Good morning, my first speaker is Yosvan Handerbeck from Ciena, Ciena, or Ciener, if you want to say it in original language. So, experiences from tuning high-resolution climate modeling with this year's people. Yes, so what I want to show you is some of the things we have done in the past years regarding mainly tuning a climate model, namely ECEOT. ECEOT is based on IFS, so I think it will be of interest for this community. And, well, I will come to the main points. Of course, the point is that ECEOT, of course, is a climate model. So, we are interested in longer time scales and what we would be interested in for weather forecasting. So, first a few words on ECEOT, which has already been shown and mentioned by many speakers in these days. ECEOT is actually, it's mainly a global climate model. It's quite recent one in the sense that development has started in the, well, basically 10 years ago, in 2006 or 2007. The first idea came out. It was the first version, ECEOT 2. But already then, the current version we are working on, which is version 3, has started development. Actually, I just checked this morning and asked Uber who actually did that. The first commits were from 2009. To give a reference, ECEOT 3.0, which is basically, what we are working on now is basically continuation of that version was released in 2012. It's based on IFS. It's based on IFS Cycle 36. Our idea is actually to move on to open IFS in the next future. So, ECEOT will prepare this year a new science and implementation plan, which will also state clearly this plan. The idea is actually that ECEOT version 4 would be based on open IFS. This will have many advantages among others to have a closer interaction with open IFS community, to have development cycles which are closer, faster updates, etc. And I think also there's a lot to be gained from parallel development and basically the same issues not having to be solved over and over again. Of course, as a GCM, ECEOT needs an ocean. It uses Nemo. It makes a particular choice for the IC model, which is Limb 3. And, well, for land, of course, coming from IFS, it's using HTSL. And this is the GCM. But ECEOT is also, or has a mission, and it is also being developed as a nurse system model. So, other components at the same time are ready and have been coupled to the model. And so we have a dynamic vegetation model. And there's an interactive atmospheric aerosol and chemistry module, which is based on TM5. Dynamic vegetation instead is LPJ gas. And there's a biochemistry model for the ocean, pieces. So basically all these components have been under heavy development and being coupled to ECEOT in the past years. The goal is actually to develop an overall system model which is ready to do CMIP6 integrations. And I think, well, time schedule is always a bit too optimistic, but I think things are well underway for this goal. And finally, ECEOT is also a consortium because ECEOT is based, sees a contribution of a large community of European institutions which are contributing. This slide may not be completely updated. So if you're involved in ECEOT and you don't find yourself here, don't be offended, this is an older one. So basically we talk about something like 22 European institutions actively contributing to the development of ECEOT. The original plan of ECEOT, well, one of the motivations is also this idea of seamless prediction that you have a model which you start from a weather model. You can apply it also longer time scales and then you end up with climate. And the idea is that of course if you make a good model for one, the physics being the same, why shouldn't you be able to have a good model also at longer time scales. So the tuning of the model, well, I will go more in detail what I mean by tuning of course, but the goals of the tuning of the model are mainly to improve some certain things in the model and to make it ready to be competitive with other models in CMIP6. Obviously it's all aimed at having a more realistic model. And the first thing we looked at and actually we worked a lot and actually a great part of my presentation will be on this was actually on looking at energy fluxes, energy balances, mass fluxes and mass balances. And the reason for that is actually that it's quite different to tune a weather model from a climate model in the sense that suddenly you need to take everything what you certainly need to have all the parts which you would look at in a weather model. And actually being based on IFS, you would say that part is already well tuned. I mean, ECMWF did a lot of effort in doing this to the best to state of art. So actually why would we need tuning? Well, the problem is that if we look at longer time scales, tuning a climate model poses new problems and new issues. There are some things like mass conservation and energy conservation which may be negligible over shorter time scales and may become very important over long time scales. So the small imbalance in P-C, precipitation minus evaporation, may be completely irrelevant at short time scales or even at seasonal time scales. But over 100 years it may change your sea level heights by meters and meters. And so obviously it will be very relevant and so you don't want that in your model. And the other thing as we will soon see also is that actually energy and mass conservation are sort of related because obviously mass conservation also implies or missing mass conservation also implies missing energy conservation. If you don't conserve water vapor in the atmosphere, well sooner or later this water vapor will condense releasing Latin tea and again so that missing mass conservation becomes a missing energy conservation. And these are issues which may not be relevant at shorter time scales. Of course it's not all about these radiative fluxes and so of course you're also interested that the long term averages or statistics of certain fields are as realistic as possible. And of course you have the problem of having good references to compare with. For ECOS we, the trick is actually to compare with era intering which is sort of cheating because we compare the model sort of with itself. But it's helpful because at least it gives a clear reference what to compare with. ECOS should at least be close to era inter if possible. Of course it's not only about fields, it's also about model variability and so that's another thing you look at. And all these needs and all these comparisons of course need some, if you need to do this process of many variables, different groups and you need to compare what you're talking about, you need to have some common measures, some common way to talk with each other. So indices and by index I mean any number which can be sort of shared and which gives you a measure of skill become extremely important in this sense. So they are, well, the simplest one is this rifling key indices which were actually developed now quite some time ago which is basically adjusted with mean square differences compared to some reference fields. And then of course a more refined thing is actually to look at the regional features, regional dynamics, etc. This whole exercise actually, as I mentioned, is necessary also for coordinated experiments which is involved in to have a model which is well suited for this experiment. And the reason is actually for each experiment, say you do CMIP6 or you do some other experiment like we're involved in a coordinate experiment called high res MIP, which is actually part of CMIP but where you compare the high resolution version of the model. Every time the protocol changes a bit, the forcing fields change a bit and so of course you need to check again if your model is sort of well tuned. Because some of the tuning you do may be specific for having made so much assumptions about the forcing fields, say ozone or aerosols, etc. So I mentioned the radiative imbalance, well there are many, there are very good estimates of these, of course recent ones also from satellite, etc. There is some recent literature about this. All these numbers have uncertainties which are still unfortunately quite large. Basically it's always something like plus or minus zero five in all of these numbers. But still we can use the central values as a reference and we would like to see the model to be quite, to be similar to what is observed in some of these numbers. And the most important numbers of course for, while usually you would judge coupled model in general and climate model from the top of the atmosphere fluxes, basically you just look at the balance between what is going in in terms of energy, what is coming out. It's not zero because our planet is warming. What is actually more relevant for a couple models of course is surface fluxes because that is where the adjustment between the atmosphere and the ocean and the land surfaces are curing. I would say mainly ocean because the land surface has much reduced heat capacity so what really counts is the ocean. And so of course it is this fluxes at the surface which will be a particular important. So as, I wasn't here the morning of the first day so but I was told that actually Franco also mentioned this for IFS, that the first thing we discovered when we started looking at this to our dismay was that actually if we took the top of the atmosphere fluxes, the net flux at the top and compared it to the net flux at the bottom, well this should be the same because the atmosphere has no significant heat capacity. So there's no way, average of a long time. So there's no way it could possibly store energy somewhere or release energy significantly. So if you, on average, those are the difference between what you get at the top and what you get at the bottom, you really should get zero. And any different numbers in indication that the models either producing or consuming energy. And we did that and well the number was quite significant, what's significant, very high. And we got this huge number of minus 2.5 baht per square meter. All these are at our reference resolution, standard resolution. At