Hello, everyone, and welcome to Pack Your Suitcase with Paddington. Paddington comes to London all the way from Peru with just one small leather suitcase packed with his most treasured possessions. If you were going on a journey like Paddington, what would you pack to remind you of home? This summer from the 7th of June until the 16th of July, the British Library are asking children across the country to create and personalise their own paper suitcase and reveal what they'd pack inside to remind them of home or a special place using art, creative writing or collage. This new creative project for children is inspired by Paddington and powerful stories of journeys and new homes. To inspire children to take part, the British Library invited some brilliant authors and illustrators to make their own suitcases and show us what they'd pack if they were going on a journey. This story is told by Richard O'Neill, Richard as an author and storyteller. There isn't time to tell you anything while Richard is describing his suitcase, and so I can let you know now what is happening. As he starts his tale, Richard is in a crisp white shirt with black braces over his shoulders. He's sitting on a narrow bench in a traditional wooden caravan leaning back against a red cushion. Pale wooden beams hold up the horseshoe-shaped top of the van, and the wallpaper is grey covered with large pink roses. In a picture which he shows us of the outside of the van, there are three wooden steps going up to the only door, and the wagon has four large wheels. Next to him is a pine sideboard on which he has laid out his favourite things that he would want to take with him.  His face wrinkles slightly when he smiles, which he does a lot. His suitcase is made of brown cardboard and is covered with stickers. I love to travel, mountains, a cooking pot on an open fire, a waterfall and a notebook. Take a seat with Richard O'Neill as he reveals what's inside his suitcase and the stories that he carries with him. Hello, I'm Richard O'Neill, storyteller and author, and I've been asked by the British Library to create my very own suitcase. I hope it inspires you to create your own too. Now on the outside of my suitcase you can see at the front and at the back, I've put lots and lots of stickers about things that mean a lot to me, including this photograph here of the old-fashioned caravan that I'm sat in right now talking to you. I've also done a label which says, Ask Me For A Story, because I hope on my travels people will ask me for a story. And I thought, what if I lose my suitcase and somebody finds it and wonders why all of the things are in it? I thought I'd better write a little letter to explain it, so I'd like to read this to you now. Writers love to write and many like to travel. There's something I wrote as a little introduction going back in time to when I was a child. It's time to shift again, and that's OK. I'm used to it. I only have a few special items. There isn't room in my home for a lot of things, because my home is mobile. But my mam says that I can keep my special things in a suitcase that can be stored under the bed in the caravan, so it keeps safe and secure in case of any bumps in the road. Now as an adult in my suitcase, I have some notes and some little bits of writing for some new stories I'm working on. I also have a very precious cup, which although it seems very delicate, it's already 100 years old and has survived lots of journeys. It's much tougher than it looks. I can use my cup if anyone is kind enough to offer me a cup of tea. I have a list of stories, so I don't forget them. It's a long list, so each entry has a couple of words, some in English and some in Romani. Greedy King, Choon Gray, Baro Bowery, Yinot Ridler and so on and so on. And then of course I have to pack a pencil and some paper. Now these writing tools are not just to record all the amazing things I might see in here, but to cheer me up when I might feel a little bit lonely. I've noticed that no matter what I write, even if it would seem moany or boring to others, my pencil and paper never complain or judge. They just let me put the words out there. Then there's my favourite pebble from a beach I once visited that people in the local village were so welcome in and kind. Then there's the old key that was given to me by an older lady who told me she had no idea which locket fitted, so wherever I go I should ask people if I could try it in their locks. And I have. It hasn't fitted any locks so far, but I have made lots of people smile when I tell them why I carry this key. Who knows, one day it might even open a treasure chest. There's the wooden spoons, which you can use to eat, but also you can clack them together to make a lovely percussion sound. And who knows, I might find a band who needs somebody like me to join them. Then there's the homemade wooden clothes peg, which reminds me of my family. It is also very useful for keeping my papers together. And then finally, there is this lovely painted horseshoe that a friend gave me for a gift for no reason at all, apart from they knew I would like it. It could bring me luck, but I could also use it to play a game of coits. Well, that's everything that's in my suitcase. And I hope you enjoy your travels as much as I do.


