here because many of the individuals involved in the early history of British cultural property protection unit. The antecedent units that Tim was talking about to the modern unit were fellows of the Society of Antiquaries. Right. So British military cultural property protection really originated and developed in 1943 to 1944. Most of the key figures involved were fellows of the Society of Antiquaries and the most prominent of them was Mortimer Wheeler. Lydia Carr, the biography of Tessa Burney Wheeler, Wheeler's first wife, describes how Wheeler's dominating and larger than life personality means that he tends to elbow himself centre stage even into stories that aren't actually his own. Wheeler is undoubtedly an important character in this story, but given the extent to which it's told through his eyes and his words, it's legitimate to wonder if his role is perhaps a little overstated. However, he was present at all its stages, and so if nothing else he provides a useful organising principle. Likewise, Wheeler's 13th of January 1944 paper, Archaeology in the War Zone, Facts and Needs delivered to fellows and visitors here at the Society of Antiquaries in London represents an important symbolic moment at least in the development of British cultural property, British military cultural property protection. I suspect Wheeler would have approved of the organising part of him being used as an organising principle, but not of being reduced to being a mere organising principle. So British armed forces entered the Second World War with a legal commitment to prevent, or at least limit, damage to historical buildings and cultural institutions under the terms of the 1907 paid convention, and that was quoted and cited extensively in the 1939 edition of the Manual of Military Law. However, there were no specific mechanisms or personnel in place at the beginning of the war to ensure British military compliance with this body of international law, and it was not a high priority. This eventually caused problems. The first significant British military occupation of enemy territory came in February and March 1941 of the Italian colonial territory of Cyrenau, with its important archaeological sites and collections at Cyrenau, Apollonia, Tormeta and Tokra. However, a joint German-Italian counterattack drove the British out and re-occupied the area in April 1941. Subsequently, the Italians published a book What the English Did in Cyrenau Cup, and this is the cover of it as you can see, depicting a quintessentially English soldier from the perspective of 1941 Italy. Among other things, this book included photographs that ported to depict damage inflicted on the museum at Cyrenau, over on the other side there, by British and Australian troops. Later investigation and scholarships suggests that this was somewhat exaggerated and much of it was wrongly attributed, but there was some truth to it. The kangaroo graffiti was something of a dead giveaway. The next British occupation of Italian colonial territory came after the Second Battle of El Alame in Egypt in October 1942, when the Eighth Army drove back Axis forces into Libya and eventually Tunisia, re-occupying Cyrenau Cup there, but then also Tripollitania in January 1943, with its important Roman sites of Lexus Magna and Sepratha. Lieutenant Colonel Mortimer Wheeler was in North Africa in 1943, commanding 42nd Light Anti-Aircraft Frenchman Royal Artillery. Wheeler had served in the Royal Artillery during the First World War before beginning his archaeological career, which is well known to many of you, which included serving as director of the National Museum of Wales from 1924, and with Tessa directing the excavation of important Roman sites such as the Legionary Fortress at Caleil. He was keeper of the London Museum from 1926, and again with Tessa established the University of London Institute of Archaeology in 1937. Subsequently, the Wheeler's excavated at sites like Verolewium and Maiden Castle. In 1943 he was also a council member, director of the Society of Antiquaries, that's the director's chair over there, moved out of the way. So, Wheeler's account of what happened in Tripollitania, here's a quotation from it. On my entry into Tripoli, I found that no steps whatever had been envisaged for the protection of the libraries, buildings and sites of historical value in Tripollitania. In Africa, in spite of spurious reassurances from on high, no official steps whatever were taken to preserve any part of our cultural heritage. The hour there is interesting. Wheeler's own accounts describe how he became aware of the problem of cultural property protections, now at least, in January 1943 on the advance into Tripollitania, and during a lull in his military duties he took an initiative to visit some key sites in the province with his friend, archaeological colleague, and subordinate officer in the regiment, Major John Ward Perkins. Ward Perkins had been an assistant at the London Museum under Wheeler in 1936 and had been appointed chair of archaeology at the Royal University of Malta in 1939. Ward Perkins returned to England to enlist in Wheeler's regiment in which he served until 1943, so he was in North Africa with Wheeler. He was also a fellow of the Society of Antiquities, and of course later had a very distinguished career as a Roman archaeologist including serving as director of the British School at Rome. According to Wheeler, there followed what he described as a characteristic exemplification of British improvisation. A lepsis magna, for example, the small site museum had been ransacked whether by troops or whether by local civilians, it's unclear. The Royal Air Force was in the process of establishing a radar installation on the site, and graffiti and general wear and tear was being caused to the site by both what Wheeler describes as the momentarily idle troops of a famous division, which is actually the 7th Armored Division, and the local civilian population. The archaeologist's response was to post out-of-bounds notices around the site and to direct what Wheeler describes as the vague attention of the military police to them, to give impromptu lectures to the troops there, to persuade the RAF to move the radar installation, and to arrange with the local town major, the British military officer responsible for portring troops and similar matters, to post a military sentry outside the museum. Subsequently, Wheeler writes, he and Ward Perkins engaged with and took measures to re-establish the Italian archaeological service, most of whom in the Italian colonial archaeological service, most of whose personnel they encountered at Sabrata. Wheeler then left to resume his primary military duties in the Royal Artillery. However, Ward Perkins remained seconded to the British military administration on monuments duties for about four months, ultimately until August 1943. In that time, he effectively reconstituted the Italian antiquities organisation in Libya, with its Italian and Arab staff, to the point where it could significantly contribute to the protection and conservation of the major sites, primarily but not exclusively Roman sites, and Roman urban sites. Ward Perkins also produced an impressive series of reports that not only dealt with the pressing and practical issues of site protection, but also considered the possible futures of archaeological research in both Tripolitania and Cyrenauca. Wheeler presents all this as a very personal enterprise, and to some extent this may have been true. Some of Wheeler's personality traits, his total self-assurance and tendency to take charge, unattractive in many other contexts, may have served him very well in this context. I have some quotations again from Lydia Kahn, but also from his biographer Jaketa Hawks, who knew him very well. A man of overwhelming personality in his military role is described by many as a martinet. Hawks describes his demonic and extraordinary energy, and Hawks goes on to describe this cultural property protection activity as exactly the kind of undertaking Wheeler relished, with its combination of archaeology and soldering, the chance to exert authority, impose order to get something done all under intense pressure. However, Wheeler does present a narrative in which no one else was doing anything, and according to him, efforts elapsed when he, or at least Ward Perkins, his subordinate, took their feet off the accelerator, so to speak, and he significantly underestimates what other people were doing in parallel. For example, the apparent damage in Cyrenia and its exploitation for propaganda purposes raised concern in the War Office in London. That led to Sir Lenin Woolley, another fellow of the society, being consulted for the first time on archaeological matters. Woolley, of course, was a well-known and important pre-war archaeologist, best known for his excavations at the site of Ur in Iraq, which was an important factory in his night of it in 1935. Woolley was employed initially in a non-archaeological role in the War Office in 1941, with the rank of major and then lieutenant colonel. However, consultation on archaeological issues became more official and more frequent, leading to his appointment as full-time archaeological adviser to the director of civil affairs at the War Office as lieutenant colonel on 1 November 1943. The War Office and British military authorities had certainly drawn up procedures and taken some steps to protect sites in Tripolitania along the lines of those we were claimed to have initiated, although they may have been relatively ineffective. Likewise, we were claimed that again since his foot was off the gas. No one did anything serious to plan for the protection of cultural heritage during the invasion of Sicily. That took place in July to August 1943. Wheeler's account of this is rather casual and dismissive. He says, two Americans whose names meant nothing to us were, somewhat vaguely as it seemed, going to keep an eye upon the churches, temples and collections of Sicily. We