different resolutions unfortunately you get even different numbers. So there's also the sensitivity of this number to the model resolution. This had been tested, et cetera, and basically it's quite robust result. And then of course, depending on the forcing fields, you can shift where this energy goes. So like in IFS, the convention of course is that incoming downward radiation has positive signs. So minus means actually outgoing. And in this case, this is top minus surface. So a minus really means outgoing from the atmospheric slab. And well, so the atmosphere loses energy. That's okay if it were cooling. But if you look at, by looking at this experiment, the atmosphere was not cooling significantly. So nothing which could justify this flux of energy. Of course, depending on the forcing, this could be distributed differently. You just change say you do an atmosphere-only experiment. And of course then, depending on your sea surface temperatures, the ocean may be too cold or too warm. And so of course these fluxes may either go inside the ocean or be released at the top of the atmosphere. But some is always the same. So nothing to be done about that. And you can fiddle as much as you want with your parameters of the model. And this difference usually is quite robust. As long as you stay at the same resolution, as I will also mention. So basically, this is a, nominally, this is an internal heat source in the model. And it's a large heat source because it has to be compared to, mainly basically to what we're interested in in a climate simulation, which is anthropogenic forcing, which is something around 06. So 2.5 is embarrassing. And you could live with that, but the problem is that you could just, if we were sure it's always the same, it's always the same, and we understood what causes it, we can of course live with that. And we can also make future projections, et cetera. But we do not know, if we don't know the processes, which are at the base of this, in this case energy production, how can I trust a future projection if I have no idea if maybe these processes may change, and may change this in a different setup. And in fact, there is a state dependency of these imbalance, which is unfortunate as we show, so that's important. So the first thing is, which we quickly, well, took us some time, I must say, realized was that we were making a mistake in our balance. So because nominally, the model saves all these fluxes. So you have your sensibly heat, your latent heat from evaporation. You have your incoming shortwave radiation at the surface. And you have your thermal heat, longwave heat, net at the surface. These all get stored nicely in grip files. You see them in the output also of OpenFS. And it would be natural to sum them up and say, okay, that's a net surface balance. And that should be, well, 06 if you are in a transient present-day simulation. The problem is that the latent heat actually is computed only based on evaporation and sublimation. It does not include one important player, which is not obvious immediately, because it's actually a mass flux. It doesn't include snow. Snowfall actually carries with it a latent heat content. And it's quite easy to understand, the atmosphere actually, to create the snow, takes droplets, freezes them, and to simplify, freezes them and basically extracts heat by doing this. So the atmosphere is gaining heat. The droplets, then, the snow falls into, say, the ocean. And the ocean will use heat to melt them again and bring them to SST. So basically, the atmosphere has gained heat. The ocean has lost heat. This is a heat flux to the atmosphere. It's a negative heat flux because the sign is upward. And, well, based on the average, there's no fall in the model. Well, it's something around 0.23 meters a day. You multiply that by 334 kilojoules per kilogram. And, well, you get that that's actually equivalent to minus 0.88 Watt per square meter. So that's huge. In a sense, if the numbers are below 0.1, 0.2, I would start worrying less. But as long as we're talking about numbers around 0, comparable to the anthropogenic forcing, I would be quite worried. So this clearly has to be added. And the same, actually, also is true for land because also the land surface uses heat to melt the snow. And this, of course, will cool the land surface, quite natural. And part of the snow, instead, is sort of excess snow, which at least in the third becomes a flux called calving. So it's basically a representation of glacier calving. So it gets transferred to the ocean. And then it melts again. So it's a flux which, in the end, goes to the ocean. So, basically, it's the same story also for the land surface. So this we had to remove. OK. And so basically, based on this, we have to look at the revised version of our top of the atmosphere in the surface. But, well, it's still not a full 2.5. So we haven't solved the problem at all. We only have reduced it significantly. Then the other thing which we found is that comes actually from solving a completely different problem. It's that the model is not mass conservative. P minus E is actually 0.3 millimeters a day. Was actually 0.03 millimeters a day. This may seem not very much. It's actually quite a lot if you integrate it over 100 years or so. So it will significantly change your sea level heights because this water ultimately will end up in the oceans. And so it also poses a problem in that sense. And in fact, it has to be corrected. And the initial actually admit we correct this by then it's unacceptable that the water would increase. So in the end, any residual mass imbalance like this, we actually correct. In the end, by slightly adjusting river runoff. But apart from that, this actually could be identified to be caused obviously by the advection scheme in IFS. So of course, it's an error which comes due to the numerics of the advection scheme. It's a well known problem. Actually a lot of fixes have been developed by using the graph basically in later versions of cycles of IFS. And actually it's significant also from an energetic point of view because 0.03 millimeters per day, well you do your mass and you end up with a number like this. So almost 1 W per square meter of energy. Because again, it's the same thing. You advect water vapor, but you create new water vapor. And this, once it condenses, releases heat in the atmosphere. So voila, you have energy production in your atmosphere. But okay, so we implemented the simplest possible fixer we could which was simply a proportional fixer. That was easy actually to write ourselves. And later we actually backported one from Cycles 38. We could not backport more sophisticated ones because the core structure of IFS has changed too much. So it would be significantly too much work to do that. It's actually a nice product. And well, doing this, P minus E actually was reduced, actually became negative, but at least half of what it was before in amplitude. And so this residual minus 0.016 is, you probably listen to something else, some other numerical things. But the main point is, so basically we reduce it by, instead of reducing it by 003, we reduce it by 0045 or something like that. And in fact, we had a significant improvement in the top of the atmosphere minus surface imbalance, actually 1.4, which is corresponded with this change in the mass balance. And so basically at the end of the story, with all these things put together, now our residual top of the atmosphere minus surface imbalance is only minus 0.27 W per square meter, which is, but we decided we can live with that. Even if it's obviously still, it's still a minus sign, and so it's still an energy production. Okay, something similar while doing this, at a certain point we also work with stochastic physics. And so investigating stochastic physics, I said also the stochastic physics scheme was not energy and mass conservative. And so basically this was leading to a very strong negative precipitation and vibration imbalance, actually significantly strong, because this now starts being a very huge number, comparable to the average snowfall basically, which might do us the 0.23. And it was also corresponded to very large top of 30 atmospheres minus surface dead flux imbalance in the model. So again, in this case, we implemented a simple proportional, since we had that tool, proportional fixer. So basically making sure that before and after the application of the SPPT scheme, these quantities would be conserved. Of course it has a cost in terms of communication in the model. But it solves the problem, because basically after that, if you use SPPT or you don't use it, the P minus E balance becomes exactly the same. So basically that problem is solved. And then working actually with Antje and others at the ICNWF, the same thing has also been implemented even in IFS itself, as documented in this memo. So having solved that, we did a lot of series of experiments to actually start fixing in general the fluxes to actually tune the model and get fluxes to our liking. And we need some tools to do that. And these are specific parameters which we identified for IFS, which we could actually modify. It's sort of classic or standard for all communities, all climate model developing communities to have to modify basically convection and basically parameters related to the water cycle mainly, or related to clouds and to the microphysics. And so this is a list of the parameters which we experimented with. So all these parameters will have... Yeah, sorry, this one here, which is not really a parameter, it was a code modification which we also experimented. Problem was that when we first did this, we had very unrealistic fluxes at the surface even when we forced the model with present-day sea surface temperatures. So basically the model was decided that it really did not like the temperature of the ocean which we were giving it, no matter what we did. And it was even by changing all these parameters within ranges which are sort of reasonable, all these parameters are not fixed. They are