Okay, we're back, thanks for watching everybody. This is theCUBE, Silicon Angles coverage of IOD. I'm Dave Vellante, and we're here at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas, covering IOD, wall-to-wall coverage, as usual. You can tweet us, I'm at Dave Vellante. My co-host today is Jeffrey T. Kelly, K-E-L-L-Y. So please tweet us and let us know what you think if you have any questions. So I'd like to introduce my co-host now. Who's going to introduce the next guest? Jeff? Welcome, everybody. Just quick correction, Jeffrey F. Kelly. Well, Jeffrey F. No, T, I don't want to mess that up. So Jeffrey F. Kelly, K-E-L-L-Y. Right, important for the Twitter handle. And then you've been, welcome everybody. Thanks for watching today. First guest, very interesting company, Bill Hartman, president of Terra Echoes. Welcome to theCUBE. First time. Appreciate Jeff, thanks. On theCUBE and we appreciate you coming on. Yeah, thanks, Bill, for coming on. Why don't you set it up?  So tell us what Terra Echoes does, and then we'll get into it. Okay, well, the short story is, and Jeff made a little distinction about real time just a minute ago. What we do is true real time, live. Our applications are all about where a customer has to determine in the moment what's going on and then be able to take action on it. So it isn't, the speed at which we do processing is just means to an end. And so our applications, we started with a problem that was incredibly time critical based on multiple sensors, and we didn't have a way to solve that problem until about four or five years ago when we came across IBM InfoSphere Streams. So it's a streaming technology, there are other streaming technologies out there, but what's unique about it is it was designed and it's exceptional for not just streaming data, but massive amounts of big unstructured data. So what we're able to do in that is take, just as a real quick example, cyber and a video and let's say social media, but let's say there was some application where those three particular things are available but haven't been able to be brought together before. What we can do in that, and what we've already demonstrated to our customers is on the fly, continuously taking those three different sensors, if you will, analyzing them and then acting on that information in a continuous moment. So what we're not doing is we're not persisting to a database, what we're doing is the data never stops. We actually are analyzing it and acting on it on the fly. In real time. In real time, true real time. So take us through some examples of how customers are using this. Well, we're a startup, so we're early. Most of our focus has been on the, what's called the intelligence community, the IC, and the Department of Defense where, if one was to go Google their sensor problems, they're literally drowning in information and they can't get to the information fast enough. It's just all sort of dropping off the table, if you will, given their traditional ways to analyze it. And so what they need is a way to achieve time critical insight into the information and then be able to act on that. Not everything, but there are certainly times whether it be in cyber warfare or whether it be in protection of critical assets or something tactical in the field. Picture a cobble or someplace like that where you'd want to be able to know if you're the guy on the ground, CL Team Six, let's just make this fun. And you were doing something where you wanted to know you've got the best available information and the insight from that information before you bang the door down. Okay, so you essentially have a software platform, a software application, how would you describe it? What we do is we're building on InfoSphere Streams. So InfoSphere Streams is a fabric that allows us to then build on top. We develop our own environment on top of InfoSphere Streams and then we develop our analytics, either proprietary analytics or we take analytics that are already out there but that are developed for the serial world and then we adapt them into our environment and tailor those to the applications. And what's the business model? Is it, you sell it as a service? Well, right now, eventually what we want to do is get to selling it as a service. I mean, there's some technical reasons why today where we could sell it as a service but it basically, it's off a cluster as opposed to a cloud-based kind of a service but as a technology, both the streaming technology evolves and our ability to adapt our analytics to it, we would see, let's say maybe three to five years from now, analytics as a service being what we're doing. So if I understood correctly, you're not storing the data. We don't store it. Now, to your point about working with integrators, certainly, I want to put in a plug for Netiza. I can see why Rob Thomas thought was impressed with the team. We've done some early work with Netiza and they're incredible people. We love their team and we love their technology but so for example, we could be working with a Netiza device where because we don't stop the data but we might want to do some deeper analytics to inform us, let's say five minutes from now, about something that we need to look at. We can modify our models on the fly based on Netiza or a green plumber, some other device informing us. So there's a go-between between the two of us which would be similar to, we could talk to Vivizimo, we could talk to Palantir or traditional database kinds of resources. So we're not only taking live data but we're taking all data as if it was live. Interesting, so the way I kind of envision the scenario is as the data comes in, kind of that streaming component is kind of the entry way and that data kind of flows into another, either a database like a Netiza or maybe a Hadoop or whatever it might be for either deep analytics or more SQL type analytics. And then as you mentioned, you can feed that back into the streaming system to take advantage of what you've learned over the long term and incorporate that with kind of the in-the-moment analytics. Right, and I think of this very crudely as the canary in the coal mine. I mean, there are clearly applications today where you need to know as fast as you possibly can. But we've also talked to people that are in industrial control systems. So picture a power turbine, a major industrial-sized power turbine where if you could manage all the different sensors that are on that more precisely than you can now, truly in millisecond time based on looking at 400 sensors, all in the moment to say, one sensor would have said speed up, but really what you need to do is slow down just to make it real simple. If they could shave maybe a half a percent to a percent more in the efficiency of that turbine, the investment pays for itself almost immediately. So we see a number of different applications but it's such a different way about thinking how to actually use data. To me, it's actually more obvious what data is worth if you're using it real time. But what we're used to, what the world's used to is putting it into a database and then somebody has to ask the question and then was that the right question? What we're doing is really asking the question, we're never not asking the question. We're asking it all the time and then adjusting the question on the fly as well. So yeah, and a lot of that was due to technical limitations that certainly weren't just wasn't possible until recently. But I want to talk a little bit about kind of the sensors themselves. We heard about 10 years ago RFID kind of hit the scene, got a lot of press. It was kind of going to be the new thing. And then we kind of died down and now we're kind of back to the internet of things and things being censored. Where are we, you've got your feet on the ground in this space in terms of connecting all our devices. I mean, where are we in terms of is the average industrial component censored at this point? Is the average consumer products censored at this point? Where are we in terms of actually getting those physical sensors there so that we can actually grab data from them? Yeah, well realistically, there's a continuum. I mean, there's people on the cutting edge and I was at a breakfast here with IBM the other day and one of the IBM champions who does a lot of consulting, the Fortune 500 company said, she has Fortune 500 companies that are still doing a lot with paper. So even in those kinds of companies, they're not the internet of things yet. But in general, whatever, how many, eight billion cell phones or something like that or smart phones and where all that's going. In our early applications, where we're going is where the sensors are already there, clearly already there. It might be in the military, it might be in the Department of Defense, it might, you know, satellite imagery, full motion video, you know, what the military and the commercial world has really come to like in the last 10 years. I mean, you know, we're on YouTube is video, more and more and more and more videos. So the military is using it a lot, businesses are using it more and more. I was talking to you off air about a company, a commercial company that's using facial recognition kinds of technology to recognize their shelf space and what's on the shelf is placed properly or not. So to us that facial recognition input is a sensor. You're global positioning us, the three being right here and that we're static for a certain amount of time and being able to monitor what's going out on the air or whatever would be a couple of different sensors. We also monitor cyber. So for example, this isn't speaking to the broad market but you could picture something like a Stuxnet in a broader sense where someone is trying to attack a facility, but nowadays it isn't a single vector kind of an attack, it would be cyber from multiple different angles if you will and physical from multiple different angles and all of those things are likely in an industrial setting to have some kinds of sensors on them. It might be a fence, it might be video systems, it might be how your system is operating and you take all that and you put it together, it's going to tell you something that you wouldn't otherwise know and in some applications that's critical to know and some it isn't. Whether we could help Nordstrom or Target help somebody buy something more quickly, I think we could, but whether that's worth all, the ROI probably isn't there yet. So your focus today is really on solving those hard problems that are related to potentially national security and other factors. Talk about what your clients and how you envision your clients accommodating this new capability because you started off this segment saying your customers have all this data that they're ingesting and they have no way to really process it. So how are they changing their processes to be able to manage all this or actually get outcomes, describe the outcomes that they're getting and how are they changing their processes in order to be able to exploit the capability. And I wouldn't want to overstate how we're driving customers to change processes just yet. We really, how do you envision it? We pivoted this, yes. So how we envision it is our customers, particularly in the Department of Defense, the intelligence community already have a very serially oriented workflow and that workflow moves from sensor input and it might be multiple sensors. They call it intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance but the analogy to what happens in the commercial world I think is exactly the same in BI where what they're doing is they're serially processing based on some sort of data-driven, whether it's a machine-driven or person-driven decision to sort of do 80, 20, what's important, what's not important. And that's what's breaking down right now is there's so much data coming through they're not able to figure out, gee what did I just miss? Someone yesterday here at the show was talking to me about a subway overseas where someone recently committed suicide in the subway and the subway system like New York, London, Singapore, where else has somebody or four or five guys in a room looking at 30 or 40 different monitors trying to keep up with what's going on. That just doesn't work and so now there's, he was telling me a backlash in this particular city where they've got this video over and over and over again of somebody committing suicide despite all this technology not being able to get the