glance skeptically at one another, admitting, however, that the Americans were at least half a move ahead of us. This is demonstrably untrue, as the Allied Occupation Plan for Sicily included extensive provisions for closing cultural sites and institutions, guarding them, posting out-of-bounds notices and cooperating with Italian authorities in reconstruction. Many of these provisions were not as effective as they may have been, but that wasn't primarily or purely because Mortimer Wheeler was absent, as he rather implies. Both British and US military authorities had, by June 1943, proposed the development of specialist monuments and fine arts section with officers at the first Allied CPP unit, at least. Officers with appropriate civilian backgrounds. The first officer deployed to Sicily in late July 1943 was Mason Hammond, who Tim has showed you here. Hammond was a Harvard Roman historian, an officer in the Captain in the US Army Air Force. He was joined in September by Major Paul Bailey Reynolds, over on the other side there, who was British and a fellow, again, at the Society of Antiquaries, a Roman historian, a Roman archaeologist and ministry of works inspector of ancient monuments. The kinds of people who served as monument officers in the Second World War were typically what Anthony Pohl describes as over-aged subalterns, basically relatively junior-ranking officers who had specialist skills that they could apply from the civilian world in archaeology, for example, but individuals who were typically too old, considered too old to actually command in combat. Also, in parallel with the military steps to appoint officers and create the first unit, in particular in the US, academics and civilians contributed to the provision of documentation on cultural sites. These are two of the individuals concerned. William Bell Dinsmore, senior, who was a Greek archaeologist, is actually working there on some of the maps that we used by monument officers in the Second World War, and because this is such a relentlessly male presentation, I'm afraid. This is Marion Blake, who was a Roman archaeologist. This is a portrait of her when she was in Rome at the American Academy in Rome. She contributed very frankly to the lists of cultural sites in Italy that we used by military personnel. Some examples, that's the so-called Frick map of Potswoli in Italy with the Roman amphitheater, for example, Mark Hoyd, the oval thing there. Lists of protected monuments, this is the small booklet for central Italy there. So there were things going on, even that Wheeler was unaware of, even when Wheeler claimed that things weren't happening. Wheeler, meanwhile, coming back to our organising principle, commanded 12 anti-aircraft regate in the 10th British Corps, which was part of the US Fifth Army, which was actually a US and British army for the Salerno landings in September 1943, and followed the campaign through to Naples, the Liberation Naples in October 1943. Wheeler left Italy on the 8th of November 1943, and then spent four months in London before setting out to become director general of the archaeological survey of India. So when Wheeler came back to London, he later claimed that on his return here, it was my intention to go straight to the Prime Minister and lay the matter of damage to cultural property before him. Unfortunately, Mr Churchill had chosen the moment to discuss less important matters with Mr Roosevelt and Mr Stalin in other parts of the world, such as the Terran Conference, depicted here. I have therefore to content myself with going to the War Office and discussing the matter with permanent undersecretary of the State and the Director of Civil Affairs. While there was clearly humorous intent in Wheeler's reference to Churchill's absence at the Terran Conference, Wheeler's self-confidence was such that he might actually have considered taking his views directly to the Prime Minister. At any rate, he did present his views on these matters to an all-party amenities group of Members of Parliament in December 1943 at the invitation of Conservative MP Eric Keeling, himself and RAF Volunteer Reserve Officer, with interests in heritage. Wheeler also discussed the issues with the Principal Private Secretary of Foreign Principal Private Secretary of Foreign Secretary Anthony Eden. The lobbying that Wheeler engaged in provoked a flurry of correspondence between interested parties, including Keeling, the Secretary of State for Air, Sir Archibald Sinclair, Deputy Prime Minister Clement Attlee, J.G. Mann, James Mann of the Wallace Collection, who was also a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, and Sir John Forstike, Director of the British Museum, also a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries. That's a selection of some of those individuals, all looking very male and very Edwardian here. They circulated amongst themselves copies of a report that Wheeler had written in November presenting his views on the preservation of historic buildings and collections in the war zone. Many of these men, politicians and curators alike, had already expressed concern about damage to cultural sites in Italy particularly, and particularly things that have been caused by bombing. Then, contributing to all this discussion and lobbying, on the 13th January 1944, Wheeler gave his paper here at the Society of Antiquaries, entitled Archaeology in the War Zone, Facts and Needs. This is the visitor's book for that, which thanks to Magda, who used to work in the library here, this photograph. This is one page, there's another page as well. Interesting to see who's represented here. So, J.G. Mann, Sir O'Fox, the previous president of the, I think you've just become president of the Society there, Sir Frederick Kenyon and T.D. Kendrick of the British Museum, Sir Eric McClaggan, who you saw just there at the Victorian Albert Museum, Conservative MP Hugh Molson. All of these were people who were already involved in discussion of monuments protection activities. There were also people who would go on and undertake monuments protection activities in the services later. So, there was Woolly, who was already involved in it. He signed there. Professor Geoffrey Webb, who's just up there as Professor Webb in the second column, who was the slave professor of fine arts at Cambridge, who later oversaw the monuments fine arts section in Normandy, RAF officer Christopher Norris, and also important civilian archaeologists at the time, like Jocelyn Toynbee, Tennyson Joseph and Ian Richmond, and also, interestingly, and something which confused me a bit when we did it up there, it signed Brian Ward Perkins, and I was a bit confused for that because John Ward Perkins' full name is John Brian Ward Perkins, but I knew that John Ward Perkins wasn't around in London at that point and so I sent this picture to Brian Ward Perkins, John's son who's a late antique historian, and he recognised it as a signature of his grandfather Brian Ward Perkins, who was John Ward Perkins' father, so he was coming along to find out about these activities that his son was involved in in the Mediterranean. Wheeler's paper reflects a mix of his own experiences in North Africa, his first hand, although not always entirely correct, knowledge of what had happened in Italy, and probably what he'd heard from others on the ground. For not only had Wheeler already written a report and a letter on these themes, but others like Woolly, who'd been to Naples in the meantime, Ward Perkins, Hammond and Bailey Reynolds, based on their experience in the field in Sicily and in southern Italy, had done so as well. There are a number of reports and things circulating at this time. Even if Wheeler hadn't actually read all these materials himself, clearly he'd heard these ideas from other people as well as thought about them for himself. The key themes of Wheeler's paper is that we don't have a text of Wheeler's paper in the archive here in the Society of Articories. I knew he'd given this paper, and I spent years actually looking for text of it, and then I accidentally found it in a file of other documents in the National Archives when I was looking for something completely different, so I've got a text of it there, which is very exciting. The first theme in this is Wheeler calls for essentially a cultural property protection unit, an organisation of archaeologically qualified, what he describes as district officers, perhaps about 20 in number with the rank of left-handed colonel or major serving under a War Office Archaeological Advisor of what he describes as sufficient rank and authority, i.e. a brigadier, to make personal contact with senior commanders in the field. Each officer he envisaged would be assigned to a particular geographic district. He gives Tripolitania and Cyrenauica together as one such area, Sicily and Calabria as one such area, and Central Italy as another such area. In fact, of course, as we've seen by January 1944, this organisation had already been created in the form of the Allied Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives sub-commission at the NFAA Monuments Men, with both British and American officers, about 12 of them in Topol, not just in Sicily, but now in South Italy, including Ward Perkins who'd come back to Monuments Protection duties, and they were serving within the Allied Military Government structures. The rigid distribution of officers to geographical regions or districts was, in fact, initially practised by the NFAA in Italy, and this became a problem when the urgent needs for personnel were actually focused in just one or two areas, like Naples on its liberation in October 1943. Subsequently, this structure, the one that Wielu was advocating and the one that they used anyway in parallel, was changed for a more flexible task-organised structure. The size of the area Wielu had suggested a single officer might supervise was also, was probably unrealistic and derived from the relatively benign situation he'd encountered in North