not physical. They have no real physical value. They have recommended ranges also, which you can derive basically by talking with people who implemented these parameterizations. And this actually, I believe, a thesis work in Oxford which has been done for development of the stochastic schemes which also discussed this a bit. And then... But basically we were not able to shift enough basically our fluxes, mainly our surface fluxes. So one thing actually then by discussion which came out by discussion which is in the ref was also that there is one change which was specific for cycle 36 but then had been changed again in cycle 38. Actually it was a reversing because it was there before and then came back afterwards which is a specific condensation limiter, a specific way how to implement this. And so we went back also in ECR to the old scheme and this is actually, we could use it as a tool to shift surface fluxes by at least 1.5 watt per square meter. So we had an additional tool we could use to use it. Here I talk only about global values but of course after doing all this in the end you have to go and look if your model climatology also regionally in terms of fields, etc. is still reasonable and of course this has been done. So anyway we have all these parameters and at that point what can we do? Well you need to know the sensitivity of the model to these parameters. So we did a series of experiments relatively short, these are all six year experiments bearing these parameters. So starting from the reference value and then increasing and decreasing them. So this graph is a bit older but actually each of these actually had five points in the end. And so you change each, so you see these are all the parameters, you change each parameter and see what happens if you increase them slightly or decrease them slightly within the range of what is reasonable. And then you can make similar plots for all possible radiative fluxes you're interested in. So this is a TOA flux but you can do that for cloud forcing, long wave cloud forcing, you can do that for short wave at surface, etc.  And the lines actually are, believe in this case the lines here are where we would like these fluxes to be. But what we really were interested here were the slopes. And what is interesting is that most of these are reasonably linear so for all purposes we decided that these are actually linear so by fitting a line we can actually derive these sensitivities. Don't look at the numbers, I'm just showing this to tell you to give you the idea. So for each parameter you would get the sensitivity of a specific flux in terms of the parameter. So what happens if you change the parameter how much does it change if you change the parameter by one unit. And then you can put all these together and so we made basically a software tuning simulator to do that. Actually we were lazy so it's a big Excel spreadsheet so don't worry but it works nicely. And with that tool actually what you can do is to plan your experiments. So you can say okay I don't like these fluxes how they look like, you can even implement a score. You could say, and this we did actually, you could say I value a lot the net surface flux so I give it weight 4, I value a little bit more, little bit say cloud forcing, long wave cloud forcing so I give it a certain weight and make a score like that and then I play changing these parameters and try to reduce to find a minimum of my score. So to get a model configuration which is the closest possible to what I would like. And the nice thing is that this way you can plan your experiments, do that, then make the experiment actually for say a reasonable time, say 20 years, get new averages and then see how we have done and actually this converges quite efficiently so in a couple of iterations you get actually where you want to go so that's a very useful tool. So we were able to do that, we combined these and actually we decided we actually focused on a few fluxes which were particularly important for us and we tested different combinations. This is actually an exercise we did a couple of years ago so this is not what we would do now, what we are doing now but it's illustrative what we did so these are all different combinations of parameters and this is the end result in terms say of TOA fluxes of what is it, yeah, of the different fluxes which we're interested in. This for example is this famous TOA minus surface difference which as you can see is pretty stable no matter what we do never changes, there's nothing to be done about that by changing these parameters but all the others are quite sensitive and so you can actually find combinations which really give you what you would like and the green bands are actually the desiderata where we would like the model to lie based on observations and it's interesting that at least this was an exercise we did one and a half years ago, one year ago and that was based on the previous version of this year with EME brand it was interesting that in the end the winner was actually a combination of parameters which was pretty similar to what a later cycle of IFS cycle 340R1 was using with some modifications but many of the parameters in the end we ended up changing in a similar way maybe a chance but it was pretty interesting so of course this has been repeated more recently with more recent versions of the model now using actual CMIP6 for things and so this is an exercise which is undergoing and well in the end you can get really what you want and still then you can check the model climatologies the dynamics in the model, etc and check that still everything is okay and make sure that the model is that you didn't ruin anything of course I do not have the slide here at the right place but basically in order to check to keep quickly under control that you do not do any damage by doing this you also use other indices so we have this Reichelin-Kim performance index I mentioned before which basically quickly gives you some numbers to tell you if you're getting too far from observed climatology and so basically as I said you shouldn't ruin your scores and still get the decent score even if you make these changes okay so this is of course not the end of the story because this was AMIP so if you now couple the model to the ocean different problems come out of course the first problem of course will be that you may have a problem that actually you should tune the model for AMIP and then maybe since the ocean will have a different idea on what the SSTs will be you could be tempted to also do a different tuning for the coupled model and that depends on your strategy of course it would be desirable to have the same model for everything but actually when you couple the model to the ocean new things come out and this was actually a recent one which we discovered and discussed which is actually the fact that Nemo takes actually additional initiatives and adds further heat which you wouldn't have expected it should add or remove further heat which you shouldn't expect to do the idea is that the atmosphere is coupled to the ocean it sends I can use actually this slide which says exactly what I need the idea is that the atmosphere is coupled to the ocean it sends from the point of view of heat it sends a solar flux which is distinguished from non-solar fluxes mainly because the solar flux is penetrative so it goes deeper and then it sends the surface fluxes which are the latent heat flux the sensibly heat and the longwave fluxes which all act on the first layer so basically IFS is sending to the ocean everything it needs and then it also sends mass fluxes and Nemo of course knows it would be surprising if it didn't that it has to spend heat to made snow so it will add that latent heat for you so that's all nice problem is that then Nemo but most other ocean models I'm told also has to take care of other things like you add a mass of water to a bucket of water you're diluting that water so it becomes important to know what is the temperature of the water I put in it makes a difference to put well obviously it's probably not a good term it's actually a wrong term but there is a sensibly heat content in addition to the latent heat content say of snow there is a sensibly heat content in the temperature of rain say falling into water or in the temperature of river runoff or the fact that calving is at zero degrees all these actually play a role and you can estimate them there is also some literature recent which has tried to estimate this and you always end up to a number which is similar to what we also get in Nemo which is basically we evaluated this and basically this is worth well it's not insignificant it's worth minus 0.23 watts per square meter so again it's a number we could be worried about I must say though this is an average of the ocean so globally it's a bit less of course and so this has to be taken into account and why is it important because IFS does not take into account of this heat IFS did not spend energy to warm up the rain whereas the ocean uses this the warm rain and extracts heat you see there is a problem here because obviously there's a non-conservation of energy in all this and so the first attempt you could make is to say okay all mass fluxes entering the ocean are all at the same temperature which is good and nice but obviously it's not very good for say calving which is basically snow and ice which just melted which obviously will be at a much lower temperature so you'll make a mistake there and so in the end basically what we decided to do was to leave it as it is and to live with the fact that there's an energy sink in the coupling basically and there's nothing else you can do actually and the energy sink of course is less than this because well you have to convert it to a global average so that would be minus 0.16 Watt per square meter and there's another thing which happens in the ocean which we have on and which actually happens also of course in nature is geothermal heating personally I thought it was not very relevant but then