information about what was about to happen and perhaps say this man's been loitering there or he's doing something unusual, why don't we have someone go over and take his arm or ask him if he needs some help or something like that. Not I don't know if that's exactly the right application but there are workflow, my point is there are workflows already out there and what we picture is plugging into those workflows not telling them blow your workflow up. Really, again in the Natisa example of the Vivizamo plugging into an approach that's already there but making that approach much better. So that's a huge advantage obviously for your business because otherwise you're going to delay the adoption. Eventually this is going to change the world but we got to take baby steps. Talk about the company bill. You mentioned your startup, can you talk about where you're at, funding, things of that nature? Sure, we raised, thank you. We raised a seed round last year led by Flywheel Ventures and True Ventures. True Ventures and Flywheel both very excited about big data and saw the opportunity with what we were doing with this stream's fabric and the analytics to really be the old thing about catching the wave. So we think we're right there and really excited about it and we'll probably be going out in about 12 months for our A round. For an A round. For an A round. So we were seed stage. Seed stage. Can you talk about how much you raised? A couple million. Okay, so sizable seed round. Yeah, seed round and we got traction with several customers. Our initial customer we delivered a system to in January. Pilot system and we have a follow on with them that's a significant development for the next year. And then we're also talking to two or three other government customers and a couple of commercial applications. So we hope to see several more orders in the next two or three months that would help lay the groundwork for the A round. So what's the 100 day plan? What's the big milestones to get ready for that A round? What are you really focused on? I'm hopping on a plane tonight to go to Washington DC and it's not a 100 day plan. It's a two or three week plan. It's a 100 hour plan. Yeah, now we've got several things teed up where just like in the commercial world, there's no problem getting meetings with people to talk about big data. So we're talking to all the name brand intelligence community agencies. And again, we're not selling to all of them but we're talking to all of them because they all have their verticals. I mean, we probably think of the U.S. government as this monolith but what the FBI needs versus what the CIA needs versus what the National Reconnaissance needs are all completely different. They're all similar workflows but different. And so with one, what we're focused on is live, what we're doing with them is live feature extraction from full motion video on the fly. So picture of the video is always coming with multiple channels, let's say 32 channels of full motion video and what we're going to develop for them and the analytics is to be able to pull out particular features that they want to see as the video is flowing by. Certainly we see down the road lots of commercial applications for that but right now this is a workflow for them that's just bottlenecked. Is there, we had Jeff Jonas on yesterday he was talking about geospatial. Is there a play for that in what you guys are doing? Yeah, we actually, we under emphasize that the geospatial part ties into all we do. Our company actually has a very, very strong GIS background and we see the play, not the play but the need for geospatial because you gotta, you can't just analyze the information, you gotta act on the information. If you don't know where the information is you're both in cyber, there's actually kind of some neat things about cybergeo where things are in cyberspace but certainly in the world we all get right here what underlies almost everything we do is the geocomponent which also is what we're doing in real time. Live real, true real time. How much discussion, engineering thought do you guys give to privacy in that context given that geo is so fundamental to what you do? We haven't given it much thought yet particularly because we're plugging in the workflows that are already there. I mean there are bigger issues like what's going on in the Senate and the House of Cyber and policy issues and all that. We're a startup, we're focused on the initial applications and not getting, I don't want to say we're self-insuring but I think a lot of that's going to work out and particularly for the applications we're in now privacy isn't the issue. It's really, if you will, proprietary sensors that the customer owns. Well I think that's certainly going to be an issue going down the line. I think another issue when it comes to the type of streaming real time analytics we're talking about is it's one thing to for the system to tell you okay something has occurred and another thing to be able to respond. Oh sure. To actually take that action. A, know what it is and B, being able to actually execute. Sure. So you're still early days and it sounds like the clients you're working with have a very specific use case. But how do you envision helping clients in the future actually when you start maybe perhaps working with retail customers or others who this is kind of a new type of thought process for them. How do you envision kind of helping them not just transform their data analytics but actual culture to take advantage of real time streaming analytics and not just say well there goes a, we just saw a really important event just happened. Okay what do we do? We don't know the time has passed. Part of it is I'm not sure how this is all going to evolve. I think the world needs to get more, I mean there's an awful lot of us here that are drinking the Kool-Aid saying analytics is the answer. There's an awful lot of folks that don't trust analytics yet. And so part of our business strategy early on is both to use analytics that are already available that our customers are already using and David mentioned the Navy. You know we'd worked closely with the Navy for several years taking technology, both technology and algorithms that the Navy had and then adapting those into this stream highly parallel application environment that we're operating in. And so to go back to that same customer and say look we're not trying to change everything you do, what we're doing is taking what you already do and do it better. You already trust your analytics. Let's work through how we've now made those analytics better. And so I think that's a much better way to approach it rather than trying to blow into the room if you will and say analytics is the answer to somebody who didn't know they had a problem. And so I think the world's got to get more comfortable and also understand in a lot of our applications there's a trade off with false positives and all that sort of stuff. We're not making the decision, it's the customer making the decision on are we in full auto if you will. If it's a cyber attack, there isn't time to have a person in the loop so that might be full auto for example. There might be other things where what we're also working on is the visualization and the display portion of all of this because if you can't communicate it then the information if you will is kind of trapped somewhere and it's falling off the table for another reason. And so I think there's going to be an evolution and I hope our strategy of working with customers that are already having a big problem is a time critical problem and are already somewhat at least predisposed to doing analytics on that data anyway. I mean most of our customers are some of the very early, some of the first big data customers in the world. And so getting run out with them I think is a pretty good test but also as they ring it out there'll be other folks that'll kind of see it working and be a little more, you know, the classic more crossing the chasm and all that kind of stuff. So did I understand you correctly Bill? You're saying you're not spending a lot of time worrying about false positives, that's you. No, no, no, I'm saying from a technology standpoint yeah we're not worrying about that. It's really for example, we might be solving problems, we are solving problems with streams in our analytics today that literally could not be solved a year ago. And in being able to solve those it may be that we'll come up with what's they call it a figure of merit or a confidence factor to the decision maker that would say you now have a 50 or 60% confidence based on analytics that this is what's happening. What we're, in most cases or in some cases we're not going to say it's 100% because it's based on analytics. Now it's really fast and it's incredible analytics across multiple sensor streams but in a sense it's still a judgment call. And what we're trying to do is provide data and inform the decision maker and allow them to act on that however their policy describes doing it. But the capability is there to be full auto. One of the things we can do in streams and we've done and demonstrated is let's say just to make up some example you've got five different sensors available right now and there's a couple more sort of in the closet that are really expensive but you can't use those unless you have higher justification. What you can do in streaming with our analytics is you can not just do the analytics but then you can gain insight let's say in a few seconds and then based on that insight turn on those three other sensors and then bring those into the party and then raise your confidence factor based on the analytics maybe to 80% just to make up some numbers. But what we're able to do in the fabric is not just the analytics but actually take action such as turning on a video, analyzing that video then based on the video turning on some other sensor input and so you're processing and acting on all the information as it's streaming through. Can you, my last question is the data sources. Where are they coming from? How do you see them changing over time and what does that mean to you and your customers? Well the obvious thing seems to be it's all essentially some dates all going to be unstructured. I mean the numbers just are all going that way and the reason we picked InfoSphere Streams is because it was tailored, it was developed for the US government several years ago specifically to handle unstructured data and so it really doesn't run out of gas. So it could be text, could be video, could be satellite imagery, could be social media and we've demonstrated all those different kinds of applications. It could be binary up through the packets for cyber. So we're able to handle all that kind of data and so we're pretty agnostic. We're not too worried about where the world's going from a data structure standpoint because we think we've got a fabric that allows us to be able to operate on all of it. Which is a pretty incredible, yeah I mean to what you're talking about before I think IBM's done an incredible job building a great portfolio but what I keep harping on to Rob Thomas and these other guys is Streams is home built and Streams is the most incredible InfoSphere Streams has put in a plug for IBM. You know we've looked a little bit at TwitterStorm and Yahoo S4 and there's some high performance computing streaming platforms out there as well but there's still more research oriented. InfoSphere Streams is, they're announcing their 3.0 release version of it. It's prime time, it's what you'd expect if you were a business using it and what it can do is just incredible and it was developed by IBM. Well let's not forget IBM does more R&D than any company in the industry and you write on, I mean a lot of innovation actually comes out of IBM and in fact Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has made that point many times that he does worry about IBM because they do so much R&D so that was his way of backhanded slap at HP of course but it's true, IBM is renowned for its emphasis on R&D. All right Bill Hartman, Tara Eccles thanks very much for coming on theCUBE really great story, good luck with the company and the next round and good luck with your trip to Washington this week. Thanks Dan, call ahead. Keep it right here, we'll be right back live from Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas this is theCUBE, SiliconANGLE's coverage of IBM's IOD conference, keep it right there.