Hello, everybody. Thank you so much for having me over. This poem is part of the writing project that I participated in as part of the invitation from Graham, and it is called What I Dreamed of. I dream with my eyes open. I'm awake, sometimes with them closed. Presence is found somewhere between what was and where I'd like to go. There are millions of stars blinking like curious eyelids within the ceiling above me. And although night here, outside, it isn't even dark. I dream with my eyes open that someday, that soon, I will build a world beyond magic. I tell myself daily, build it, and they will come. Not sure yet who all I will invite. All of you, maybe. All of you right here with me. Because I want kindness to guide us. I want peace to unite us, but somehow, without the presence of storm, we all seem to get a bit bored. So look at that war that we construct. Look at our frail little bodies caught in the net of it all. Look at us bow to the fear of not having another day to love someone and watch that fear helping us gravitate towards each other. I write love poems. I breathe in chaos. It burns like a salt gulp of ocean water. I exhale sorrow. There is not a soul that's not on fire out there, and it makes me sick to know that conflict is the cost of loving and being loved. It makes me spit at the idea of unconditional. And there's no cause without consequence. There's no reaction without the action portion. All that there is, all that there can ever be is stillness. But we live in a world that is not still, that dances around itself, spins around an imaginary axis. So tell me that you don't spin from one harm to another. Tell me that you don't wish to be held spellbound while you move restless like that. Tell me this. Why be so restless? Why be so afraid to be here under this grand microscope? Why do you have to hide behind those pretty, pretty eyes? What do you have to lose by dancing shamelessly beneath this starry blue skies? Have you ever considered that maybe this world was built by the fearless gods that live within both you and I? Thank you.


Item number SCP-014 Object Class Safe Special Containment Procedures SCP-014 is to be kept in sight ██ in a chair with arms, preferably facing a window. Music should be supplied on a regular basis, preferably constantly. This music should not include pieces originating after 1937. A security camera should be present in SCP-014's room.  Records indicate his name to be Robert Chepford, confined in 1915 to the Norwich Asylum in Connecticut for delusional insanity, claiming that he had been cursed to live forever and was slowly turning into concrete and consequence. The asylum closed in 1937, and the patients were transferred to various other facilities. SCP-014 came to Foundation attention in 19██ from rumors of a patient who seemed to be entirely immobile and showed no signs of aging. Further investigation determined that acquisition was warranted. SCP-014 is to all outward appearances a normal man, but he does not appear to age, and shows no signs of possessing a metabolism. He does not eat, drink, perspire, or in any other way demonstrate life functions. He breathes only to speak, and apart from his eyes and vocal apparatus, it is to all appearances utterly immobile. He has never shown any evidence of pressure ulcers despite his position not having varied for several decades. Under due his muscles appear atrophied. He can't converse normally, but showed little knowledge of or interest in events since his confinement. Addendum No. Frankly, were I to interview this man without knowing his history, I think he was a perfectly sane and well-adjusted individual who happens to be quadriplegic. As it is, I have to conclude that he is the ultimate proof of the idea that the mind rules the body. He thinks he's concrete and will live forever, and so he's as close to both as he can be. Somehow. Doctor.


Well, next let's talk about the CAP program or rather the MAP program now. What do you expect to get out of expanding the quotas and kind of adding the availability to shore commands as well to map their sailors? Well, I think first and foremost this is another demonstration of our desire to want to put more authority back to the COs and triads at the local level. Nobody knows their sailors better than our COs in the fleet, our command master chiefs and a chief's mess in the fleet. We want to give them more opportunity to recognize the best of the best inside their units by expanding the opportunity to meritoriously advance sailors. We have also heard from multiple units and COs around the fleet that, you know, all of our great sailors aren't only at sea. Now we have some great sailors ashore who deserve the opportunity to be recognized as way too. So the secretary has, and you read about it, and he spoke about it in Annapolis. He said, hey, let's expand this. Let's do it in a measured way, but I want to open it up to not only sea but shore commands as well. So we are working now to figure out the numbers and make sure that we do this smartly and continue to be fair across the majority of our force.