if you look at the number it is it's well it's this number you may decide that's important or not but it adds up to all the other guys so in the end you also have this 0.06 Watt per square meter of geothermal heating in the ocean just that's physical you can decide if to represent it or not if you have that represented but of course you have to take care of that and remember that when you do your balances if you decide if the fluxes which you get to your ocean are realistic or not because then you would have to add this number to your balance and I just make a few final caveats points which came which one has to remember which are many of these things are actually state dependent so say all other fluxes too but say this top of the atmosphere minus surface in balance actually has a dependence on the state this was a series of AMIP experiments where we manipulated the temperature of the ocean and immediately this reacts and reacts quite a lot so that is that's why it's very important to avoid them because in a climate projection where the sea surface temperatures may change this may mean that this difference may also change so again it makes you worry sorry it's the same thing until I don't understand what is the cause of an effect I'm worried that it may do uncontrolled things in my simulation the radiative fluxes themselves are state dependent so this shows you the same sensitivity plots I showed before but done at present time and done in a future scenario say in the year 2100 main point it's the most extreme one so the main point is that it's much warmer planet then and you see well you could say that these are different and that the sensitivities are different and again we have a problem then and finally there's a technical thing how many minutes one minute two minutes the final thing is that there's dependence on the time I just show you the final thing which is this how do you actually proceed to do the tuning of the coupled model actually and what is very useful in this case is to use plots like this where you plot some measure of your radiative net top of the atmosphere or surface fluxes versus temperature either global average temperature and what is nice is that all models actually have a typical sensitivity and while they're wandering the space they do that so following an approximately constant linear line obviously if it's short enough ECOD does the same and the nice thing then is that you don't need to run your model for hundreds of years to guess where it will end up because then you can do an exercise like this you can take say ECOD estimate this from a long run you have done but maybe not the run with the final forcing the final setup etc you spent maybe months to do this and now you want to get as much information as you can from this well the slopes are very important because this way now I set up the model with the right forcing, the right tuning everything now is ready and I just do a short run a few years, ten years or so coupled which may already be expensive I look where I am and then I can sort of guess where I end up basically what the system will do is we'll try to set to zero the flux at the interface between the atmosphere and the ocean if you are in a permanent run say you're doing a pre-industrial run and so this can be done and this is actually an attempt to do this now with high resolution ECOD which is quite costly and the details are not exact but it gives you the idea that you can sort of guess from already 50 years of run what your equilibrium temperature will be and then you can decide if you like that or you don't the two sets of points are doing this either at top TOA or at surface and I think that's it I mentioned all the processes so we also worked on improving some dynamical processes in the model but I think we'll skip this


I'm sure many of you have heard of Brian Turner, a popular vegan bodybuilder, aka juiced up fake natural liar. He recently had an interview with Dr. Greger, or should we say The Claw? As seen in Scary Movie 2, E.T. as well as Harry Potter, it's surprising he can even hold up that microphone with that appendage he calls a hand. Let's see what they have to say. Dr. Greger, thank you for being on the channel. I really appreciate it. Happy to be here. How are you doing, man? Good. Yeah. All right, so I feel like this video is going to be an interesting one, and I feel like there's going to be a lot of people watching ready to nitpick everything away because there's a lot of anti-vegan arguments out there, and I feel like there'd be no better person to answer them than the famed Dr. Greger himself. Happy to help. Are you ready to jump into this? Let's do it. Okay. So what I mean by that is a lot of anti-vegans go straight to the anti-nutrient argument, which is, you know, a lot of plant-based foods have lectins, phytates, oxalates, and that cancels out the ability to absorb vitamins and minerals. What is your opinion on that, and what's your advice with that? It's ironic. I mean, you can't make a, you're not getting enough nutrition on a plant-based diet, since of course, plants are where essentially all our nutrition originally comes from. Are plants really where our nutrition originally comes from? If you're starting to look like a corpse in your late 40s, I've beaten this topic to death. The forms of vitamins and minerals and plants are not available to humans. We do not absorb them properly. The burden of proof for fruits and vegetables to contain important nutrients is on vegans. It shouldn't be accepted as a fact. So for example, lectins, I've got a bunch of videos about Dr. Gundry's plant paradox, and I think the first video in the series on nutrition facts.org is simply titled, Dr. Gundry's Plant Paradox Is Wrong. And I just go and enunciate and go through all the reasons why.  But if you soak them overnight, they'd get firm and rubbery, and then you can put them in a salad and make people really sick. Because the lectins, but they're utterly destroyed by proper cooking, you can squash your bean with a fork, then you don't have to worry about lectins. How can you say lectins are harmless when people are quitting the vegan diet after a few months because it just destroys their gut lining? This happens because of gluten as well. Are we just ignoring those people? The fairly local vegan is at the point of consuming only pureed, boiled, baby food mush, and she still spends half the day lying in bed. The only purpose of consuming these harmful plant foods is as a source of energy as when you consume them in artificially high amounts without animal foods present, you destroy your stomach, you destroy your health. Potentially anti-cancer benefits, which you particularly see in phytates, phytic acid, see based on studies on puppies and rats done decades ago, it was considered an anti-nutrient in terms of absorption of calcium. But now we think of phytic acid, these phytates, as beneficial. Having anti-cancer properties, we should go out of our way. We should not be soaking our nuts. Why? Because we might be losing phytates. We don't want to lose phytates as one of the benefits of eating nuts. So, saying that phytates have anti-cancer benefits doesn't address the mineral deficiencies that most people are suffering from. For Dr. Greger to say, you shouldn't soak your beans to reduce phytic acid is comical. As phytates are literally the storage form of the mineral for the plant, meaning that mineral will not get absorbed unless you soak it and break down the phytic acid. Then oxalates, there are a few high oxalate sources, so spinach, swiss chard, beet greens, you don't want to overdo those. If you're following my recommendations to eat lots of greens, and so my daily dozen recommendation is two servings of greens, plus a serving of cruciferous vegetables, which could also be greens.   He acknowledges that you shouldn't overdo certain high oxalate greens, but if you go back to the fact that the nutrients in these foods aren't bioavailable, why are we risking consuming high levels of potentially harmful substances? Avoiding high oxalate foods doesn't answer the question of mineral absorption being inhibited by oxalates, it also doesn't answer why you should eat your greens.  So you would say that the absorption of calcium is not a problem because you're having oxalates when you're eating spinach and kale and all these dark greens and stuff. Oh, I mean you're not going to absorb the calcium, you don't get a spinach for calcium because it's stingy with the calcium because it's combined with the oxalates, but if you made like a spinach kale pesto, it's not like the oxalates in the spinach would somehow grab onto the calcium and kale, it just binds up its own calcium. So you get calcium from other low oxalate dark green leafy vegetables. Okay, because one of the arguments is that if you're eating like tofu or something like that, it's calcium set and that's how you're getting a good portion of calcium, but you're also having spinach with it. The spinach is going to stop you from absorbing the calcium from the tofu.  