So Fuzz and I are in the studio today. I'm getting cat hair all in my painting. I said, okay, I don't mind. And we're asking a really important question. How do I know if my art's any good? Art's one of those things. It's not necessarily right or wrong or black and white. It's kind of hard to tell sometimes whether or not you're making art that people are gonna find good. So in this video, I'm gonna offer you five criteria so you can base for yourself whether or not you think your art's any good. So before we get started, let's play a guessing game. Here I'm showing you three different paintings, each done by three different artists. One of them is worth a lot of money and done by a famous artist. Another one is done by a four-year-old and the third one is done by a gorilla. So which one is which? Piece one, piece two, piece three. I'm gonna tell you at the end of this video. Now, in the process of this conversation, I'm gonna be making my own piece of art. And you can let me know in the comments if you think that my art isn't any good. So the first criteria is, is your art original? You can make the argument that no art is ever original because art is always influenced by something that came before it, but there is something to be said about art that is proprietary. It's different from something that comes before it in some sort of way. It's got a twist to it. So if you are, for example, just emulating another artist's work, that can be beneficial in that it will help you to see what it takes to get those techniques down and to create a specific look, but eventually you wanna move beyond that because if all you ever do is copy somebody, then you're a copycat. There's no value in copying someone else because they're reaping the rewards of the value because it was their original art.  Now, if you actually create something that is really, really truly original and really out there, you may have some people actually hate it at first. Like Einstein said, if at first an idea is not absurd, there's no hope for it. And everything that's new kind of looks weird at first. Take, for example, Manet's Dejeuner Serlerbe. That painting was absolutely hated when it came out in 1863. It was refused by the Paris Salon. It was refused by the Salon de Refusé and there was all kinds of controversy about that piece. Of course, now it's a celebrated piece in the Musée d'Orsay in Paris. And I don't know how much money it must be worth by now. The same goes for Jackson Pollock with his poor splatter drip technique. Back in the 40s, when he was doing it, nobody had ever done that before. It looked completely weird. It looked kind of amateur, to be honest. And in 1949, his piece number five from 1948 sold for $1,500. It was the only piece that he sold. And people thought that that person who bought it was kind of crazy for wasting their money. Well, fast forward to 2006, and that piece by Pollock sold for a whopping $140 million, which was the highest amount that any art piece had ever fetched in history. So just because you make art that is so original that people don't necessarily appreciate it now, doesn't mean that it won't be appreciated later once people come around to see your point of view. Okay, number two. Does the artwork incorporate the principles of design? So the principles of design are things like balance, emphasis, movement, repetition, unity, contrast, and proportion. They're the ways that you use line, shape, color to create appeal. And chances are, if you've made art that you think looks good, you've probably used the principles of design without even realizing it. And people who have sort of an innate sense of artistry use these things just because it feels natural to place things where you place them because they look good that way. If something doesn't follow the principles of design, it has like an off-kilter randomness to it. The composition, you can tell there's something not quite right about it.  So if you wanna get better at the principles of design, you can just look at examples, like really explicit examples of where people have done a really good job with, let's say, repetition or contrast or unity, and look at what they've done and try to replicate some of those techniques. So how do the principles of design relate back to whether art is any good? Basically, the principles of design bring order to your composition. And that sense of orderliness is generally appealing to the eye. So number three, do the materials that you've used have integrity? Are they good quality products?  Same kind of idea here. If you're using good quality paints and other things, then you're probably going to come out with a product that actually looks a lot nicer. The money that you put into your materials really does have an effect with the overall outcome, at least in my opinion. So today I am using gold and acrylic paints. I'm working on a nice wooden panel from a company called Apple On God Trek. And it's very, very sturdy. I'm using some really nice brushes, which I do spend a lot of money on my brushes because I just find that they break down really easily if I don't put enough money into my brushes.  And when I'm all done with this piece, I'm gonna be coating it in a product called Art Resin. It's an epoxy resin that makes everything look really shiny. It's kind of like clear nail polish for your artwork. And I'm using that brand because that is the epoxy resin that was basically designed for artwork. Poxy resins tend to yellow, actually some of them really badly over time. And so Art Resin is the one that has been tested to show the least amount of yellowing over time. So if you don't use good quality products to begin with, your artist won't last. So it's important to think about. Even really good quality art products will break down over time. If you've ever been to an art museum and you've looked at oil paintings from like 100 years ago, you'll see that they have little cracks in it.  But pieces that we really wanna stay around for a long time because it has inherent cultural and educational value, like the Mona Lisa, for example, conservators will actually go in and restore the painting. Like in 1809, Mona Lisa had its entire top coat of paint stripped right off of it because it was aging and it was showing age. It was looking more amber-y than it was probably intended to. So conservators have a role in going in restoring art. But I think ultimately like, what's the point of making good art if it's not going to be around for a while for people to enjoy? So if you start with good materials, then you're giving your art the best chance to have a really long life, good longevity. Number four, does the art have a message or is there a point that's trying to be made through this piece of art? Now this one is not really a necessity. It's not like art that doesn't have a message is no good at all. I'm not saying that. But art is one of these things that is really subjective. And so sometimes if there's a bit of a narrative that can be wrapped around this piece of art, it helps people to understand it better. And in turn, it helps people to attribute value to the piece. So when I say narrative, this could be in a bunch of different ways. There could be a narrative with respect to how the piece is actually made, the process of building this piece of art. There could be a narrative surrounding the artist themselves, which is like how you brand yourself as an artist. If you have a story to tell, like you're like a regs to riches type artist and now you've hit the big time. Well, people are going to appreciate that story and think of that story when they look at your piece of art. And in turn, they may just like your piece of art better. And then there's also the narrative surrounding what the art focuses on. So for example, art that is a little more conceptual, art that wants to speak to some psychological, sociological, ideological message. All of that context can add value to art. But again, it's not to say that if you don't have a point to your art that it can't be good. Lots of times art can stand on its own just because it's really strong with those principles of design that we talked about. Sometimes the message that an artwork communicates isn't even a nice one. Sometimes it can be rather nasty, but art exists for all these different purposes. So for example, 1917, Marcelle Duchamp exhibited a urinal which he signed his name to, signed add name on his name and put it in an exhibition. And that was a straight up comment on the state of the modern world at the time.  This is at a time of World War I when the world was sort of upside down. And so his art was very much in context of the time and it was making a comment on the state of affairs at the time. So by putting a urinal in an exhibition it was almost to say art is art and that was their slogan, kunst ich scheiße. So in that case, the message wasn't glamorous, not at all and it wasn't beautiful but it was still a compelling message. And I think sometimes compelling is a good metric or having art that is interesting one way or another is a good metric to go by. Now we can contrast that with an artist, a contemporary artist like Mike Hammer for example who fully admits he has no point to his art in the sense that there's no political comment, there's no sociological intent or anything like that. His art is blobs of paint stacked upon blobs of paint that are there for purely aesthetic value and he makes no problems about that. It stands on its own merit based on the principles of design and it's still, in my opinion, it still is good art. So just to underscore that point again you don't have to align your art with a message or a narrative but sometimes it can help others to perceive your art as being good. Finally, style. Style is something that is really a matter of taste. It's not like one style is necessarily better than another. It's not like we have a hierarchy of styles but style is something that you should commit to one way or another and that's up to you as the artist. So if you are painting figures and your figures happen to look kind of rough and ragged it's not to say that those figures are worse or not as good as someone who can paint figures in high realism. It's just they're stylized differently. So whereas in high realism the criteria for excellence is a real close likeness that is not what you're looking for as a criteria of excellence when it comes to a different style like abstraction. In abstraction you're going for something completely opposite something that has no likeness at all something completely non-representational. So whatever the style is that you're going for I would suggest just committing to it one way or another and whatever that is is what it is it comes down to taste and opinion from there. So there you have it those are my five criteria for judging whether or not your art is any good. I think that you could tick off a few of these boxes you don't have to tick off all five boxes to consider your art any good but that's just it artists objective. There's no hard and fast rules here and you might have your own criteria. If so I would love to hear it. Oh and before I forget I have to reveal which of the pieces belongs to which artist? So which piece belongs to a famous artist? Which piece belongs to the gorilla and which piece belongs to the four year old? Well, number one is the four year old. Number two is the gorilla and number three is the famous artist Carl Apple. Now you might have your own opinions after this whole video about which piece is better or which piece should be more valuable or what have you but I think ultimately now that I think about it I think art is just good if it makes you feel good. So if it makes you feel good then I must pick an art, right? So comment, subscribe, stay happy and be creative and I'll see you next time.