Africa. However, Wielu did recognise the need for authority within the military hierarchy in Naples, for example, Monuments officers with the rank of captain and major had come into dispute with senior officers, brigadiers, and above, for example, and even Woolly, the British head of the organisation, was just to left him and Curl instead of a brigadier as Wiela advocates, actually having some more senior ranks in there would have helped. He also argued that district officers should be chosen not just on the basis of technical knowledge, i.e. coming from archaeological or architectural or archival backgrounds, but also on, quote, their energy underlined and power of dealing with men, which is a very Wiela-rich phrase. The second theme in this, Wiela argued that the district officer should enter with the foremost troops as a forward element of military government with a small staff, typically one or two clerks, a car, and actually transport was a recurring problem for Monuments officers in Italy. They typically had to hitch lifts or borrow civilian vehicles. And also these individuals should be able to draw on half a dozen or so military police, which he describes as essential for guarding cultural sites. The district officer would institute measures on entering a recently occupied area, according to a prepared scheme, to protect against willful, unnecessary and unintelligent damage, as Wiela calls it, by occupying troops and also looting civilians. And the officers would reconstitute and reorganise the relevant local heritage authorities and supervise initial repairs to damaged structures. This all very much reflects Allied experience at the Liberation of Naples in October 1943 and also proposals made by Woolly, Hammond and other Monuments officers based on their experience. Monuments protection at this time was conceived of by Allied military authorities as something to be done in securely occupied territory well behind the front line, in conjunction for example the re-establishment of the Italian educational ministry. Experience show that much of the damage and looting actually occurred just as combat had passed when a security vacuum enabled civilians to loot and a second echelon trinks moved up and occupied and even looted cultural institutions because of insufficient control. This had happened in Naples where the assigned monuments officer, American major and museum curator, Paul Gardner, depicted over here, initially had been diverted to general civil affairs duties on the island Viscia and he didn't actually arrive in Naples until nearly three weeks after the Liberation. So here you've got a characteristically dyspepsic wheeler quotation about this. Inquiry discovered on the staff of Allied military government at Naples, a major with one sergeant as his total staff appointed to look after education and the fine arts. Education included re-establishment of the entire Italian school system and it will be appreciated that fine arts scarcely entered the picture. In which time considerable damage would be done for example by American troops in the University of Naples scientific departments. There are stories of American troops driving around Naples in jeeps with stuffed birds from the specimens from the scientific department of the University of Naples mounted on jeeps and British troops had occupied the Royal Palace of Naples depicted down there and caused some admittedly relatively minor damage. Wheelers argument, one that other people had advocated as well, of pushing monuments officers forward with advanced military government parties so they entered occupied territory immediately after combat had passed on had the potential to obviate much of this damage by posting historic science buildings and cultural institutions out of bounds liaising with commanders over possible controlled occupation of such buildings if necessary and making sure they were guarded either by civilian custodians or military personnel if necessary. The third theme was the role of cultural monument officers in liaison with air forces and the role of cultural property protection operational planning and this also reflects allied experience in Italy and represents a development in wheelers thoughts because he hadn't raised it in many of his earlier things but he did raise it in January 1944. Cultural property protection was conceived of by military authorities as relating to occupation but much of the damage was actually being done by bombing and even at the end of 1943 the monuments finance and archive section had no liaison with allied air forces or input into operational planning of any kind. This meant that CPP issues weren't discussed before targets and heritage sites in Sicily and southern Italy were attacked so Palermo Pompeii depicted here this actually the main supply route to Salerno those are the targets that are being aimed at this intersection down here that's the forum of the ancient city of Pompeii there that's the house of the forum there. Benevento Cathedral and the Church of Santa Chiara in Naples as well all of these things concerned monuments officers civilian politicians museum create purators in Rome and so on wheelers wheeler with his military experience was probably more realistic about this kind of thing than some of the civilians admitted that military necessity was actually more of a factor than some of them would admit. So did wheelers views have any impact well yes probably directly on some men like man and McGlagon who later served on the Macmillan community but more generally in contributing to the concerns and calls for change in monuments finance and archives section structures and policies that were being circulated at the same time amongst monuments officers and other military personnel in the field museum professionals and heritage professionals as well and academics in civilian life and some politicians there were never as many monuments officers as wheeler in visage nor were they ever at the kind of rank that he envisaged but they did enter with the foremost truth so for example the liberation of Rome went much better than the liberation of Naples from a heritage perspective monuments officers were assigned to army headquarters and more importantly were involved in air force targeting this is Peter Shilly who was then a RF intelligence officer in the Mediterranean another fellow of the Society of Antiquaries after the war in that case another archaeologist he was responsible for producing documentation like this marking heritage sites on aerial photographs those helped in some respects and they were very famous missions against railway targets in Florence and and against shipping targets in Venice harbour that were designed with monuments finance and archives input to minimize damage to cultural sites but of course the nature of the inaccuracy of second world war bombing meant that any bombing at all stood a high chance of damaging or destroying cultural property even in allied countries such as France has occurred in the summer of 1942 44 other in Normandy here and in the case of Germany there was never any serious attempt to restrict bombing on cultural property protection grounds we were finished his paper with a characteristically dramatic flourish he says my last words to the fellowship to which my own loyalties are focused are these yours is the responsibility of leadership in our science you have no rival or substitute in this matter what have you done about all this up to date i do not know but i do know this your voice did not penetrate to Africa your voice was not heard in Italy have you thought of what is about to occur in France in the lands of Greece in that holy land of central and northern Italy believe me my friends unless we wake up and march ahead unless we anticipate of as we have in the past i am afraid fail adequately to anticipate needs and demands such as those which now encompass us we will cease to honor our fellowship and our fellowship will cease to honor us


Recall command in Shutsun IGP Sport step 2. It didn't take him actually long to learn step 1, which is running through the poles, between my legs, when I recall him and learn the command come. So I've practiced literally a few times and he is just doing it great.  So right now I'm gonna try and see if he's gonna stop or he's gonna knock me over and we'll see what happens. So what I'm going to do is I'll set him up the same way as I did. I'll give him command come and then when he's approaching instead of tossing the ball between my legs, I'll try to stop him and say sit and help him to sit and see how he does it. And then when I interchange these commands, recalling and running through my legs or sitting, more often I do running through my legs and randomly I do sitting command. So the dog doesn't slow down because in the sport it is important that the dog doesn't slow down, goes really fast up to you. And then we'll have one more step after that, which I'll record later. So let's see. Sit. Good see. Yes, he did pretty well. I thought he's gonna bruise my legs. And so you always, when you train this recall command, you always reward through your legs, always in training. So the dog doesn't learn to sit far away if you think to throw the dog, the ball towards the dog. So if you do that, the dog will anticipate and they will start sitting more away from you than you need. And for that reason, the reward is always coming through the legs or behind. So the dog needs to run through the legs in this practice. So let's do one more run. Come on. And for now, I'm not worried about him being a bit crooked. To fix that, we'll practice that in the next step. For now, it's just interchanging between running through and commands to sit. So let me do a couple of run-throughs to finish on that note because I don't want him to learn to slow down in front of me. Good boy. So here that is. You have two phases of the same exercise that you now can interchange. And the dog just loves it. Look at him. He's so happy. Happy training.