Nice. But there are healthier sources of soy than tofu because it's relative to processed food, so tempeh or edamame or the whole soy foods even better. Okay, nice. Doesn't it seem strange to you how all of these young vegan influencers are praising these decaying corpse-like vegan doctors almost like they are being paid? How could you seriously sit in a room and smile across from that zombie? Gregor is right about oxalates from one food, not inhibiting the absorption of calcium from another, but the point is that whenever a food has a significant mineral content, it likely has a correspondingly high oxalate or phytate aka phytic acid content to which these minerals are bound to. It also ignores the real issue of vitamin K2 and vitamin D3 being needed to mobilize calcium. Calcium is the last thing we need in our diets. The amount the body needs is insignificant. Without vitamin K2 and vitamin D3, calcium cannot be used. Even if you get vitamin K2 from a food like natto on a vegan diet, you won't have enough cholesterol and other precursor nutrients for efficient metabolism. Vegans don't understand this because they stick to preschool levels of nutrition so that they can brainwash and fearmonger everyone else. All right, so next up, the other biggest argument that I get because my channel is heavily fitness-based, muscle-based, things like that. So a lot of the arguments is that plant-based protein is inferior because of the amino acid profile. Specifically, the amount of leucine is lower in plant-based foods. So what's your response to that? What's your advice? Thank God for that because leucine increases the engine of aging, enzyme TOR and I presume there'll be a substantial discussion on my next book, How Not to Age, which should be out December 2022 on just that very topic. And so for longevity sake, we want to decrease leucine intake. We want to decrease methionine intake, also found concentrated animal proteins. We want to decrease branching of amino acid intake. We want to decrease, in fact, our essential amino acid intake across the board down to recommended levels instead of getting the excess protein, which is associated with cardiometabolic disease. Dr. Greger, why are you writing a book on how not to age if you look 20 years older than you are? The body's systems are not efficient enough to metabolize plant amino acids into proteins as you aren't getting enough of the other precursor nutrients. It's not paper value of amino acids equals protein. That's not how these cycles in the body work. Krebs cycle, urea cycle. I've explained these in my Cam Newton video. Blaming mTOR for aging is like blaming running for your knees hurting. It's simplifying the answer to avoid the underlying issue. What's funny is that vegans will blame all of these fake things in order to get people to follow the vegan diet, but when the vegan diet actually starts causing the misuse, it can't possibly be the diet. The third biggest argument that I get from anti-vegans is about omega-3 and the fact that plant-based omega-3 sources are high, well, are entirely ALA, alpha-lenoic acid. Alpha-lenoic acid. I mean, this guy doesn't even know what it's called. And our conversion of ALA to EPA and DHA is poor. So what would your opinion and advice be on that one? So you need two things. You need conversion and you need to have a good source of ALA in the first place. That's why I encourage you. That's one of the reasons why one of my daily dozen, this is my daily dozen checklist about the healthiest of healthy foods out there, a tablespoon of ground flaxseeds. That's one of the reasons that flaxseeds are on there because it's a very concentrated source of ALA, alpha-lenoic acid. And we can facilitate that process by cutting down their intake of junkie omega-6 rich oils such as cotton seed oil, safflower oil, sunflower oil, and corn oil, some of these junkie processed food oils, one might find. One can also just take long chain omega-3s preformed in algae or yeast-based EPA-DHA supplements. I encourage people to consider taking 250 milligrams of preformed DHA every day. For long-term brain health, particularly in men, I, until we know more, I would suggest it. Now of course you can get it from fish, but along with fish comes, because of how polluted our world has become. If you look at toxic heavy metals, PCBs, dioxins, the highest levels of most of these persistent organic pollutants are found in the aquatic food chain. The only way, I mean to the healthiest source for everybody would be either make yourself from the short chain fatty acids or take a preformed algae-based pollutant-free source, plant-based source. Dr. Greger is right that reducing omega-6 increases conversion of omega-3 into EPA, but a vegan diet is so high in omega-6, this is not possible. There has never been a study that even shows alpha-linoleic acid can be converted into DHA, only EPA in very small amounts, and even Dr. Greger acknowledges that the brain will rot away without an omega-3 supplement. To say that fish is polluted, but not acknowledged that algae supplements are processed with hexane and are incredibly toxic, is comical. Last year was a heavy year of very popular YouTubers going x-vegan, and then the thing that they say a lot of them was saying is that they had, you know, some fish, or they had their first, you know, piece of steak or something like that, and they woke up the next day, their sexual functions were going back to normal, they were able to get erections, they were becoming lubricated, their libido came back as one that I hear a lot, and I don't know, what do you have to say about that?   I mean, there's something called placebo effect, right, where you get beneficial effects because you're imagining them to be beneficial effects from something that's actually nothing. Is he malfunctioning? Sexual function relies on blood flow. How do you increase blood flow to the pelvic region? You do that by having healthy arteries. How do you have healthy arteries? There's only one diet ever proven to reverse heart disease, opening up arteries without drugs, without surgery, plant-based diet, a whole food plant-based diet. I mean, if that was the all plant-based diet I could do, reverse the number one killer of men and women, right, then you'd think it'd be kind of the default diet until proven otherwise. In fact, it can also be so effective preventing arrest and reversing. Other leading killers, type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, seem to make the case for plant-based eating simply overwhelming. One of the people that I'm talking about specifically did say they had fish that night, they woke up the next morning, and everything was feeling way different, you know, they were getting erections and things like that. So I figured you were going to say mind over matter, basically like they convinced themselves that they felt better the next morning because they had convinced themselves that the vegan diet was causing them to feel bad. So the first time they had something that wasn't vegan, it was going to be the cure. And then the next morning they woke up telling themselves it was the cure. You would hope that these vegans at least have a shred of honesty, but they don't. This is clearly not a placebo effect. It's been reported in every ex-vegan that has a media spotlight and Hathaway Tim Sheaf, Raw Alignment, Matt Monarch, when they eat fish, they felt like their brain was rebooting. Goes to show that the animal version of B12, of Omega 3, contain different forms of nutrients, as well as other nutrients that work synergistically that your body needs, that is not obtained on a vegan diet, whether you're supplementing or not. How hard is it for these clowns just to say that the vegan diet isn't for everyone? How can they double down so hard on their BS? It makes them look so disingenuous to anyone with an IQ above 80.  Now we're getting into kind of like the less popular arguments, but I still do hear these quite often. This more so comes from like the hardcore carnivore channels who are really, really fervent on, you know, calling out vegans and stuff. And so this one is, a lot of them will say that veganism is causing vegans to age quicker. So their skin is aging quicker. Their skin is discolored or more pale over time. What's your response to that one? I mean, the studies that have been done on skin health, where, I mean, the randomized control trials, so they took college students, randomized to be more fruits and vegetables or not, got a significant improvement in rated attractiveness and healthfulness. And that's because we get this golden glow because the crotinoids in fruits and vegetables gets deposited in our skin.  And so when you actually take people, randomize them to a healthier diet and then put their pictures before and after to unbiased independent third-party observers and say, who's more attractive? Who looks healthier? It's not only an cross-sectional basis, those eating healthier rate higher in that way, but you can actually over a few weeks significantly improve the attractiveness of people. And this is not just white Caucasian skin, but it's done for Asians, done for African Americans. For any skin tone, you can improve its healthfulness by eating crotinoids, which are only found in fruits and vegetables. A vegan diet gives us a healthy and rosy glow. Oh, buddy, is that why all of your vegan puss boys are on my video saying I wear makeup?  Let's take a step back to reality. How can he say that?  The only thing one really has to seriously be concerned about on a plant-based diet is getting a regular, reliable source of vitamin B12, otherwise you can end up paralyzed, eventually they're dead. There's a happy note, but serious shit, right? Right, right. Okay, so there was an article published in New England Journal of Medicine, the most prestigious medical journal on the planet. You know what it's called? Blindness in a Vegan. How did that do for the movement? We can't do this.  Everybody needs to get their B12. Screwing what up exactly?  In this study, a man went blind because he didn't supplement B12. Do vegans tell you that when saying how great the vegan diet is? Oh my God, go vegan for the animals, but make sure to take your B12 so you don't go blind. Well, that'll wrap up this interview. It's amazing how the vegan echo chamber never ends due to the low IQ population and Zoomer attention span. I feel like I will be stuck on the same topics over and over again. At least I can try to have some fun with it. Thank you guys for joining me. Please like the video, subscribe, hit that bell icon. If you guys want to support me further, definitely check out my book, The Uncessual Indigenous Diet, that is available on Amazon, A Testament to My Seven Years on a Nutrient-Based Animal Foods Diet. You can also go to Frankie's Naturals, Frankie's Free Range Meat, frank-to-final.com. Check all that stuff out, guys, down in the description below. Thanks again, guys. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.