Welcome to Toffy TV. It's a manager update. This might be our last, maybe our last manager update before something is confirmed. Talk about the manager who is the manager. That's what I'm saying. This might be our last, like, speculation. Oh, okay. Kind of... I mean, let's be honest, it's down to one now, isn't it? I mean... For all we know, it was always down to one because everyone put a statement out last night basically saying, no one has dropped out the race and we haven't offered it to anyone. So that basically suggests that people like... Vita Perair. Perair, and people like that, and anyone else who'd been in the... They just played the owl. Oh, these want me. Well, they did something. Contract. That was sort of speculated at the time. But I think... A lot of people said, why did they put that statement out? No, they didn't have to put that statement out. But I almost took that as... We've only been after one fella. So forget all these other people. Forget anyone saying that they've rejected us or whatever. We've only ever been after one guy. But we haven't offered them the job yet. But it does seem like now, with various sources. Some in Italy, some in England. Saying that. Carlo Anceletti will be the next Everton manager. With Sky Sports going as far as saying, and I'm just saying this is Sky Sports, that he will take over for the boxing day game. And that his son will be one of the assistants. Duncan will be one of the assistants.  So if that is the case, what are your thoughts? O'ch labd y Duncan will be one of the assistants. Because I think what we've seen with Duncan is his ability to motivate. There's been a whole atmosphere change at the club since he took over, I would say. Certainly from a fan perspective. I don't know what it's like. Behind the scenes, but the players have certainly seen to abort in it. Given the two performances he put in for him since he's been in charge. I think Sunday's performance against United was arguably better than the Chelsea one. Due to the amount of changes we had to make and who we had in the field. Chelsea was great in the one the game and all that, but what I mean is what he had to pick where it was, the four neighbouring. I think to get that kind of performance out of a team shows his ability tactically and motivationally. So I think it's key that he's part of this. Carlo Ancelotti's got one of the best CVs around. Three Champions League wins. He's won a league in England, he's won it in Spain, he's won it in France, he's won it in Italy. So top, or Germany rather. So top, top leagues that he's had success in, didn't win in Spain, didn't win in Germany and Italy. So big wins in countries, managed a lot of the world top clubs. Players. The only, and the players are big egos and you know, top of the game. The only kind of worry I have is that, quite clearly on his way down, Napoli was a step down from buying Everton. People will say he's a step down from Napoli, they're in the Champions League. So there's a little bit of a worry there with him being 60. But one of the things that kind of smoothed it over for me was if Duncan was with him. Because I think as far as my mind is Duncan will now be getting groomed for the manager after Ancelotti going into Bramley Mordoch. In your mind. That hasn't, yeah, no one's come out and said that, but that's how I see it. Because I think he's in that almost. He'd be laying it from another top fella. Top manager. That's kind of where I am with it in my mind. So that to me then is a better fit than just another manager coming in with all the talking stuff. I'm in a similar position, I honestly can't sit here and say I am like, oh, this is going to be the best thing ever. I honestly can't say that. And I don't know whether that is because we've got another manager and it's another thing again. And I don't want to get ahead of myself. So I'm sort of keeping myself level. I'm not saying I don't want them. I'm definitely not saying I don't want them. I'm just keeping myself level into a point where we'll see where it goes. He's a manager who's never managed from this position I don't think before. We'll see me in his, you know, since his early days. But if he's a top manager, he can turn that round really, really quickly. I think that's what the club are looking at. I think this can be turned round really, really quickly. I don't know whether that was always the objective to go and get him. Or Duncan has shown that this it can be turned around if you instill something into the players. Because obviously the abrumers were early on that we were going to go and try and look for someone until the end of the season. No, that was part of the thing. If he's a good manager, he should be able to instill that into play straight away and get a level of organisation. He's Italian. Italian football, from what I can see, is all about organisation. It's all about getting your defence. I mean, listen, Italy is the number one country in the world for defenders. Simple as that. They're defenders, treat defenders. It's an art. So, from that point of view, I'm sure you'll get that, right? It's in the second with Napoli last time. Napoli is a good side. There's been question marks in the last few years about some of the things Bayern Munich played saying about his coaching and all that kind of thing. Listen, I don't know because I wasn't there. So all we can know for is that he comes in and he's got high standards for the players, and those high standards continue. We don't want it to be a case of, well, it's evident, so it's got to be high standards. And he installs that, and the players who are at the club will be thinking, hopefully we'll be thinking, can't I have a mentality? Big name, managing some of the biggest players and biggest clubs in the world, and hopefully they respond, and hopefully, if it does happen that results, go the way we want them to go. He's been in the Premier League before with Chelsea, won the league, got sacked for coming second, I think, won the FA Cup. So knows what it's all about, and I think this is the appointment that Michelio always wanted to make, but there was never quite the person out there the right time, the right place. For him, he obviously thinks Angelotti's the right man, and he's the right time. Anything we'll have to wait and see? Yeah, I'm like you, but it's not one that I'm kind of buying all into, you know what I mean, because I think what you've said before, we've had a lot of managers recently, and everyone that doesn't work makes you more sceptical about the next one, and that's it. It's like, I can't sit here and go, oh everything's going to be perfect now because we don't know. But saying that, the caveat to that is, there's nobody out there that I look at and go, who we could get and go, he will turn us round, no problem. But with Duncan there as well, I think it might be a good fit. Hopefully, yeah. So after two of these allowed to coach, we've proven himself in the last couple of games, I think Angelotti will. This has been on the cards for a few weeks this, it's been muted three weeks ago, and he's still managing Napoli. So if that's the case, then he will have had his eye on everything, and he will have seen probably the impact Duncan Ferguson's had in the last couple of games. Well, he talked Ray Wilkins, he got Ray Wilkins in the HLC, and obviously he's had Paul Clements with him at different places as well. So it's not a case of it, a closed shop, and he just has his people around him. He obviously respects the idea of having people who understand the football club around them and uses them as you would, as you should do. I think we've mentioned this loads of times, that's where I think Michael Silver, we think fell down because he did have a closed shop that maybe pushed Duncan to a side, where he should have really been helping him. I mean listen, the one I wanted was Benitez when we faced, and I wasn't really looking at Carlo Ancelotti probably because he was in the job. And really if you think about it, Carlo Ancelotti's track record in terms of winning things is much better, but in terms of where they are right now, they're probably sort of similar. You know, that sounds stupid, but this is, Benitez is when we manage Newcastle, so Ancelotti's coming towards, not saying where Newcastle, but you know what I mean, it's like the only thing, the reason I thought Benitez was a good fit at the time was because he had managed Newcastle and he had sort of experienced a club away from the higher echelons of the game in European football. But I suppose in terms of at the other end of things, they've got similar experiences and Ancelotti's done more and won more. So I suppose on that