Over the past few years, antivascular endothelial growth factor, VEGF, therapy has become a standard treatment for neovascular age-related macular degeneration, AMD. During this time, treatment strategies have evolved from a monthly dosing schedule to individualized regimens. This paper will review the currently available antivegf agents and evidence-based treatment strategies. This article was authored by Jacqueline Elkovac, Stephen G. Shorts, Harry W. Flynn and others.


Ooh, Arctic Aurora! How's that look? Ooh, that's nice, let's stick with that one shall we, yes! So hello everybody and welcome back to another episode of Jurassic World, the live where we've just came across one of the new flyy boys! We've got a lot to talk about, there has, well there's kind of been new dinosaurs, oh like lizards, prehistoric creatures we'll call them, which is great. There has also been a glitch that is now prevalent, prevalent, prevalent, prevalent through the community, which is actually stopping a lot of people being able to even access the game, being stuck on the loading screen, but Ludia have put out on their social media that they are aware of this glitch, so hopefully it's not going to last too much longer. And also another really kind of bad thing, well there's two things right, these have each coincided to make it even worse. So the first one is that when it comes to dinosaurs, a lot of dinosaurs had, ooh collect all this, they had an ability which was resilient. And they've got like, Ludia has basically, and Jurassic World Live has basically got rid of the resilient class. So what that means is, you would get dinosaurs like Hadrosaur Lux, you know something that was used quite a lot, in a lot of the top player, I think most top player teams have a Hadrosaur Lux, you know something similar. So basically what this guy had was, well it's a resilient strike has changed, so it used to be a case of it would cleanse itself from damage reduction, which is still there, but it would also lower the other dinosaur's speed. And a lot of dinosaurs had this, including Hadrosaur Lux, which we're looking at right now, but it had it as a counter. So it felt as though, as long as the dinosaur wasn't resilient or resistant to a speed reduction, then you have a good chance of going first next turn. However, this is now gone, and Ludia have put this whole big update out, where a lot of dinosaurs, in fact I've got a whole list of them here. Ability updates. In this update, we revised the mechanics associated with resilient class abilities. Resilient creatures have the potential to overly dominate the battlefield because they have access to slowing behaviors, which can take over the time based battle system. Myself personally, it has been in the game for so long, and it was kind of implemented for the exact purpose and reason to stop Velociraptor. Remember when this game first happened or first was out, everyone would max their Velociraptor at level 30, they would do a pound straight away and then switch it out or something. Another dinosaur of a similar kind of strategy. So Ludia put in this new tactic, which was you could also cleanse yourself, which is what pounds would do to you to reduce your attack, and also reduce their attack, sorry, speed. So next turn, you'd go first and you'd wipe it. Now they're having a rethink of it, and I'll tell you why this is actually kind of not worked out the way they might think once I've read this. In order to make this class more balanced with others, we've replaced the slowing behaviors in resilient class abilities with vulnerability inducing behaviors. This makes sure the resilient creatures remain a foil to cunning creatures and also still pose a threat to fierce creatures, but are not predominant in an overall class meta. No, what Ludia has actually done has made the swapping meta way more prevalent. So you have resilient strike, you have resilient impact, you have resilient rampage, you have the swapping, resilient strike, and then a medium resilient counterattack. So basically it's all everything that was reduction and speed is now we're going to make a vulnerable. So because of this, and here they say, because we have put more focus on vulnerability and resilient abilities, we needed to adjust several creatures' vulnerable resistances. We also updated some resistant creatures' abilities to make sure they stay true to their original use in battle. Not everything. I've got to admit. Finally, we took the opportunity to touch up a few creatures that were underperforming or overperforming. Now, in the last video I did, we looked over a lot of the dinosaurs that were changing a lot, or the main ones, which was the deer, which was never seen any kind of use. And if I'm going to be honest, it still won't see any use. The little heal you get every turn, max you're going to survive is probably two to three turns. You're going to get a little bit of heal. It could work. I think it could work just we haven't seen, or I haven't seen it myself used properly because this is another thing that's making this worse. There are no boost reshuffle events. Though a lot of dinosaurs have had now the resilience or vulnerability, I should say, updated on Tweet. This is why we scrolled here, like all these dinosaurs, basically they're just saying their resistance to resilience has been changed. So many of them. A lot of them probably that were just 100%, because let's be honest, nobody really used it. It is now changed completely. Now, there were some good updates. Eutarnix got a major buff. That's the Tester Cornibus, which is the deer has also had a big buff. And mainly everything else has had its resistance to vulnerability changed. Now, why is this a bad thing? Well, because let's say you put a lot into how the saw looks, right? But now it's changed completely the way it was supposed to be used. It would reduce or make it so it would probably go first next turn. So if you're facing against a tricosaurus, maybe the tricosaurus is faster than you. It hits you. It reduces your speed, but you get the counter and you go for a resilience strike, which means that you're faster next time.  That's a big change. And for some, you know, a lot of players have plowed a lot of boosts into dinosaurs like this. It's like, well, come on. Now, normally when Ludia changes something like this or, you know, has a big reshuffle or structure of the way the battles go, they sometimes add a boost reshuffle, or they have done twice, I think, in the past so far. Which is good, because if I want to take the five speed boosts that is on this how to saw looks, I would lose. 250 boosts by taking them all off. Normally, I'd get, well, with the reshuffle event, I'd get 500. That's a lot. I'm losing two and a half worth of boosts there. And I think it's needed. And the problem is, Ludia haven't went on record to say if the boost reshuffles are a thing or if they're once off. It's like training a dog. You know, maybe you ask a poll, it gives you a poll.  It knows it's done good, right? And yes, I'm using the analogy that we are dogs and Ludia's the owner. And then another time you ask a poll, it gives you a poll and no treat. It's like, what's going on? Is this going to happen? Do I wait until we get a reshuffle event? Because I don't want to lose these boosts. I've never taken a boost off a creature or maybe once and only got half back because I've been waiting for these reshuffle events. So now that this battle and the way this works has changed so drastically, do I do it now? I don't know. But with that out the way, let's have a look at what's coming up in this week's event. Because of course this is Monday and do we have some things to look forward to? Let's find out. From Monday to Tuesday, we have Majungso... Oh, dear me. Coloborosaurus, whatever it's called. The new flying lizard as well as Amethyrium. Now, I think a lot of us know that we probably shouldn't really go for the Coloborosaurus. I mean the Majungosaurus. It's either going to be Amethyrium or Coloborosaurus, really. Out of those two, you got 27 attempts. For those Wednesday to Thursday being the res, you have Archaeopteryx, Composignatus Gen 2, Posasukus and Baleonix Gen 3. Out of those, really it's up to you. I'd probably go for Archaeopteryx or Baleonix Gen 2. I think Baleonix Gen 2 is one of the more rarer ones. I think it's for Gemina Titan or something like that. But I see lots of Posasukus. Composignatus Gen 2 is not too hard. I don't think it has a great hybrid at the moment. But again, like you said, when it comes to this game, you never know. When they're going to put something good in that's never used. Friday to Saturday being your epics, you have the Dodo, the Willy Mammoth and the Kentrosaurus. Kentrosaurus being the dinosaur out of these lot that's been in the longest Dodo being the shortest. Up to you. I see a lot of people going for the Dodo hybrid in the higher levels and stuff like that. So maybe you want to work towards that Dodo or you want to go for a Willy Mammoth hybrid. I'd suggest one of those two years. And finally, on the Sunday, you have a one attempt for a Mammothyrium or a Colohast. Which is the newest hybrid actually. I think it's the Haas Eagle. And I can't remember one of the new things I think it is. Yes, it's the lizard at the start. So if you want to, you can sort of get the ingredients ready for that. And then you get a free shot of it on Sunday. So a lot of these creatures, the Archeopteryx, the Colobrosaurus and the Colohast are the new creatures.  