Hello and welcome to the Jason Tawny show. I'm Joe Wamba joined now with Jason Tawny head coach of the baseball team and coach You guys had a very important series with Lebanon Valley unable to pull it off But man the team showed some fight in that series capper against Lebanon Valley. Yeah, it was it was a tough series Really important series to us. Unfortunately. We dropped the first game. I had to lead late our bullpen just just didn't get done even after making some changes and then You know went into the doubleheader Dan through the ball, okay I just couldn't quite get enough runs to win it and then the second game. Yeah, down by three bottom of the seventh We come back tie it up and then have a walk off by by Kevin copis with it And they it's recorded as a single, but it was a one hopper to the fence. Yeah It was it was a shot to win to win the ball game. So it was nice to get that one But yeah, it was this weekend was a challenge for us We didn't we didn't we didn't pitch as well as we needed to and doesn't necessarily pull you out of the playoff race But now a little bit more pressure on these series coming up, especially with the big one against Alvarnia this week Yeah, you know, it's it's it's amazing that we're in a position. We're still sitting in fifth place We have a shot to catch the fourth place team Technically speaking. Yeah, I mean if we went out, we're probably gonna be in but we have to we have to sweep Alvarnia this weekend and we'll have to sweep messiah at the end of the year and you know Alvarnia is a good ballclub. I think they're number 11 in the country right now Are we capable? Sure.  Absolutely Probable. Yeah. Yeah, that's gonna be a challenge. It's gonna be tough Right. He's gonna have to play your brand of vault consistently for the whole however many innings you guys have to play Yeah, I mean we'll have to play it at our best and like I said, we're capable. We've done it before You know, we're probably one of the few teams in the conference that that can beat Alvarnia multiple times in my opinion Which we did last year we beat them we beat them twice they beat us twice and then we had them Two outs bottom of the ninth at their place. We had them be we to beat them three out of four last year So we're so we're close. We could do it. It's just it's just difficult in any situation sweeping a series It doesn't matter who you're playing sweeping a series is difficult Before you guys head over to Alvarnia and then play them at home for senior day on Saturday You're gonna make a stop over at Catholic for an important out-of-conference game. How important is that for you? I think it's gonna be really important. I know we we played them two weeks ago. They are again a good program They were receiving votes. They were number 26 D3 baseball when we beat them last two weeks ago so they're a good program and You know, we like to use these non-conference games late in the year to start figuring out some others Maybe some other players some other situations some other things we get in We've also got a couple injuries so that opens up opens up some playing time for some people So yeah, I do think it's a really important game. We have a guys can be starting this Wednesday that it'll be his first collegiate start on the mound. He's pitched out of the bullpen with this be his first start on the mound That'll be awfully exciting to see and you guys talk about your capabilities At one point in the season you guys were playing Sunni Cortland I think they were number three or number five in the team. Yeah, and you guys were right there How do you lean on those experiences to push you over that hill? You know, we've we've we've played it. We always play a very competitive schedule We've always done that since I've been here We're gonna play a nationally ranked schedule and so we get to play teams like a coreland or whoever it may be and you know Through the majority of that game. We were right there And fortunately, you know, some of our personal woes which has been our bullpen, you know, haunted us in that game And it's still haunting us now. So, you know, we have to continue to build on that I mean, I as I said to the guys right after that game, you know, they're actually number two in the country That week I think they went to number three the next day But but still being playing the number two team of the country playing, you know, coach Joe Brown Who I've known for years who is one of the winningest coaches in the history of college baseball For him to even say to us that we were one of the toughest teams They played this year and you know, if you've got two more pitchers just like that guy who threw which is our number three At the time. He's like you guys should be in a regional. I said, yeah, that's that's that's the ability We haven't just haven't been able to put it together The ability and the goal and you know, you think about you don't want to think about next season You're focusing on this year But you think about the growth of the team and the guys as individuals It's leading to some optimism. It is, you know, it's you know I said it last week that we were a little bit of a rebuilding year and the truth of the matter is You know next year we this year we graduate five guys Two of which are starters. So we're gonna be returning seven position players and the two two pitchers that were a seven starting position players and the two pitchers that were That were losing her both out of the bullpen So we have a lot returning. So yeah, we look really promising moving forward, but that's not still not a good enough excuse You know in our program and you know this Joe, we want to win every year, you know rebuilding year Yeah, but you know, we expect our freshman to step up and some have right and we want to win every year and we can We know we just got to stay with that focus. Yep Well coach, I appreciate your time this week and good luck on your road games this week and again senior day on Saturday Sounds good. Thank you. He's Jason Taney. I'm Joe Wamba and this has been the Jason Taney show


Live from the Sands Convention Center, Las Vegas, Nevada. Extracting the signal from the noise. It's theCUBE, covering HP Discover 2015. Brought to you by HP. And now your hosts, John Furrier and Dave Vellante. Okay, welcome back everyone. We are live in Las Vegas for HP Discover 2015. This is theCUBE, Silicon Angles flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signal from the noise. I'm John Furrier. Founder of Silicon Angles, Dave Vellante. Founder of Wikibon.com. Our next guest is Johan Deschifler. SVPGM of Worldwide Technology Services. CUBE alum, been on every year. Thanks for coming back again. Great to see you. You're welcome. Great setup here. We've got a nice backdrop here. You look good. Day one. So you look fresh. You haven't had all the zillion customer meetings. Full of energy. Good morning, John. Good morning, Dave. Happy coming back. Great to see you. So you guys are out of the gate with an announcement. A quick update on this application-ready infrastructure announcement you guys had. What's going on with you guys and the services? So remember last time when we were in Barcelona, we announced that we were going to go into the direction of software-defined infrastructure, which clearly puts the control layer on top of the infrastructure layer, and where we look at software-defined infrastructure in an integrated way. Well, today we announced that we go one level deeper. And so we announced a number of services around software-defined compute, software-defined compute in a cloud environment, software-defined around networking, and software-defined around storage. So it's bringing it to the next level. But I think the more important thing of what we announced today is around the four transformation areas. You will hear that that is a team throughout the Discover event. And I truly believe that that is a really important approach, not only for TS Consulting, but also for the Enterprise Group. And for you, Lud Packardt, as a company, because it really looks at what are the customer problems that are happening today, and how can we react to that from a transformation perspective? You know, customers go through this transformation. You know that we have a reputation. We spoke about the experience workshops that we delivered in the past. Remember cloud mobility. Well, today we announced the transformation areas workshops in the four areas that HP is going to bring forward today. The patient teased out the four areas, hybrid infrastructure, which I do love the software-defined infrastructure. I like that slogan. It's really nice. Digital Enterprise, data-driven Enterprise, workplace productivity, kind of the UX experience, all tied together with all the stuff in between with security. It's not easy, so it sounds easy. Share with us from a customer standpoint what are the challenges to make their agile, social business, what we try to do here is to understand what the most important customer opportunities issues that they are facing, and we try to bundle it in those four areas that you just named. And it's really a different approach that we take. It's listening to what the customer business needs are, how can we translate it into top-of-mind priorities for them, and how can we translate that into a number of transformation areas that address those needs. And so we felt like, with the workshops that we have been delivering in the past, that we were in a really strong position to deliver new workshops that really address hybrid infrastructure, security, data-driven Enterprise or organization, and then the most mobile workforce. And these workshops are here at Discover in length, duration. Can you share some color around? Someone's here, on site, what do they do? We deliver them at Discover in a short version. So people can enroll for the workshops. There is a booth available where people can subscribe for the workshops. And we take the customers through the methodology that we are using. And I'm really proud that we can make this very real. Going back to Discover, we delivered 100 websites at Discover. I think it was one of the best experiences we had. Because it really means that when we talk about a certain subject that we can take into the discovery workshops and explain how things are implemented in a real-life situation. This