point, I should sort of be happy with it because it sort of does tick the bot. Has anyone 17 trophies or something? Yeah, he's won a lot of stuff. Listen, he's a successful manager. Like I said before, he's manager at Elmadrid, Napoli, Paris Saint-Germain, Juventus, Milan. You know, big, big, big clubs in Welsh football with all the top names. He's beat Liverpool quite a few times even recently. He's played Liverpool four times in the last two seasons and he's beat them twice in a row. In fact, the only team to beat Liverpool so far this season. So, you know, he's got there, and it's nice, it's nice for him. But we've got one of them coming soon. Exactly. Listen, it's like I said before, it's difficult to know exactly what happened to me. Duncan's shown us what we crave as fan and stack connection with the team and that connection and bringing it together. And if Anciolotti is smart and I think he probably is because he's been to a lot of clubs, he will buy into that with Duncan Ferguson and he'll say that you're the connection, the fans love you, the players are sponsor you. And if you could ideally get Duncan's motivation and threatening looks and Anciolotti's careful planning, you might have a man. You might have the man at the top and he's all started and comes down and he's going to be like the over figure and it all works through, his assistant and everything else and the coaching staff. We'll have to wait and see. Listen, it's not been confirmed yet. So we're just going to take it as... One thing I would say is if you're an Everton player though you can't say to him, show me your trophy. Exactly. Straight away there's a respect and from the outside world look at his clubs and then go up Everton the next one on the list. The one thing that would completely smooth it over for me would be to bring one of his old players to Everton. Like who? Of course it would but that's you'd allow bloody Alan Party to be brought to London. He is actually. So go and get Slatan, you're adding my PSG.  I think the thing is like I said it's one of them it puts Everton... people will sit up a little bit probably in tight notice. It's probably what Mr Sheary wanted. Brands I believe has given the full approval to that and he's worked with people like Louis Mandel when he was getting on. I think what it should do ideally is it should allow brands now to get on with his job because Nancy Lottie's managed some big clubs. You said they're off here before but they're off the training ground. This fella he's just... he'll have had demands on him. Everton think they're needy Napoli fans and... And he's had win ratios that Bayamunich and Railman did of 75% I think the last time he fell under 50% was a win ratio with that Parmig I think. Everything was a Parmig was the second club. So it was really on but because of who he is people will look at him and go with his name and that should allow Marcel Brand to carry on what he started last summer. So theoretically we still should be trying to buy a similar kind of player as what we wanted to grow and then maybe anti Lottie will say yeah but let's get it. He'll understand the standard of a player now because if he's worked with the very best he'll understand the standard what it requires to be a top player. But waiting to see what happens obviously Duncan's in charge for the game against Leicester and possibly Arsenal and then maybe maybe anti Lottie be in the stands on Saturday maybe he's going to have a few days away I don't know. Well the latest reports are he's going to Napoli to sign off on the thing and then he's a parent and then apparently according to the latest reports he'll put Pennsylvania. He's got a holiday home I believe in Vancouver and he was supposed to go there and that's why a lot of people will say it's not going to happen. He's willing to have a break but I don't know if he's here. Offered a deal he couldn't refuse. According to all reports he could not refuse. He's going to be managing on Thursday or Friday he'll be confirmed so and then that kind of fits in that Duncan would take the team anyway Saturday and he'd be a kick-up for the atmosphere as well if he wasn't on Saturday but if he introduced anti Lottie before and Duncan's taking it. That's the sheet. Lockwell Saturday then? It's about winning the game so that's the most important thing. Let us know in your thoughts if you want Karl on Shalottie if you don't tell us why if you do tell us why there's obviously very good reasons why you want to but if you don't let us know he's like this now or do you think that he's got that much experience as a manager that can only benefit Everton Football Club? Let us know your thoughts in the comments. If you haven't already subscribed please do. Click the bell for a letter you know exactly when Karl on Shalottie becomes the Everton manager. If he does become the Everton manager I'm sure we'll be going live not long after that. And if you want more great videos like the live video we're about to do tune us over on Patreon for more great videos. Thank you.


Roman engineers have been attributed and indeed claimed many ruins as their own in which they were simply incapable of creating. Yet they seemingly hijacked a number of sites which we have continued to claim were not their works. The Patera Pipes being one such example. Yet alas, although we claimed that the ruin was pre-Roman, our next subject of interest we feel unarguably supports said posit as not only was the creation claimed as having been conceived by the Romans, but these sites, often the only surviving example, thus is also often argued as the first creation in regards to said concept. Yet although these are often claimed as first attempts, many of the ruins were of such perfected accuracy that not only are they still functional today, but could still serve modern man's purpose. The Patera aqueduct system, which in fact includes several examples of this ingenious solution to hilly areas in regards to water transportation, places in which the topography of the land makes bridge building an impossible task, forcing the engineers to think of a solution. With the sighting question being such an innovation, now known as an inverted siphon, the one we are focusing on tonight is Delic Kemmer near Patera, undoubtedly connected to the incredible ancient relic that is the Patera Pipes, an inverted siphon being a pressurized water conduit. One end sits at a higher elevation than the other, with the center of the structure being the lowest point. The Delic Kemmer Siphon, which was apparently renovated following an earthquake in the first century CE, is built out of stone blocks laid across the top of an impressive several hundred foot long wall. Piping holes were then artistically carved out of blocks of stone, which were fitted into each other and ten apparently sealed to create a watertight channel. Thus due to the system being closed off and pressurized, when water flowed into the higher end it was forced through the system and subsequently across the valley. The inverted siphon allowed the aqueduct to cross lower elevations, forcing the flow against gravity at certain points. Yet the most compelling detail of the site, and the one we perceive as a smoking gun supporting our prior posit, and confirming that this was in fact the work of a past highly advanced yet now lost civilization, is the polygonal stonework which can be found within the walls of the structure. A type of blockwork construction found all over the world yet denied as being connected, just like that of the Neolithic ruins we often share here on the channel, that regardless of the similarities and ruins throughout nearly every continent are actively denied as having once been the work of the same group. Kate Clow, an explorer behind popularization of Turkey's Lycian Way hiking trail, described the blocks in a Turkish newspaper title, Hurry It Daily News quote, The system was designed for easy maintenance. If you examine the fallen blocks you will find occasional ones with top holes bored into them. These were for cleaning out deposits and must have been sealed with a plug when the pipe was filled with water. There were also occasional stones where the socket cutout was extended so that a stone could be slipped out of the pipeline.  The pipe joints have traces of a lime cement used initially to seal them, however the whole pipe is now thickly lined with a deposit of pink lime from the water inside it and this must have quickly sealed any remaining leaks between the stones, end quote. Who built the reverse siphon and the entire aqueduct as a whole? It is a place which we find highly compelling. Thanks for watching guys and until next time, take care.