Maybe you just want to use them for an event because a lot of the times in the skill tournaments, you need to have them unlocked to use them and they just get put to level 26. And out of all those, you've got your options sorted. So how is this affecting the general meta with this huge new update basically? Well, let's do a few battles and find out, shall we? I'll tell you something. I'm not doing as hard as I did before. In the past, that's for sure. So let's have a look. Right. So depending on the team. So here we go. Now after nine times, maybe I'll start with how the sword looks. But I mean, these creatures, basically the big changes. Tricosaur now no longer with speed reducers and Hadrosaur doesn't either. Unfortunately, I don't have anything to switch in that can do damage like Marl Orion or what's it called the Saramagnus. And that's kind of what you want when you've got this new meta. So let's say I face up against this Malanemis. Now, what is it's resistant to vulnerability? It's completely vulnerable. So he's going to go first. He can do a hit to me. I do a counter and then I do a was a resilient thing here. So I mean, does it make too much of a difference? Do they stack? I think they may stack. So there's the counter and that's going to make it vulnerable. Now it's basically 50% extra damage for the next in the hits. And then I do this. So now he's he's double vulnerable. Now, if I was to switch in and something was to do a hit, I think it would do quite a bit of damage here. So let's have a look. Let's also switch in Tricosaur. Never mind. He does have armor. He does have a shield. Let's see. So I would normally do about 1000 damage. Let's say 500 with the shield. Okay, so yeah, I didn't really make much of a difference to it. Whoopsie-tazes. And of course now goes to the high pounds. I can't speed reduce. I don't think it would be speed reduced anyway. Oh no, it's 50%. So it might have made a difference. But mean with what? Yeah, it possibly could have it possibly cut up. So now he's going to go for rampage and run. I'm just going to go for the instant invincibility because he's probably going to have a switcher. I think basically I don't have a switcher. I don't have a monlorion. I do not have a- oh wait, what? Really? Why though? Why did you do that? I would have went for the thingy hit. That was- that was a- I have no idea why he did that. That was weird. Whoa. If I just went for that, would I have killed him? No, I wouldn't have. So he was prepping. He was prepping. Okay. Oh and now it comes. Now we're bringing up- we didn't get the crit so well there's that. And let's see. Let's see. Would you have switched into a ceremony on monlorino? And well it's a Draco. And I don't have a resistance to it even though I do have armor. I don't think it's enough to resist the big hit here. So yeah. There it is unfortunately. I love this game. It's brilliant now. Now the funny thing is in the last video I was like, I actually like doing the battles. This is interesting. This has never happened to me before. You know what- you know what the problem is now? I don't like doing the battles because now the battles are basically- I'll do one- I mean they probably were more so before I suppose. But for whatever reason now it feels more so. Okay so there's a vulnerability. So now I do an extra like 50%. 7200 damage instead of 5000.   So I don't know why he's swapping in here. I feel like he might have another swapper. Because he knows I'm going to go for the resilient here. And if that is the case. I feel like he's going to swap. Yeah. I thought, yeah this is it. It's just a swapping meta at the moment. That's all this is. Don't take out the speed reduction, Ludia. Find a way to fix the swapping meta.  And I mean I know that's why they boosted the unique deer. Because if everybody is swapping. Then it's just going to be getting health all the time. And then it gets hit. And then it gets more health. So I get that. I do get that. I mean maybe we can win this. It's had two swappers. And I have had none. Maybe it's possible. So he's reduced my speed. He's reduced all that. Now Sarah Magnus is dead. Sarah Magnus is dead. He could probably go for a speed boost now. And he'd probably be in his right to do so. Yeah, I mean there's nothing I could do there. I might as well have tried it. I'm pretty much dead. But so is Sarah Magnus. Oh, I'm alive! Never mind. I'm alive. Brilliant. Okay, so what? I mean what could he do? If he has another frigging swapping attack, I'll be. If he has a monlorino as well. Jesus. I guess in that case he's got too many swappers, I suppose.  And also the unsung change to this update. They frigging put Scorpius Rex's eyebrows up another quarter of an inch. He's got like points now. Ooh, interesting, interesting. Okay, so what do we go for here? Do we think we go for that? 5,000? We might as well go for that, eh? Maybe he'll still have this next time. Even if he does. We'll see, we'll see. Oh, a crit as well. Beautiful. Right, this is going to be tricky. This is going to be very tricky here now. Does he show what he did? Oh, he did go for it. That's actually really good for us. Because I think he's only got Smalanemis now. He's got Smalanemis and Triko. Now we could go for the Hadasaur and we would be quicker. However, he's going to do 5,000 damage. And I'd rather not have that. So we're going to go for the safe. We're going to go for safety. I think we pretty much won this. We're going to go for the reducing his attack by 50%. He'll go for his biggest hit, which will probably be the 2,500. And either way, he could survive. If I didn't get a crit, he could have went for instant invincibility here.  And then he would have done this next turn. I think either way they both work out, he probably would have died. And then here comes the big hit. Doesn't even matter if Smalanemis comes in. Oh, but I mean, as you can see, the Hadasaur would have probably played a more vital role there if I could have Sped reduced, especially against the Triko. Yeah, he just decided the time and I was like, ragequit, I don't care. I'm not like other YouTubers. I lose. I will put those battles in for you because I don't really care about winning or losing, apart from if I'm really close to getting into new blah shows, which I've already done once, so who cares? So guys, let me know in the comments below what you think of this update. Do you think they should change it back? I'm almost 100% certain you'll definitely say they need to put a boost reshuffle. And they should just be a thing on the first of every month or something for a week. You're allowed to reshuffle your boost. The problem is with this game at the moment, there's too much emphasis and you spend too much coin leveling a creature up, putting boosts on it, for then all of a sudden, the meta to change and you don't use that creature anymore. And what are your options? Will you take all the boosts? I mean, for instance, I've got the Compi Hybrid, which is down here at level 24, and I've put 18 speed boosts on it. If I was to take that off, it's almost 500 basically. I'd be losing five, maybe even more, to just, you know, taking those boosts off. So it's really, I do not want to do that and I was waiting for a boost reshuffle to do that because at the moment I'm not really thinking of using it. It hasn't really worked its way into my mind as far as the strategy goes. So let me know what your thoughts are and until next time, I'll see you be your babies later. Oh, bye-bye.