is real-life what happened last year. We had 45 minutes to talk about strategy around store and information management. And rather than me explaining it, we went to the experience workshop and go through it real-life. It was unprepared, we dive into it and the value to the customer was so important that, and I'm not joking, we immediately ordered two and we implemented one for them in Europe and one in the United States. That's called closing the deal on site. That's what it's all about. But no, that's something that's going on. People can get information, certainly we do our share by broadcasting on theCUBE. But in the moment on the ground, immersive expertise, I was really impressed with Barcelona. So the plan here is the same kind of concept, bring the workshops and engage with the customers. But what if someone's watching theCUBE and they didn't make it to discover, what do they do? Is there going to be a follow-up? Is there going to be a road show? What's the plan? So the way it works is so first of all, we have done this before, as I mentioned. And so on a yearly basis we deliver close to 500 workshops and so it's something that is really real. So they can contact me at hp.com and we can take it from there or they can go to their local consulting or account management representative and we will take care of that. And so it's not only because we make the announcement here, we deliver those workshops right away. For example, around security we delivered one of the first workshops about two weeks ago in Middle East so these are the things that are going on in real life for customers. So I've got to ask you, pretend that I'm a customer for a minute and I bump into you in the hallway and you close two deals with me and I'm going to get the order signed with me. I say, I've been working with HP with IT, transforming IT but I've got to think strategically, I think bigger. I've got to bring in big data, I've got a new security model, I've got to reboot, I've got incidents going on, I've got breaches, I've got to change the user experience with all the API based applications. What do I do? I need a strategic framework. Not just don't I want to do IT, I've got to go bigger on strategic, the whole company. How do you engage? What we love to do is to understand where is the customer from the business going, what is happening in that market. And what we find out more and more is that being very agile and being very fast to solve new business problems has become a major priority for IT. So once we have understood where the customer wants to go from a business perspective we try to understand how we can bring that into IT priorities. And then how it fits in the overall IT approach. And as you mentioned in your introduction we cannot see infrastructure including the control layer independent from the application. So we want to understand what is going on at the business level, how that implies the applications and how that has an impact on the overall infrastructure. And as business is going faster and faster, you know the development of application making applications available needs to go faster and faster. But there is a correlation between the applications and the infrastructure that you put in place. And so rather than thinking from a box point of view, we try to think what is going on with the customer at the business point of view and how does it come all together. And by the way when we talk about the four workshops about the four transformation areas we can deliver them in an isolated way but we can also deliver them in an integrated way. And I truly believe that you cannot see things like mobility independent from what is going on in big data. And when you have figured out what you want to do with the data that is available to your company, how you want to make it accessible to your employees and to your customers, you need to have a platform that is going to bring the compute value to deliver that information. And that's where Cloud and Ibit infrastructure and so rather than looking at it in a one by one, what we can do is have it in an integrated way. So Johan one of the biggest things we hear from the practitioners in our community is that they struggle not with just the technology piece but the whole cultural aspects, the business process, that's the transformational issues. Are you seeing the same and how is HP helping customers navigate through that? Well I'm really glad that you bring up that point because this is something that is really a high priority for us. You know that within the consulting practice we also have an education practice. And traditionally our education was really focused about the technology that we delivered. And we believe that with the new style of business and the new style of IT there is a new opportunity for us around education. And the way we look at our education business is really to an answer to that question. Half of our education business is focused on how can we help customers understand the new environment but also half of it is focused on change management and how do we transform the workforce of the customer from where it was in the past to where it needs to be in the future. For example when you talk about mobility when you talk about how to make people work in a different way from different places with different technology as you mentioned it's not only a technology but change. It is mainly a behavioral change. It's a cultural change and so within our EDU education practice we really focus on that aspect. And by the way really big customers are very interested in that. And that's a new way of delivering educational services. I love that example you mentioned about the workload piece not just being a box provider. That's IT old IT. The new style of IT business really is about application centric. The software defined infrastructure gives program ability to use a geek term to handle workload configurations agile if you will. So I got to ask you that's a strategic conversation that's business conversation that's not an IT conversation. Are they tied together? They have to be right so you have to know your workload what drives the business and then you got again. So do you guys provide that service end to end in which vertical? Global Enterprise is there certain verticals? All verticals? I think if there is one thing that we have learned in technology services consulting is that you cannot do everything to everybody everywhere. So we really specialize and what we want to make sure is that we can make customers happy about the ULT Packard Enterprise Group Intellectual Property that they buy. Whether it's around service storage, networking, convert systems. But we want to make sure that we can bring it in the overall picture. And so of course our DNA is around the infrastructure IP but you cannot implement infrastructure without having the control layer on top of it without having the software defined on top of it. And as we move on we try to understand what is going on from an application point of view and from a business point of view. Not that we are going to become the business consultant that's not our priority. We are not going to go into application consulting and the price services dot that. But when it comes to make the link between business, application and then the infrastructure that's where we play. And I truly believe that to do our role in a good way in a meaningful way to the customer we need to understand what is going on in the application space. And we need to know what the impact on the business is going to be. And I can give a real-life example of that. You know we with a large American pharmaceutical company where we were doing a major transformation business around storage and information management. It's better to know which application runs on top of that infrastructure to know how you are going to handle it. In that case you know their electronic their e-commerce was running on that platform. Before you make a change there you better know what happens is system goes down. And you do it in a different way when you know what the business case is. So are we becoming the business consultants on driving new business models in pharmaceutical? Probably not. But do we want to understand the business they are in, understand what is really critical for them, what is going on in their market? We absolutely do. Because the better we understand that, the better we can link it to the work that we are doing and bring value to the customer. You can be a steward, not so much the business consultant. They might know their business model differently. What you're saying is you guys would come in and assist in execution of implementing that. They hire a consultancy pharma they lay it all out. And this works really well for us because when you look at HP also on the hardware side we have a DNA of working with partners. The vast majority of our of our gear is brought to customers through channel partners and that is really strategic to us. And by the way I would like to bring that forward too. Also our consulting services are now being opened to channel partners. And so we have the DNA to work with other companies. We do not go into a company with statements. We know it all from business up to infrastructure up to business. And we want to play a cooperative, a partner led model there. You're saying you will white label your consulting services to channel partners. Is that right? Did I just hear that? You know that we have a major channel event here in Las Vegas in March. It's called the Global Partner Conference. The major announcement we made at the Global Partner Conference is that we open up our consulting portfolio to channel partners. Because we truly believe that not only HP needs to move to new style of business, new style of IT but we are also convinced that channel partners need to go into that direction. And we believe and by the way that's the request we got from senior management is that TS consulting can play an important role in helping the channel partners to move what I would call from traditional to new style of business channel partner for HP. And that was the major announcement that we made at GPC. And by the way the attention we got from the channel partners, the reaction we got from the channel partners was overwhelming. And it was really really great for us to see that when we