Let's get started. Hi, I'm Robert Foss. I work for Collabra, as you may have guessed. And my name is actually Foss. It's not some sort of an alias. It's my mother's name as well. And she does not do any kind of software, really. So working for Collabra means that I work on open source for a living. I mostly do Linux graphics work. And this is what we're going to talk about today, the embedded GPU ecosystem and how it's doing and what's going on. So specifically, we're going to cover the history, what the open source support is for most of the vendors. And we're also going to cover what comes next and the bigger picture of what the industry looks like and how open source drivers seem to come about. So we're not going to talk about the GPU you're making in your garage. We're not going to talk about very old architectures like the Viya Chrome GPU, for example, that Kevin Brace Bravely is working on. And the emphasis is also going to be on the embedded ecosystem, because it's what's interesting to us. So let's start off with the history. This is Intel. They've contributed for a very long time. They've been a very good citizen for a very long time. Their current driver, the i9-15 driver, was first merged in 2004. And they've been very active in supporting it since then. They support OpenGL 4.5, Vulkan 1.1, and all the applicable hardware anyway. So if there's a gold standard, I think Intel is it. There's also MD, which has been around for quite a while in the open source space anyway. And they're also a good citizen. They've contributed a lot, especially recently. But they've been very open towards the community since at least 2009, where they released the documentation for their then-current high-end GPUs. And they also support OpenGL 4.5 and Vulkan 1.1, which almost is as current as it gets. There's OpenGL 4.6, but let's ignore that. No one supports it at the moment, not in the open source space anyway. And then there's NVIDIA, which is very interesting. The Nouveau driver has been around since 2010. So that's a relatively long history. It supports OpenGL 4.5, so it has very good support. But NVIDIA itself has never really backed it. They have on occasion backed it, but not through and through. So they could be a better citizen. I'm saying that. And there are very specific things they could be doing, which would be very simple for them, like releasing the firmware for their GPUs, so that an open source driver could just load it and run it in the same way that the proprietary one does. Something interesting, though, about NVIDIA and their support is the support for their Tegra platforms, which was partly sponsored by an aircraft supplier. So they upstreamed, I think, the initial support for the Tegra platform. And that's something we'll get back to. There's also Qualcomm, which has an even shorter history in the open source space. And as you may be noticing, we're going through this in a sort of vaguely chronological order. And Qualcomm is becoming a rather good citizen in the sense that they're contributing code through the Coderora project. They didn't start the driver. They didn't start the initial development. That was Rob Clark, mostly by himself, I think. And their current driver supports all of their hardware, which is rather good. That's more than we can say for most vendors. And interestingly, there's a fun fact about the Qualcomm Adreno drivers. It was bought by or from AMD. The Qualcomm bought the AMD mobile handset division, 2009, I believe. And Adreno is a wordplay on Radeon. So it's hidden in plain sight, if you will. There's also Broadcom, which has been a very good citizen, but since very recently. They hired Eric Anholt in 2015, I believe, who has since been going on a solo mission to provide very good support for the VC4 platform. And the VC4 platform has very good support now. And there's more newer, higher-end hardware coming along, the VC5, which has partial support. But it's not really even available to the public in DevKits anymore, or already so. We're kind of ahead of us ourselves. There's also Vivante and the Etnaviv driver, which is fairly recent. It's from 2015 in Mesa, or maybe the kernel. The first patches were accepted. Reverse engineering of it has been going on since about 2012. And more recently, in the past few years, reverse engineering and development has been sponsored by another aircraft supplier, which is very interesting. I'm seeing a trend here. Apparently, aircraft suppliers care a lot about open source, which was very surprising to me. And support for their hardware is now very good. They're also coming out with newer fancier hardware, which has initial support. But it seems to be working out quite well, that too. And then there's imagination. Imagination is interesting in that they have some patches and some support floating around for their hardware, for the kernel and for Mesa. But none of these patches are acceptable to the upstream community. And that's mostly due to the fact that their patches are very partial. Like they support a very slim use case, or a slim set of use cases for their hardware. So they can't be accepted due to not offering full broad support. So there's, for example, a kernel driver for the PowerGPUs. And it's unacceptable due to there being no user space, the user of them or it. So Mesa has no support for it. There's also some Mesa patches floating around for it. But it's very limited to non-3D operations. So it's not interesting to the wider public, maybe, in some special use cases. And then there's ARM, which is fully unsupported. They have never contributed anything, as far as I know. And not to the GPUs, anyway. They bet very heavy on OpenCL for their previous generation of GPUs, which is interesting, the Mali TE something-somethings. But they wanted to sell the OpenCL support. So I think that that's descriptive of their perspective on open source. They would like to have their driver be a paid service. So they would like to make some money off of it, which is fair, but not really congruent with the values of the open source community. So with the broad, hand-wavy history out of the way, here's the open source support today, what it looks like. For practical reasons, I'm not going to have a look at anything before 2009. And the practical reasons is that my diagrams would be very wide, and I wouldn't be able to fit stuff in them. That's why. So 10 years is plenty. Let's have a look at NVIDIA first. And this is what the reverse engineering process looked like. This is specifically looking at a reverse engineering tool called NVTools. And around 2010, early 2010, the first support for the current modern-day NVJ GPUs was merged. That's Fermi for, let's see, it's also known as the NVC0. But since then, there's been a steady pace of support added for the NVIDIA GPUs. And the support comes in the form of adding register definitions so that you can see what the proprietary driver is actually doing when it's talking to the GPUs. You can decode it in a reasonable fashion. So about every two years, there seems to be a new GPU added. And let's see. Sorry, that was the wrong way. And this is what the reverse engineering work ends up looking like when it's actually producing a driver. So you can see that there's a little bit of a delay, generally speaking, from the reverse engineering effort. I think that's maybe six months. From the first Fermi support to the later Fermi support in Mesa. And there's also a corresponding graph for the kernel when stuff is merged. But it basically says the same thing, so it's not very interesting. So I just opted for the Mesa one. So Pascal is their latest GPU. So the open-source support goes all the way to current day to whatever you can buy in stores today, which is nice. If we continue with Intel, there's no reverse engineering timeline. Although there has been, I've heard rumors floating around that internally, Intel actually does some reverse engineering. Or the Linux team does some reverse engineering of their Windows driver to get better documentation. So that's kind of interesting, I guess. This timeline is very much cut short. It's of the i9-15 driver. It itself was merged in 2004. So yeah, we're missing a fair bit of time. So in 2004, a company called Dunkstan wrote the initial open-source driver for the i9-15 platform. And since then, Intel has been actively contributing towards it, and still is very much so. So if we look at the Gen10 hardware, that's hardware that isn't even released yet. So when you actually get a hold of that hardware, you'll probably be pretty pleasantly surprised about the level of support. It'll work out of the box, hopefully pretty well. So let's look at AMD. There's no reverse engineering timeline here either. I could probably dig one up. But since their entry into the open-source community with the R600 GPU, they have been providing documentation. So little reverse engineering efforts have been required, or at least fewer than normal, which is very nice. And yeah, it has, I think, helped the community greatly. So this is what their timeline looks like. The R600 around, let's see, 2010 was merged into Mesa. And the Vega 10 is the latest hardware that's available. So it covers basically the entire recent span. Something interesting about AMD specifically is that they have a lot of drivers, like a lot, lot. On the kernel side, they have two drivers. They have the Radeon driver and also the AMD GPU driver. So that's two. On the Mesa side, they have three drivers. They have the R600 for that very early generation of drivers. There's the Radeon. The Radeon driver covers a span from the Evergreen to Southern Islands, I believe. And then there's the Radeon SI, which covers Sea Islands and two today. So that's the stuff that lives in Mesa. But then there's more. Then there's drivers that don't live in Mesa. As specifically, there's the AMD Vulkan driver, which is open source and available to anyone. But it's not really hosted within the normal, like, everyday projects like Mesa. So it's living somewhere else, I think, on GitHub. So if you're interested, you can have a look. And then we have Broadcom, which is interesting. They have no reverse engineering chart, because much of the development has happened in-house by Broadcom, and specifically Eric Anhalt. He's the one guy dev team inside of Broadcom doing all of this stuff. And his work has resulted in very good support for the VC4 platform. So if we have a look at the graph, it's pretty empty. There's not a lot of hardware in there. But the VC4 hardware has been supported for a good while, and it's still being actively developed on. And coming down the pipeline, there's also the VC5. And the VC5 isn't really available quite yet. So it not being totally ready yet doesn't matter. That's fine. If you look at the dev kits you can get a hold of for this stuff, I would recommend maybe a Raspberry Pi 3. They're cheap, fast, available, and would let you try out the VC4 stuff. And then there's the VC5 hardware. There's an SOC number. I don't think it's available anywhere. So who knows? Maybe it'll be in the Raspberry Pi 4. No idea, but maybe. Continuing on, there's Qualcomm. And this is what their reverse engineering chart looks like. So it started a few years ago with the A200, A300. They were added basically simultaneously. The A200 and A300 hardware was very much available at the time, or both were available at the time of the first reverse engineering. They were added pretty much simultaneously. And this hardware is what you'll find probably in your Android phone, most likely. And it also covers the entire span of available hardware from Qualcomm. The A500, I believe, is the very latest hardware you can get a hold of. So it is well supported. And much of this work has been done by Rob Clark. And this is what the support in Mesa looks like. So it's almost like same day, at least for some of the hardware targets. The A500, the most recent hardware, was reverse engineered a little bit before the actual support was added to Mesa. But it's all in there. And it's in good order too. The driver is very mature, so that's nice. And if you want to have a look at the hardware and develop it for yourself, perhaps, or develop the drivers for yourself, this is the first or the most reasonable A200 development kit I could find. It's the NXP IMX53. It should be pretty cheap by now. It's somewhat old. It's three generations old, I think. If you want to have a look at something more reasonable, there's the Dragon board 410C, which is a pretty current dev board. I use it every now and then. And it's based on the Qualcomm 410E SoC. And if you want to look at the A400, there's the Inforce board here. It has a Qualcomm 805 SoC. And lastly, there's the most recent board. I'm not even sure how available this is, but I think it's starting to trickle out