Come to New York where we will put on a seamless and spectacular convention You know New York's veteran team is offering a centrally located experience in the heart of Midtown Manhattan with two world-class venues Madison Square Garden and the Javits Center You know we have over 13,000 hotel rooms media studios iconic event spaces and world-renowned cultural and entertainment all with an attempt to 15-minute car or shuttle ride or 20-minute walk That means no more waste of so much time in traffic As the world's most famous arena Madison Square Garden hosts one of 400 annual events attended by more than 4 million fans and with over 20,000 seats 97 luxury suites every delegate will enjoy everything that MSG has to offer The garden is proud to employ workers from 14 different labor youth Representing 70% of the workforce and at the Javits Delegates will be welcomed to a convention center that encompasses over three million square feet with a new 54,000 square foot special event space ready to host 6,000 guests you can even get some honey from the bees who call the roof of the Javits Center home Look New York City offers hotels that are second to none with over 10,000 options within walking distance of the convention at affordable rates including 4,000 rooms for under $300 NYC is also the proud home of a robust unionized hotel industry The majority of committed rooms for the DNC in NYC are in union hotels And you know getting to New York is easy at one of our three airports You know LaGuardia JFK and Newark over 100 airlines offer non-stop service to about 2,000 cities in the United States and around the world oh And for ground transportation take president Biden's favorite way to get around Amtrak From almost 500 cities to Penn Station in Midtown Once you arrive you can get where you need to go quickly with the entire convention with a 1.5 miles Delegates can spend their time in handling party business and enjoying all that New York has to offer and New York is also proud to be one of the safest big cities in America with an unparalleled police force ready to ensure Convention security our over 34,000 uniformed police officers and 17,000 civilian members represent the largest police force in the country And you know New York is home to cuisines from every corner of the world at every possible price point That means you couldn't get a $2 slice of pizza or you can get a $8 falafel to $29 fine dining through a special DNC restaurant week and more New York will also offer a DNC exclusive delegate pass it discounts on a variety of activities unique to New York including museums and cultural attractions Experiences exhibitions shows on and off Broadway restaurants and all five boroughs and shopping opportunities Hey, welcome to New York. We've been waiting for you


Good morning everybody. My name is Scott Drennan and I'm a member of the newly formed product working group within OpenStack. And we're a bunch of people who got together who are active in the OpenStack community but we're not people who generally write code. That said, we still have influence over people who write code. So we'll talk more about what the product working group is a little bit later but what I'd like to focus on right now is a glimpse at the roadmap. What we're going to do, I'll talk a little bit about what we're doing. I handed over to a couple of my co-presenters here and then there will be time for questions and discussion at the end. So we have Mike Cohen from Cisco, myself, Scott Drennan from Nuage Networks, Shamile from EMC, and Sean from EMC. There's only four of us standing here but there's a longer list there. This is one of the sub teams within the product working group that solicited the information from the PTLs and the core teams to develop the content. And as you can see, it's a pretty broad spectrum of vendors and companies involved in OpenStack. There are lots more people involved who aren't on this list. So this is the ubiquitous and obligatory disclaimer slide. No warranty expressed or implied. You see that on every roadmap but it's a little bit more important here because of the nature of the OpenStack projects. OpenStack is open source. OpenStack is also a community. But what that means is there's no one group that says this is what OpenStack is going to look like for the next three releases. It's a very organic process. And so what we've done here is reflected back what the PTLs have been telling us. But even for the PTLs, some of them call themselves the chief catherter of NOVA or the chief catherter of Neutron. So there is no one roadmap. That said, with the disclaimer out of the way, one of the reasons we did this was again because of the diversity and complexity of the OpenStack community. There's lots of different inputs coming out the PTLs from the user committee, from the ops groups, from individual people, from individual developers, from the various working groups that are focused on segments where OpenStack is interesting, and from some specific working groups to solve cross-project problems. And one of the key goals of the product working group is to facilitate a consistent, coherent feedback loop between all of the different parties involved, between the PTLs, the core teams, the developers, the user committee, ops, everybody. There's another session on Wednesday which we'll talk about later to discuss this in more detail. And we're certainly not doing this alone. There's lots of work within the OpenStack community to try and bring this together. As OpenStack has grown, it's become a much bigger project. There would never have been this many people in a room a year ago, two years ago, three years ago. So it's become necessary to do this sort of thing. So enough background. What did we actually do? So we were going through a process gathering feedback from the PTLs. We went and looked at what is OpenStack going to look like for the next 18 months. And this is from the viewpoint of the PTLs two to four months ago. So these things always change. But we asked, what are you delivering for Kilo? What are your plans for Liberty? What are your plans for the M Cycle? And another key question, what can we do to help you? So we'll be talking about the first three here. The fourth one we'll have to wait for another session. So next up is Mike, who will talk a little bit more about what we're doing. Thanks a lot, Scott. So as Scott mentioned, we basically did these pseudo interviews with the PTLs and asked them a very definitive set of questions. What are you working on different releases? Then we had the problem of once we got this feedback, what do we actually do with it? The feedback ranged from a list of blueprints to high level initiatives, to initiatives that span across multiple cycles, to things that were definitively mapped to specific releases. We got a very broad range of feedback and it was actually quite a bit of work to figure out how to structure it and how to lay it out in a material way. And ultimately what we came up with was a framework that broke it down into three different views. One was essentially a 30,000 foot view where we sliced it across a number of different areas, scalability, management, reliability, new functionality, etc. And mapped what each project is working on or essentially where the focus is across these different projects in these areas. The next level of distillation was what we call the 10,000 foot view here. Essentially what we tried to do is on a segment of slides you'll see in this presentation, map the different features that projects are working on across multiple releases and again into these specific areas. But ultimately be able to map them back to concrete projects that are being driven within the community. And then finally, the last set of material we have that we were including in the deck and we're not going through explicitly today is essentially the 30 foot view. Really documenting what we heard from the PTLs, what areas they're working on, and how that spans across different releases. So we're gonna be including that in this deck for everyone's background going forward, but we're not going through each project specifically here. So some additional comments before we get into some of the specific data. One, as we mentioned, the data was compiled based on input we heard from the PTLs, although we did some distillation of it. So there's obviously some degree this is colored by our own input and our own, some of our own thoughts about how to present this in a meaningful way. It's also important to note that it's really a glimpse at the roadmap rather than the roadmap itself. Because what we tried to do was extract one important priorities and actually bubble them to the top is to put this in a form that we knew people could absorb. If you were to look at all the blueprints for every project, something we already have today, you would find that it's actually a very difficult set of information to digest. And we wanted to come up with a more digestible form. It's also important to note when this happened. So we started gathering this data around the time of our mid-cycle meetup. So we focused on a set of projects that existed in OpenStack at that time. The reality today is after the big tent model came into play, there are actually more projects than this. And we intentionally didn't cover them, partially to manage the scope of what we were trying to achieve and develop the first set of data. One of the other things we've observed that I believe is important going forward is, as we dug into this, we actually found that there might be value in showing the roadmap in two forms. And what we might think of as a user-facing roadmap, where we could show users and operators new functionality or key areas that are being worked on. And behind that have almost a developer-facing roadmap. So what we found was there were many backend features that are incredibly important that are being worked on, that are major initiatives. And in some cases, we want them bubble to the top. And in some cases, they actually confuse the picture in terms of distilling a 10,000 or 30,000 foot view in terms of what's really important and what's being worked on. So in this view, we're