talk with channel partners that the level of maturity for them to go into consulting was completely different. Channel partners will go very high into consulting, even business consulting in a specific industry vertical, for example healthcare or for example banking. And then we have channel partners who are really close to the product and we can help them independent on where they are to open up our consulting services to open up the transformation area workshops so that they can bring it to their customers. How about the global perspective? I love to get the global perspective from you European, you travel all over the world. We tend to see things through the prism of Silicon Valley right, the Ubers, the Airbnbs the Facebooks, the Googles are there differences across the globe? There's certainly geopolitical differences, but what are you seeing in the terms of this transformation? Well I think it is not so much different in this transformation compared to what we saw in the past you know, and there is no good and bad but dependent on where a country is dependent on where an economy is probably the IT is also in a certain state of maturity. And so you have very mature markets across the Americas you have very mature markets across the EMEA and you have very mature markets across Asia Pacific. And so, but you also have more developing countries emerging countries and so what we see is that in all countries in all regions you have different levels of maturity and so what you are trying to do there is to make sure that for the most mature markets and the most mature countries we offer those more advanced services but we realize that there are also environments, you know, customers that there are also countries where there is still, you know, work to do that we did in other countries two, three, four, five years ago. And so one of the things that we do moving forward is making sure that we have a more segmented, a more focused approach on what is needed in a specific market. And we believe that for example I mean there are countries in Latin America that have a different need compared to the United States there are countries in EMEA in Africa that have a different need compared to for example the northern part of Europe the same is true in Asia Japan has a different need compared to, for example maturing and emerging countries in that region and so we really try to go one step deeper and try to understand what is the maturity, what kind of projects can we deliver but be more customer specific around that. And you have the ability to sort of adjust the skillsets and maturity that you put forth as HP based on that region or is it more sort of it's aligned already because you've got people feet on the street in those regions. So the way we work is that we try to have a globally defined portfolio where we try to follow up what is going on in the market for example SDI for example the transformation areas and then what we do is we engage locally with the customers it's extremely important for us to have our local teams in front of the customers at the country level or at the regional level and then when it comes to delivery we try to find the right mix between having people in front of the customer like solution architects, project managers subject matter experts but then from an efficiency point of view from an economical point of view you need to have the right remote delivery people and so the remote delivery people we manage them from a worldwide perspective but everything that happens close to the customer is managed close to the customer and I think it's our responsibility to make sure that we can make that work for a customer in a seamless way and one of the big advantages we bring is that in an international way and so when large customers engage with us we can bring them virtually the same service across the globe I mean the global economies here in Silicon Valley we see the venture capital investments a lot in India, a lot in Asia a lot of great stuff, it's all flat now the world is flat, congratulations thanks for coming, the four pillars hybrid, data driven workplace, productivity you guys are doing it all you have the workshops here on the ground please enroll for it we have many opportunities the real question is what's your quote of this year how many deals are you going to close how many customers are you going to close as I said we made a hundred last year you know what my expectation is growth, growth, growth I want to beat that and we are ready for it so please come to us join us we'll give you a fist pump and a high five later and a retweet, Johan decides for this SPP technology and services consulting here inside the cube, backstage pass we're live for three days we're here to go to HP Discover.Social that is our open, engaging social media site for all the cube and keynotes go to crowdchat.net HP Discover, the influencers are there all the signals being shared this year thanks for watching, we'll be right back after this short break


I'm not even sure if I do a very good job at listening to that guidance. Sometimes I find myself by chance in just the right situation, despite my efforts to avoid it. And sometimes I do feel like I'm effectively listening to my guidance, listening to, like, yeah, which choice makes me feel alive? Or which, what do I secretly want to do? That's a, that's a useful question to access the guidance. I think the guidance is, for me, I access it through questions like that. What, what do I secretly want? What do I, would I dare do if I weren't afraid of this, this, and this? If I weren't afraid of what people would think. If I weren't afraid of, of what might happen. So then to bring that into awareness without like the pressure, okay, so you're going to have to do it even though you're afraid that this is going to happen, but you have to do it. No, no, no. It's to trust that bringing the knowledge of what you're guided to do into awareness will change you into a person who will choose to follow that guidance. It's not about forcing yourself or bullying yourself or bribing yourself into following the guidance. It's to bring it into awareness, to bring maybe your readiness to take that risk or to make that choice into awareness and to trust that that's enough. Like I, I see that I am ready and I trust and from their action unfolds or maybe I see that I'm not ready and I see that I'm scared. And here's what I'm scared of. Okay, good to know that. Yeah, here's my guidance and I'm not listening to it. It's okay, you're not going to get an F.


We're out here, Jeff Raleigh skatepark, it's an older Spawn Ranch skatepark, this is Spawn Ranch here. It's Spawn. Jeff Raleigh came here and he cut the ribbon. Damn! Yeah, he came all the way from England. He did. That's kind of swag. I'm trying to do this quick today, I'm trying to do a back side 270 on the hip and then a front 180 manual on this. Back 270 on the hip, front 180 manual. Yeah, you could probably stand right here, to be honest. It's a good thing you didn't land it, because Zach's head was in the way. I just want you to get in the way. Yeah, I was in the way? Yeah. Maybe you're in a bad spot coming. Alright, alright. Dang, Zach, why are you in the way, dude? I'm back here in the way. Come on, man. 50 bucks, he says. He says, if I land this first try, give me 50 bucks. I said, okay. That was close. You're halfway. Let's draw back.  You can do kick flip nose. Oh yeah. I'm not owning this quite yet. Own the trick, bro.  Just kind of swag, then. Dude, are you Bob Bernquist? See that all the way. That was the mega ramp. That was epic swag gamers. California skateboarding now. We're at the most staunch park in Los Angeles. Yeah. Staunch, staunch. Nah, it's not that staunch, I don't think. Nah, not really. It used to be pretty chill. I feel like it used to be. Yeah. It's not super staunch. Yeah, it's mellow here. Everyone's super nice. I like it. Let's see if this will work. Like a handbrake. That's all right. It was first try, though. And they know it was first try. That looks tough. Yeah, you did. I need to be tough. Cherry. You can start training, dude. You need ears like this. Seize these. How to do a feeble on the flat ball? On the rainbow rail? No, no, no. Flat ball, I believe. I know, it's a rainbow rail. You reckon? Because it goes down. Just ditch a bit. Well, you can't really call it a kink. Nah, kink's right. I'm about to feeble this kink, right? You're right. I just found a shoelace on the ground. Like a ripped one. And I just put it in and fastened it to this lace.  That's insane. Yeah. I'm being a pussyfoot about it.  Come on, man. I'm at Cherry, dude.  Pull out your uniform.  How's it? I got to lean. First tee. Keep it going. Keep it going. Go to the flat bar. Give me a flip trick. Hit the ledge. Curve ledge. If it seemed like this video was super just like cut and shot and thrown together, it's because it was. Yeah. I just had some clips of skating from a couple of different parks. Check out this sick hat that I got from the, what did I get this from? I feel like I got this from a shop somewhere. Super gas station aesthetic. My previous misconception about Cherry is that only the hardest of hardcore Los Angeles skaters skated there and it was staunch. And then we went there today and it was fine. Everyone was super nice. Everyone was like super nice and respectful. And it was sick. Had a good time. But in my head going there, I was like, I'm not good enough to skate this park.  I'm sure you guys could probably relate. I think it goes back to like skating in Waterloo in Sydney and Waterloo being like the cherry of Sydney and all like the heavy hitters would be at Waterloo or Australia and Sydney heavy hitters. Because the level of skateboarding is different obviously in Sydney compared to Los Angeles. But yeah, you get that vibe at Waterloo sometimes and sometimes you don't. But yeah, Cherry was fine. Definitely had a good, fun session there. It's about it for this video guys. If you're new here, hit subscribe, leave me a thumbs up. Follow me on Instagram, Matt Enakism. I post way more over there. But yeah, if you haven't checked out eveningmob.com yet check it out.  It's still 20% off on like hoodies and shirts and stuff. So go and check it out. But until next time guys, cheers for watching the video. And yeah, catch you guys in the next one. Peace.