of Qualcomm now. There's the Dragon board 810C, which is based on the 820C, which is based on the 820E SoC. It's standing for embedded, I would presume. I don't know. Yeah. And support for this is pretty okay, I believe. There may be some kernel stuff that's still being worked on, but it should be usable for most use cases. So that brings us to Vivante, which I've been sort of working with a fair amount recently, which it's pretty interesting the way it was developed. So the reverse engineering work has been, I think it started in 2012. And the Vivante GPUs are very common. They're very low priced, so you'll find them in pretty much anything that's cheap. And, yeah, this is what the reverse engineering effort actually ended up in. So the driver was introduced in 2017, 16, yeah. And was done in large parts by Vladimir van der Laan. He did much of the reverse engineering. Christian Geminer also did. Lukas Stack and Pengatronics also did. And the support for this hardware, I think the entire span is the GC200 to the GC3000. It's very mature. It's pretty good. And then lastly, there's the GC7000, which just has the initial support added now. And you can sort of maybe get a hold of a dev board. Maybe not. It's a little bit early days for it. So if you want to develop stuff for the GC2000, there's the IMX Saberboards or IMX6 Saberboards. For the 3000, there's the IMX6 QP Saberboards. The QP is basically just a higher end version of the normal IMX6 with a little bit fancier hardware. And then there's this dev board, which is barely available. I don't think I could get a hold of one if I wanted to. So hopefully it'll be easier to get a hold of. But the developers of the Vivante or EthnaVib driver have some hardware. So development is proceeding. So everything is good in that respect. So let's have a look at ARM. There's actually something to say about ARM, which is pretty pleasant. Some stuff is happening. The Mali-T series of GPUs just drew its very first triangles. Maybe I think it was like a month ago, which is very recent. And also there's more of our continuous, ongoing reverse engineering effort for the Mali-G series of GPUs. There's not much of a driver, and none of it has been upstreamed. So you won't find any support for this in either the kernel or the mesa. So it's all based on tooling. So it's still the very early days for ARM support. But if you want to have a look at this stuff, here's a dashboard that you could use. It has the ROCKSHIP RK3288 SoC. I think it's like $70 or something like that. It's not too bad. And if you want to look at the more recent G-Series of GPUs, there's the high-key 960 board, which is being used for development of all kinds of things, actually. It's pretty interesting. And support for it is pretty good upstream, I believe. So that brings us to imagination. And I don't have a lot to say about imagination. There's not a lot of support. There's not really any reverse engineering going on. And they don't seem to be too interested in actually contributing towards the stuff. So I don't have any dev kits to recommend. I don't know. If you feel very brave, you can look this stuff up and see if there's anything that seems like low-hanging fruit to you. Yeah. So that brings us to what comes next. So if this is where we are now and where we've been before, we're also going places. And OpenGL support is being continuously improved. OpenGL 4.6 isn't really supported by any of the open source drivers quite yet. So most of the drivers with good support are at 4.5. So there are a few features still missing. There's also OpenCL support. Or rather, there isn't any, not in the normal open source ecosystem anyway. There's the Intel Neon support for the Intel GPUs. So this doesn't live in Mesa. It lives somewhere else on GitHub, I would presume, or Intel open source, oh, 1.0.org. And I think it supports the latest OpenCL standards, which is very nice. It's not an easy target to meet, but they've done it. There's also the AMD Rockum, which doesn't live inside of Mesa or any of the traditional repositories either, but supplies us with a pretty decent open source support for OpenCL. But for the community-only drivers, this support is very poor. There is none, basically. So if you wanted to run OpenCL on your Qualcomm Madrino GPU, you'd be out of luck, basically. And there's no such support today. But there is support coming along for the NVIDIA driver, the new VODE driver. There's also support coming along for the Fridrino Qualcomm driver. So what this looks like today is that there is a need for an OpenCL compiler or front-end. And there is LLVM, and it supports OpenCL to some extent. However, in order to use it in the context of a driver, we needed to emit something that is parsable by our drivers. So we need LLVM to emit SpearV, which is a compiler-intermediate format. SpearV isn't natively supported by the Open Source drivers, but you can convert SpearV to something that is supported by some of the drivers. There's more work to be done in that space, too, for sure. So most of the current-day Open Source drivers are using a format called TGSI. And TGSI is not very easy to convert SpearV into. However, there's an alternative. There's a format called NEAR, which is a bit more modern than TGSI. TGSI was introduced, I believe, with the i9-15 driver in 2004. It stands for Tangsten-something-intermediate, I would presume. I don't actually know. But it's very old. It's been around for a long time. So it's well-supported, but it's not well-suited for the purpose. It's, for example, not SSA-based, which is what you really want your intermediate formats to be, at least for modern-day compilers. So the idea is to move the Open Source drivers to support NEAR, which would make it very easy or relatively easy to ingest SpearV into the driver. So that concludes the OpenCL support. Colabra is also working on this in terms of making LLVM support emitting SpearV better. There is a branch of LLVM for this, but it's not upstreamed into the mainline LLVM, which is what we want and what we need in order to support this stuff. There's also Vulkan support. Most vendors don't have Vulkan support. AMD does. They have lots of support, in fact. They have RADV, which lives in Mesa, which is the community driver. And there's also AMD Vulkan, which is the corporate driver. Both are Open Source and available, of course. And I believe both support Vulkan 1.1. At least RADV does. AMD Vulkan may not, but it should be soon anyway. And for Intel, there's the ANV driver, and it supports Vulkan 1.1 and also lives inside of Mesa. So it's as community-oriented as it gets. So that concludes the Vulkan support stuff. The big picture. This is the interesting part to me. If we look at the development perspective of the big picture, there are a few conclusions we can draw. For example, some drivers are very mature. The Intel ones, the AMD ones, the Qualcomm ones, they're doing very well, and they're very reasonable to use in a production device. And if you find any bugs, you know, just report them and someone will actually attend to them. So that's very nice to see. There's also lots of supported... There are lots of vendor-supported drivers that don't live inside of the usual repositories, specifically AMD, seems to be guilty of doing this, which is certainly okay, but maybe not ideal, especially not in the sense that if AMD used the same code paths as the other drivers did, there would be a lot to gain for the other drivers, but also less work for AMD. But presumably they see the value of having the same code base run on multiple operating systems as a bigger net gain for them. Yeah, and then there's this. This is pretty cool. Just looking at the graphs or the timelines I had, there seems to be about between zero and three years, seems to be the time it takes to reverse, from reverse engineering something to the day that you actually include the first support for a device in the kernel or in Mesa. So if we look at the ARM reverse engineering, which started relatively recently, that happened basically now. If we're very lucky, maybe we'll have some drivers in three years, maybe. It would be nice. And yeah, this is sort of reiterating what I already covered. Vendors support APIs outside of the usual repos, so that's what AMD does to a large extent. Also OpenCL is hard. There's lots of work that needs to be done and the ecosystem for doing it in the open source is not very mature. Lots of tooling is needed and lots of the very basic infrastructure is just lacking. For example, the compiler infrastructure with spear V not being really in place. And there's the vendor aspect to the big picture. Some vendor support is really awesome. Some vendors are really, really good. And some are not so good. Open source drivers come in a few different shapes and the way they're structured. They're the ones with vendor support and those that don't. For example, the Vivante driver has no vendor support, yet the driver is pretty damn good. So that's cool. There are small vendors. For example, Broadcom has the one-man Eric team, which is doing really awesome work. And there are big teams like the Intel team or the AMD team. Some vendors are more motivated to control their software stack. That would be maybe the arms, the imagination, the Nvidia. They are more motivated to own the software than they are to contribute to the open source. And then there's the Nvidia, which is just plain weird. They have a great driver, but they're not allowing us to really use their GPUs to the fullest extent by not publishing the firmware that is needed to actually have them work. If we have a look at the manufacturers, here's some interesting stuff too. Some industries really need open source. And apparently that's the aircraft industry. They care in the sense that they really have to support a device for 20 years. They can't half-ass it. But the Android product manufacturers are doing, where they sort of release a device, and it's supported to some extent for a year to three years, maybe. But their devices are installed, and they're going to be used for 20 years. And if a plane ever goes down because of a faulty driver, that would be pretty unacceptable. So they actually care about open source support in a very real way. So anyone who really cares about having good long-term support for their drivers should have a serious look into the open source drivers. It's one of those huge things that isn't maybe obvious. If you do run a proprietary driver, how are you ever going to move to a new kernel in five years?  It's hard to make guarantees about using hardware that is unsupported or poorly supported. So it's hard to deliver products. Yeah, and that's it for me. That's all of the conclusions. Does anyone have any questions? In your opinion, do you have a chip manufacturer in mind that is doing the best in terms of open source software development? There are some that are really good. Like Intel, AMD are doing really well. Qualcomm seems to be doing, or they seem to start caring, which is very nice. They're actually contributing support for new GPUs. There are some that are too small or unmotivated, or some combination of that. And is there like any development boards that you could really recommend in terms of the embedded socks that are kind of leading the way? Some that are really good. Yeah, I think depending on your use case, like what kind of performance you want, maybe grab a Raspberry Pi. They have good support. They're cheap. They're available everywhere. They're a pretty decent option, I'd say. Thank you. Sorry, what about risk five? Risk five. So we're more GPU focused. I don't know. I don't think. So Mesa is independent of the architecture. As long as the kernel supports whatever CPUs happen to be using, that should be fine. No, it should be fine. So you haven't mentioned anything about virtualization. Yes. A lot of projects I'm looking at have use cases where a lot of people are doing hypervisors or other sort of testing and having, is there anybody with good virtualizations? So currently there's a fair amount of work being done to a project called Virgil 3D, which is rather interesting. It's used on the host, and the way it works is that the guest runs an open source graphic stack that has a Mesa driver called Virgil. The Virgil Mesa driver takes stuff, sends it through the VRT IO paths in the kernel to the host where an application called Virgil Renderer takes that very raw GPU state from the guest and pulls out OpenGL commands out of it and then runs that on whatever driver the host happens to be running. So you could run an open source host with a proprietary NVIDIA driver on the host. Sorry, an open source guest and a proprietary host if you want. So that's kind of what is currently being worked on. Any more questions? All right, that's it. Thanks.


