, gets that big usage uptick in the absence of Yanis. Also, such a good provider of blocks, which can really help the scoring on Fandal pretty quickly. So we think he's one of the better values on the slate. And center is a pretty tough position with Jokic priced all the way up. It's a great point. Needing a true center on the court all night long should prove very, very valuable for Brooke Lopez and his owners tonight. He's reasonably priced. If he's on there, he could get quite a few threes for you. Maybe even give you a couple of rebounds. I know rare for Brooke Lopez. We'll see what happens tonight against Nikola Jokic. One final player to talk about, and that's on the other side of that Atlanta Charlotte matchup. And that's Miles Bridges. What do you think about Bridges tonight outside of that fast paced matchup against Atlanta? Yeah, the matchup certainly plays a big role in this. And the fact that Miles Bridges is a guy that plays so well in transition, I think also helps Atlanta does play very quickly. They allow a lot of steals and blocks, which also can funnel up that Fandal score pretty quickly. And Bridges has been playing well. The minutes have been consistently into the 30s. The absence of Malik Monk has opened up more usage on the whole for a lot of the Charlotte players. It's also mixed up their rotations a little bit. He's getting a little bit more time at the four as well, which really helps his rebounding rate with PJ Washington playing some five as to being staggered a little bit more. So I think it's a combination of things that are really working in Bridges' favor tonight, but certainly the matchup with Atlanta drives a lot of the values they play so fast. Absolutely, they're just one of the quickest teams in the NBA, and Miles Bridges is value, and Charlotte scoring in general, all going to go up tonight. So let's take advantage. Let's get Bridges in there as a value play on this slate. That's going to do it for us here on the Fandal Hurry of Drew. We appreciate the time. Good luck tonight. Thanks so much. Enjoy the three game slate tonight, Greg. Absolutely, you as well. Tomorrow, we'll take a look at this week on the PGA Tour as Jim Sonos and Cam Stewart will be here on the Hurry of to talk all about it. Have a great night. Enjoy the games, and we'll see you back here tomorrow for another edition of the Fandal Hurry up.


Alright, so remember that the first derivative tells us something about the slope of the line tangent to the graph of a function, which means that we can use the first derivative to tell us something about what the graph looks like. Now in these days of graphing calculators it kind of seems pointless to actually talk about graphing, but it's actually a fairly valuable exercise because many times what we have corresponds to information about the first or even the second derivative, and what we're actually interested in is what the function looks like. And to that end, we'll consider the, we'll side-step the question of what is the derivative and focus on what it actually tells us. So here's a general approach to graphing functions using derivatives. So we might begin with, well, finding the derivative. Somehow either we start with the derivative or we apply the derivative rules to obtain it. Find where the derivative is positive or negative, and we want to sketch a graph that corresponds to a graph that's rising whenever we have a positive derivative and falling whenever we have a negative derivative. And to produce our first sketch, we'll just use a connect-the-dots-straight-line graph. Later on we'll refine our graph using higher derivatives. So let's take a look at this. We want to sketch a possible graph for y equals f of x, where f prime of x is x squared minus 50 plus 15x minus 35. So here's our function derivative, and note that we already have the derivative. We don't have to go out and find it. So we do want to know where the derivative is positive and negative, and in general, if you want to try and solve an inequality greater than zero, less than zero, you start by trying to solve the equality derivative equal to zero, and so that solves the equation x squared plus 15x minus 35 equal to zero, and that's a fairly standard quadratic equation. So we'll use the quadratic formula to find our solutions, and it's helpful if we actually get a numerical value for that, so x is around negative 17 and around positive 2. So we'll go ahead and graph these points on our number line, and there's around 17 negative, and there's around 2 positive, and we are finding the places where the derivative is equal to zero, but what is of interest is where the derivative is positive or negative. And again, the key idea here is that the derivative cannot change from positive to negative or vice versa without either being zero or being undefined. So let's take a look at that. So we'll use a test point method, and we'll note that our two points have divided our