actually showing a consolidated view of everything we've learned. I think going forward, we see value in potentially separating out what will end users care about and how will they be impacted by the work going on in OpenStack versus what are developers actually tracking and doing? So with that in mind, let me actually show you the first slide in our view here, which is the 30,000 foot view. So what we did is we actually sliced the data across a couple of different dimensions. Scalability, resiliency, manageability, modularity, and functionality. It was actually intentional to put functionality last. So obviously in OpenStack, this has been one of the key areas where almost all OpenStack development is focused on, what new is in this release? When is it coming? What are the new shiny object features? I think as OpenStack's matured, we've actually realized that there's value across the board in some of these other areas, scale, resiliency, management. And we wanted to demonstrate how the different projects are working across them. So let me show you some of the things we figured out as we started looking across this matrix. Obviously we saw in Kilo a huge focus on functionality. And I think as the Liberty and M plans materialize, we'll see that as well. There'll always be new functionality coming in OpenStack. But we also saw things like different projects having different levels of focus. In the NOVA project, there's a very strong commitment here to building scalability. And we heard that for every one of their answers was focused around increasing scale. And there were other projects like Keystone, which actually had features that fall into all of the different buckets that we were categorizing. You can also dig a little bit deeper here and you can see things like, in the Kilo release, a lot of the more mature projects, NOVA, Neutron, Keystone, etc., were focused on scale. So there actually has been quite a commitment to increasing scalability. And we can also see how some of that will also shift towards management and reliability and modularity as we get into the L release. Again, our goal here was to give you views where you can slice things both horizontally and for a project and understand that a high level where the focus of the different projects resides. Now let me hand off to Shemail and we can actually show you the next level down of depth. Good morning, everyone. So thank you for the great summary, Mike, and how we compile the feedback and what we did with the feedback. For this level, the next level down, the 10,000 foot view, if you will, we're going to shift focus a little bit. And again, not to play favorites, I can either talk about all or none. And for the sake of time, I'm going to talk about none because there's too much information here for me to actually go through everything. But what I do want to touch on is the view that Mike showed you earlier is a good view to get a top down level of what themes, like scalability, resiliency, etc., a release is working on. And a project is working on. At this layer, what we're really focused on, the best way to read this one, is read it horizontally as a release level roadmap. So in this level, what you want to do is you want to look at kilo, and across kilo, we can see that there are things done across all aspects and attributes. And we can see a consolidated view here, actually, of which projects worked on which specific blueprints and specs that impacted that area or that theme. The other thing I want to touch on real fast here is the definition of the themes. Again, just like we took the PTL feedback and built our own view using that feedback that we got, we also had to come up with some definitions of attributes and themes. And again, as we move through our work group process, these will solidify and there's other teams that we're working with to kind of understand what are the themes that we want to kind of classify going forward. But for now, what scalability implies is it implies any work in the project that is impacting the scale at which you can run that project. So basically supporting more compute nodes, more API front-ends, etc. Resiliency is focused on anything that either improves the availability of the service itself or improves resiliency of the actual data path, for example. Manageability is focused on all things that are operations and user experience focused. So if someone does a simplified workflow and makes something simpler to deploy like an instance, that would be a manageability item. And then modularity is actually more of a back-office or back-end type of function where modularity is really referring to a notion of, for example, Neutron recently took the services they had and broke them into sub-projects. So that's modularity in action, which basically allows people that are domain experts to work on sub-projects that are of interest to them within the larger networking umbrella, as well as it gives the capability to find and resolve bugs faster. So modularity is all about a decomposition of the project and service itself to make working on the service and developing against the service easier. And the last piece is functionality, of course. And functionality has two sets here. So it's either new functionality or it's enhancement to an existing functionality as well. So again, hopefully the slides will be available later, but I kind of wanted to give that background on what the themes are and how they were determined for now. So the 30,000 foot view was one slide. The 10,000 foot view is actually three slides long. And so here we can see that across the board, most teams, because Kilo was in flight and Kilo is now delivered actually, had a very good and detailed understanding of what they were going to be doing in Kilo. A lot of teams had ideas that they want to do in Liberty as well. And this is where the roadmap disclaimer that we had earlier comes into play a little bit as well. Because the feedback we got was as project teams and as people who are building services for the OpenStack platform, we have ideas that we want to focus on in the next release. But of course, until the design summit happens, which is happening this week, nothing can actually be committed in terms of the spectrum blueprints. So a lot of the ideas in Liberty are much more about focus areas and things that the team would like to start working on or continue working on. And then with M, you can see that we got a lot less feedback in M, because that's even further out. So that's one of the things that we're trying to hopefully encourage is to make this information available and publish it. So that way, at least we as users and operators of the platform can see directionally what the focus areas are at least. We don't have to get into specifics of what features and functionality per se, but at least where you're headed from a project perspective would be a good thing to display to everyone. So again, continuing on, this is the next set of projects. And for each slide on the top right hand, you can see which projects are actually covered in the slide. So per slide, there's about five projects that we're covering roughly. And then the last one here is, of course, wrapping up with some of our other projects in here. So here you can see that some projects like Horizon and Triple O, for example, have already started thinking about L, because they've got things that are going to be taking multiple releases for them to do, more or less. So a lot of the feedback we got in M level, was more about themes and areas versus actual implementation. So a lot of the M release stuff is either continuation of things that are planned for L, or its ideas of we want to work on scalability. And nothing more than that for now. So with that, I'll pass it on to Sean Nguyen. Thank you, Shumail. So if you were wondering how features, functionality, or improvements to OpenStack come to play, they actually start off as a specification. And you can see here in this table, a list of projects which have released different specifications, which have matured into blueprints over time. And then in the end, eventually get implemented in the form of new code that gets merged into the tree and deployed in your data centers. So you can see here that a number of projects have existing specs repos, and you can find these existing on GitHub today. They're available per project, and it's a resource where you can actually iterate on the specification for new features, new functionality. And in addition, when it comes to release time, for example, we just dropped the Kilo release. As Kilo was released, there are some specifications which may be listed. And for example, the Kilo specs repo, which may or may not have made it into the code. So it's a good way to go in and see, based on the release notes, along with the specifications to figure out what features and what functionality have actually made it into the code base. And then in addition, a number of projects are already hosting their Liberty specs and nobody's actually hosting the M release specs yet, because obviously we're not at the point of planning for that release. But if you'd like to be involved in any of the specification plans for Liberty, that's actually going to be developed as part of the design summit here held for developers and operators. So that's another way that you can actually help to shape OpenStack. As an example for some of the specifications and, sorry about that. So if you wanted to see some of the 30,000 foot views that are available for the different projects themselves and you wanted to get more detailed information, for example, here's the 30,000 foot view of what was released for heat. We did not include every slide for all these projects, because to be honest, there's just too many of them to cover. All these slides are going to be available for you to download. And the actual presentation that gets uploaded will include every last one of these slides that we've mapped out for you. So you'll be able to actually get a good detailed view out of the presentation and see what specifications were implemented and then also what's planned for upcoming releases. As you can see here again, the M release, not