headline news update everyone basal Chapman here this is the tiger technicians hour coming up in a few minutes and right now we'll do the update and the update says it does up 36 at 27,727. Now what's interesting about this is that the 27,774 higher four days ago has not yet been reached. My anticipation was that I said to subscribers this morning to my opening call newsletter. I say we can expect that the 27,770 to 27,790 is going to be key resistance. If we break above that, that's something else. Let's see how we handle the day. The MACD is good. Look down the left side chart. The daily chart MACD is strong. There's the MACD. Stochastic is very good at 91%. The unbalanced volume is the clue to say that we could very well be near at least some kind of a digestive phase. And we'll deal with that that moving averages are still strong. So it's going to be price based on the Chathamway methodology, perhaps going to a D or right here at the G. So what we're looking at is the S&P also. S&P right now has in fact rallied and it has gone to a new all-time high. It's at 3,095. This morning went to 3102.51. Now this is leg E. So we're going to see this is a really important moment here because by the end of the day, regardless of what's said in the trade talks, we'll see whether or not there's a breakout to the upside or whether there's the digestive phase continues, which is what I'm thinking right here. The QQQ123, there we go. The QQQ is the NDX100 trading vehicle. Also went to a new all-time high right at this moment. It's a 201.82 hit a high of 202.21. I had suspected that the 201 to 202.30 area is going to be strong resistance. Let's see if we can go higher than that. IWM, which has been lagging all the time, is lagging today. It's only at 14th century, 151.93. That's a clue to say. Not everything is in sync. It's not bad. It's just not in sync. Now let's look at gold. Gold right this moment is down three at 1453. I'd say that 1433 is going to be absolutely important to hold. Let's see if the dollar is rallying here. The dollar is up a little bit. Yep, sorry, legs seeing the date. It's a very good move from the 97.11 low just recently hit. Let's look at crude oil. Crude oil at this particular point is down just 10 cents. Stuck in that range, got repelled to the 200-period moving average. We'll talk about this as soon as I do my show. Coming up straight after this news report and the TLT is up 37 cents. We'll be right back for the Tiger Technicians Hour. This is the host of the Technicians Hour, Basel Chapman, signing off also the author of the opening call. Hope to see you soon. Otherwise, we'll see you tomorrow.


really really get into the exciting stuff about the armies. So I love it I hope you're getting some games in if not. I hope you're enjoying hope you're getting your models painted I hope you've got some hobby done Tyler thank you as always brother Absolutely get in that melee combat folks. There you go told me out there. Thank you for watching so much Hit that like as always We'll see you next wednesday


I never thought about it when I was younger, that I would be a widow when I was 60. It just never dawned on me. And I'm hoping to live many more years like my mother did and my grandmother did. And I don't want my children to have to worry about how to take care of me in the future like I had to do with my mom. I think a lot of us don't want to think about estate planning because we don't want to think that we're going to die, that we're just going to keep living and everything will work out. But that's not the way it is and Hollis pointed that out to me that, you know, it doesn't take long, you just get it all taken care of and then you don't need to worry about it. He took care of it and I felt so much more confidence in my future now. My dad and my uncles were Hollis' clients from years ago. I knew nothing about anything when my father passed away. I just called Hollis and made the appointment and took my mom in and my mom was at the beginning stages of dementia. So I was basically in charge of everything. So he got us through the process of having my parents' home appraised and putting it in my mother's name and in the trust's name, which turned out to be a huge savings. He set up trust for my brothers because of different situations they were in to protect them, which I never would have thought of. He explains things so well. He could throw in a joke when things got tense. I would recommend Hollis because I felt that he protected my parents' estate and that he's protecting mine. I've talked to other people that have had all sorts of problems with the state planning. Hollis really does care about making sure that you get everything that you deserve, that you've worked for your entire life, that you want to provide for your children, for your grandchildren. I feel a confidence in him. In fact, we paid a few thousand dollars for his services, but he also saved my mother two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. He will save me a lot of money. It could have been so much worse taking care of my mom if Hollis hadn't saved us that money on her house.


Hi friends and subscribers, welcome back to my YouTube channel. My name is Daniel Rosel and this channel focuses on life on the ground in Jerusalem and Israel. I've made a concerted effort recently to improve the focus of this YouTube channel. For the most part, I no longer post tech videos and tutorials here as I figured that people interested in Israel don't necessarily care about these topics as well. However, I'm making an exception today because this does have to do with Israel and it's about a pretty basic networking topic. Yesterday, somebody posted in a social media forum asking how they could set up a 2.4GHz Wi-Fi network to manage some smart appliances. People told her to contact Besik Support, but this is really something that can be done in a DIY fashion without needing to wait to speak to an impatient ISP support rep. So I figured I'd do a little video showing how to manage the interface of a Besik issued writer. Accessing your writer's web interface is useful for a few reasons. You can change the settings of your Wi-Fi network, configure static IP leases to help manage your local network, and configure port forwarding to do some more advanced stuff like running web servers or internet accessible servers out of your home. There's way more stuff that you can do, but those are just some of the basics. However, in Israel, as in other countries, the majority of people simply want the basics and are happy to let tech support take care of the rest. So for that reason, Besik have rolled out an application called B, which is how they want customers to manage simple router functions like changing network passwords. Unfortunately, this application is also extremely restrictive and locks away the vast majority of functionality contained in the writers they issue. Fortunately, it's not very difficult to access the actual writer interface. The advantages of doing this is that you can access all the functions available in the router, and you can do so from a computer and not only from Besik's smartphone app. Step one is to find your Besik router. That's the box they put in that connects you to the internet. Flip the router over and check out the underside of the box. Whether you have fiber or DSL, you'll see a sticker that looks a bit like this. The sticker contains the writer's local IP address and the device's serial number. Note these down or take a photo of that sticker. Your next step is to connect to the writer by entering that local IP address into a web browser like Google Chrome. Just type in the address and hit enter. You'll then be presented with a web page that looks like this. You'll need to enter the last six digits of the serial number found on the bottom of the device. And that's basically it. Once you've completed those steps, you can access a much more complete setup controls for your Besik issued writer. To access the advanced settings page, you will need to complete a capture verification form. But there you can find pretty much all the features. Some of the things that you can do here include changing your DNS servers from the Besik ones over to OpenDNS or GoogleDNS for faster DNS resolution or to configure free internet filtering using OpenDNS. You can configure static IP leases to devices on your network so that the local IP addresses don't periodically change. You can set up port forwarding and do other things to make more of your home network. You can also control the Wi-Fi networks, your Besik router broadcasts, or you can turn them off entirely if you want to use third party access points or mesh network systems for wireless connectivity. I hope this video is helpful and if you want to get more videos from me then do please consider liking this video and subscribing to this YouTube channel.