number line into one, two, three distinct regions, and within each region, the sine is going to be the same. So we can try a test point at that first interval someplace over here, minus 20 works, minus a hundred works, minus a billion works, if you can reason your way through what the sine of that's going to be, and if x equals negative 20, substituting that into our derivative equation, we find slope is equal to 65, so the derivative and the slope is positive in that first interval, so we'll go ahead and make a note of that. Likewise, we can pick a point in the middle of this next interval, zero happens to be right in there, so we can try zero, and at that point, if I substitute zero into my derivative function, I get negative 35, so the derivative and the slope is going to be negative in that middle interval. And then finally our last interval, a good test point, x equals someplace to the right here, how about x equals a hundred, I'll substitute that into my derivative formula, and find that the derivative is 11,465, importantly positive, and so our derivative is going to be positive in the last interval. And so in our first interval, our slope is positive, in the middle interval, our slope is negative, and in the last interval, our slope is positive once again, so for reference, it's useful to just sketch some representative lines that have positive slope, negative slope, positive slope, and this is mainly to give us some sense of what our graph is going to look like, and actually our graph doesn't look too different from that, so in this first interval, I'm going to sketch a graph that is rising, then falling, then rising again, and my straight line stick figure sketch that is going to look something like that. And I'll suppose I take a look at another function, so again here, I have the derivative x plus 3 quantity squared over x minus 4, and first thing to notice here is that because of this x minus 4 and the denominator x, absolutely cannot equal to 4, so the other things I have to do is solve for when the derivative is equal to 0, so I have a quotient, so the only time I can get a quotient equal to 0 is when the numerator is 0, so the only solution is x equal to negative 3. And we'll graph our solution x equals negative 3, also our forbidden point, x equal to 4, we'll put those on the number line, and we'll throw a dashed line through here to indicate this is a line we may not touch. And we're looking for these signs of the derivative in the 1, 2, 3 intervals that our points have identified, so again we'll pick a test point. So again our first interval, way out here, x equals negative 10, perfectly good test point, substituting that into our derivative expression, we get f of negative 10 is 49 over negative 6, and that's a negative number, so our graph is falling in that first interval. In this middle interval here, x equal to 0 is a perfectly good test point, if I substitute that into the derivative, the derivative at 0 is negative once again, our graph continues to fall, and then in our last interval here, x equals positive 10, perfectly good test point, and we find that our derivative at 10, 169 over 6, that's positive, so the graph is rising in that third interval. The important thing here is I can't cross this line, this line at x equals 4 is a forbidden line, so we'll leave a little bit of a gap between those two. Now as a straight line sketch, this isn't too bad, but we can refine it a little bit. This line, this forbidden line here, something interesting happens there, so let's see if we can figure out what's going on. So for that we want to take a closer look at the derivative and look at the one-sided limits as x approaches 4. So if I'm coming up from below, as x approaches 4 from below, the derivative is going to approach negative infinity, so our numerator is always positive, our denominator goes to a small negative number, so numerator close to 7 squared, close to 49, divided by small number makes large number, and that's negative, so the negative is going to be in the quotient as well. So as x gets close to 4 from below, our derivative gets close to negative infinity, and so that means our graph is falling, that's the negative, rapidly that's the infinity, so our graph falls very rapidly as we approach 4 from below. The same sort of analysis as x gets close to 4 from above, our numerator, still close to 49, our denominator close to small but positive number, so 49 over small positive gets us large and positive, so the graph is rising positive very quickly, infinity, as we move past x equals 4, and so what's that going to look like? Well rather than having these rather modest, falling or rising lines, I'm going to have much sharper falling and rising lines, so my graph is falling much more rapidly as I get close to 4 and rising much more rapidly as we move away from x equals 4, so there's our stick figure sketch of a graph with derivative x plus 3 squared over x minus 4.