a lot planned, because it's just a little bit too far out to understand what we're going to require for that. And with that, I'd like to say thank you. So, few notes. We are holding a cross-project working group session. That is going to be held today, 3.40 PM in Room 212. We're looking for more people that can actually get involved in the working group. People who can help to influence and kind of drive the roadmap for OpenStack, not necessarily drive it, but get understanding from the project technical leads as to what the roadmap is. And better communicate it to the community, to the users and vendors that are participating in the space, so that we can have better messaging for the OpenStack community as a whole. And then also tomorrow, we're having another presentation, the State of OpenStack Product Management, where we'll actually talk about the processes and everything about how this group came to be, where we hope to go, and how you can help to get involved. So with that, thanks and. Yeah, so thank you so much for attending. I think we got some time to do Q&A as well. But before we go there, I just want a quick show of hands. So what's this content as far as how we express a useful thing to have going forward? Do you see value in what we did here? Okay, good to know. And Carol, who's going to be part of the next session on tomorrow, will actually be able to go a little bit deeper in questioning of views and how can we better express the information, so on and so forth. But thank you. I mean, this is good validation and encouragement. I think you put a lot of effort into building this. So before we go into Q&A, I know I saw a few product working group people in here. So can you stand up for one second if you're actually part of the product working group already? That's a go in. Okay, so even though we presented, it was a team effort. And so as we began Q&A, we might answer the question or any of the people here that are in the room might actually chime in as well with answer. So with that said, if you have any questions, please step up to the mic right in the middle of the room. Thank you. Okay, yes, if you don't mind, thank you. So you said a lot of you are not developers. So what kind of people join the working group and are you looking for new members to join the working group? So we're definitely looking for new members to join the working group. Many of us are part of product management teams that have influence over OpenStack developers within various organizations. But that is by no means exclusive. It's really, are you interested in trying to shape, communicate, feedback the OpenStack product to direction from a non developer centric kind of approach? Absolutely, I mean, even on the stage right here, we've got product management, I'm a technologist, we've got an architect, we've got an operator. We've got a multitude of perspectives and roles represent here. And so this is why it's the product team versus, because we want multiple perspectives, we want multiple people, including operators and users to participate. So that way we can make sure that what we're delivering both to the users of the platform, as well as the information we're sharing across projects, is as meaningful and covers as many perspectives as possible. So if I'm interested in a particular subgroup like Cinder, so should I join that working group, or should I join the overall OpenStack working group? How does it work? So with the product we're working group at least to date, we're not micromanaging the individual projects, right? The PTLs are running the projects. We're looking at one kind of, how can we help understand user requirements and feed them back to PTLs and facilitate cross-project communication. If you're interested specifically in what Cinder's working on, it's best to engage with the Cinder group. So maybe I'll ask a leading question. When we do this again in Tokyo, what would you like to see different than what we presented today? How would you like to see an OpenStack roadmap, multi-release roadmap presentation that's different than what we have? Anybody have any comments, suggestions? So more charts, less text. Okay, any other comments? All right, thanks everybody. Thanks everybody. Thank you.


It's awesome to have so many of the companies and brands that I follow and just kind of keep up with in one section and they are so like welcoming to like let you sample things or try things on. I tried the new Cliff, they're the packs of like the pizza margarita flavors, bought the like Boston jacket, some food samples, but just kind of having fun in the environment. We have a noon active hydration here so it's meant for to use it as a sport drink while you're exercising. The marathon runners would take it before the race and during the race, it's in a tube that contains 12 servings. I've been running about eight years now, long distance. I do really like it. I bought it before and it's not all the calories in a drink and yet it's got that electrolytes and it tastes good, especially the days leading up to a marathon. It helps me to drink enough water or drink as I'm preparing. So what I have here today is the Moji massage line. We have our curve, which is a stick massager with 360 degree rotating spheres. We have our mini handheld massager, which is a flexible massager that contours around muscles and can be used with one hand. And then we have our foot massager that is great for plantar fasciitis. Yeah, I started the company after I ran my first Boston Marathon and once I took those two turns, taking the right and the left and the boilstone, I came up with a t-shirt to motivate and I sold the shirt for charity. Thank you for the dumbness of our store because they're so different. We're not closing but we'll be open tomorrow at 9 a.m. Thank you for coming.


During our last couple of videos, we've introduced three-dimensional reduction techniques. Principle component analysis, multi-dimensional scaling, and t-distributed stochastic embedding. Our main objective was data visualization. This means reducing the number of dimensions to two. And on smaller datasets, we've found that these techniques tend to yield similar results. But this should come as a bit of a surprise, because the three approaches really are very different in nature. PCA is a projection, meaning that for some data, and let me just quickly create some here, PCA finds its projections to the axes defined by principle components. Here I can show what could be the axis for the first principle component and what some of the projections could look like. This way, I can see that each point's value for the first principle component is the distance from the projected point to the center. These principle component axes are computed directly from the data using the eigenvectors of the covariance matrix. On the other hand, MDS considers some multi-dimensional data. Imagine the data we've just drawn, but scattered in three dimensions, not just the two you can see on your screen. Now, I'll call the distances between each pair of points, i and j, d, i, j. MDS aims to embed our data into a two-dimensional space in such a way that the resulting distances are as close to the original distances as possible. If I call the distances in the new two-dimensional space, also the embedded space, lowercase d, i, j, then what MDS tries to do is minimize the sum of capital D, i, j, minus lowercase d, i, j, square. MDS finds the embedding that minimizes this criteria function iteratively. It starts with a random placement of points and then in each iteration moves the points to slightly lower the value of the criteria function. We can take a look at how this happens on the zoo dataset. First, let me load the zoo dataset, add the MDS widget and randomize the positions of the data points, set refresh to every iteration and press start. Great, let's do it again just for fun. Randomize, refresh to set to every iteration and start. Okay, something to be aware of here is that the result of the optimization procedure MDS uses may depend on the random initialization. To make things more deterministic, MDS usually starts with the placement of points obtained by PCA instead of a completely random placement. Now onto our last algorithm, Disney. This is also an embedding that uses iterative optimization to find the best placement of its points. It's similar in execution to MDS. They just use different criteria functions. TC's criteria function is a bit more complex and prioritizes maintaining the distances between each point's neighbors. The differences between these three methods can be huge. This time, I'll use another biological dataset called bone marrow mononuclear cells. Each of the thousand rows that contains data on a single bone marrow cell. I won't go into much detail about this dataset. It's enough to know that it contains a thousand features that record the activity of the genes in each cell. Now, there are multiple types of bone marrow cells and we might expect to identify them by clustering the data. So, I'll first pass this data to PCA and look at the results in a scatter plot. The coordinates PC1 and PC2 are at the very end. There. Now, we want to compare this to what we get from Disney. This time, it really is completely different. The clustering structure is much more pronounced in the Disney visualization. Now, I can select a cluster from the Disney visualization and see where these points are in the PCA visualization. To do this, I just passed a selection from Disney to the scatter plot widget. Now, with both visualizations side by side, I can select any cluster in Disney to see how it translates to PCA. Like this, or maybe this, or this. Notice that from PCA, I would only be able to find some of the clusters visible in Disney, not all of them. Now, I can try to do the same thing again with MDS, but I find that it resembles PCA more than Disney, with much less structure immediately visible in the data. So, in summary, when I want to find clusters in my data, I use Disney. When I care about all the distances, I use MDS. And when I need some robust dimensionality reduction methods that use mathematical projection and retain as much variance as possible, I use PCA.