ServiceNow Knowledge 14 is sponsored by ServiceNow. Here are your hosts, Dave Vellante and Jeff Frick. We're back, this is Dave Vellante with Jeff Frick. This is Silicon Angles theCUBE. We're here at Moscone West and we'll be here all week covering Knowledge 14 wall-to-wall. Chris Pope is here. He's with the office of the CSO at ServiceNow. Welcome back to theCUBE. Good to see you again. Thanks, thanks for coming guys. Good to be here. Chris is here, but they want it. Everybody wants to take a look at the now guys. We got a photo bomb. Don't call them M&M's, whatever you do. Welcome back to theCUBE. You guys are cube belongs, right? They're cube belongs, right? We're wondering if Beth is in one of there because last time we saw the now guys, but Beth was with us, so. Beth, hopefully you're not working too hard in there. So Chris, I got to ask you, so we cover a lot of big data shows and we joke that with big data and all this data explosion, we're further away from a single version of the truth than we've ever been. You guys are sort of counter to that, right? Bringing a single version of the truth, single system of record. I mean, it is your raison d'etre and what you bring to the table. So I wonder if you could talk about that as a concept, why it's important, why it's so fundamental to your strategy. So I think if you go back to the days of when the platform came around and what it means, bringing all these IT processes, solutions, technologies together, IT's been very siloed over time. And really when you look at everything is enterprise service management. It's a request, it's fulfilled, it's tracking, it's analytics. How do you bring all that together? And too often, all these departments need to work together, whether you like it or not or what the reporting structure is. So the more they come together, work together and have that kind of single system of record, the more efficient they get, the service gets fulfilled. And if you think about things like we talked about this morning, delivering a book from Amazon, there's probably a thousand things in the background. It's a book at the end of the day and it gets delivered. So why is requesting technology, infrastructure, IT or phone any different? It's just internal and your actual span of control is a lot greater, but having everyone in a single system makes it a lot easier to fulfill. Now, politically within a lot of organizations achieving that single system of record is very hard because you got data all over the place in silos. How do you guys approach it? Do you go in and say, hey, you really should move to a single CMDB or do you sort of put it in and let the organic nature of your product take care of itself? I think there's a couple of different approaches. CMDB typically, if you talk to anyone now, there is hard, right? And a lot of it is usually the five terms that need to break down because it's my data, it's my server, it's don't come near my stuff. I don't trust you in number one. But the other side of it is what we've seen a lot of success is we start small and grow it and prove the success and then make that a repeatable scalable model. And we saw in the keynote this morning, the one variable that's everywhere is people. And if you really want to break something, put a person in the middle of the process, right? So it's that kind of things. And once you figure that out of what problem you want to solve, you can then go on and automate it. Too often we see people trying to automate day one. And really what it does is helps you fail a lot faster than you ever did. So if you figure that out, what you want to solve and then the technology as we've seen, right? We figured out the technology and the how and the heavy lifting, now it's around what do you want to do with it and how do we bring those groups of people together?  With the tens to the hundreds of thousands, proving it right and then like giving it the ability to scale through automation is absolutely key. But talk a little bit though, because now you're actually elevating the people in the process because you want them to build their own applications. Now we're hearing it's, you know, a system of engagement. That's not necessarily just a system of records. So how does taking people out of the process and simultaneously empowering them to do more? How does that work? And I think a lot of the time that process, right? If you look at anyone that deploys an app, you're waiting for infrastructure, you're waiting for the storage guy, your database is to be deployed. We're literally saying, hey, go, you know, hit here, create new, you can start building your app. And if you look across the enterprise, 80, 90% of what they actually do is forms-based workflow, right? It's a request, it needs data, and then you can drive consistency and automation with that common data set. And then it becomes a lot easier to do. And you don't need to be a programmer. And the technology changes so often anyway, how can anyone even keep up, right? I mean, you guys see this all the time. And really what we're saying is we've got the data, we've got the people, we've got the data models, we've now got the taxonomy, what do you wanna build, right? We've done all the how pieces. Too often it was almost the other way, you know, where 80% of it was very undefined and 20% was, well, you could use this, but you know what, things have moved on, go buy something different. We're flipping that model and saying, we've done all the how work, the heavy lifting, because all those core components are there that you need. What problems are you gonna go and solve with our technology now? And then the people are focusing on actually solving the problem. Not is it Oracle versus SQL versus what database versus what storage, what virtual platform? That's just kind of out of the question now. So the people are almost up and above the data center now. You could argue in the cloud, right? Because they're not worrying about all that tin and iron anymore, that used to be a big driver of their projects. So summarize the best practice of the journey that you're recommending with customers here. Some customers are saying, try to automate too fast and oops, let's pull back a little bit. Other customers saying, well, I don't really want to automate. Yeah, I'm afraid, whatever. We might be, I'm afraid I'll lose my job or I don't really see the business value, whatever. So what's the steps that you recommend on that journey? I think what I tend to go back to, I do a lot of work with customers on whiteboards. Take the technology out of it initially, or sticky notes, whatever you want to use, and plan it out. And if you can then do that, it can then be repeatable. Too often times people say, oh, it's too complicated, you can never write it down. Well, what hope of you ever got it to work, let alone automate the thing, right? You can't write it down. So there's a lot of activity there and it's really focusing on, just because you can solve it this way doesn't mean you should, right? It's like with seem to be in discovery, just because you can discover something doesn't mean you should, right? It's not that serious, so yeah. So really focus on what we need to do and what the value we want and then what technology is gonna help us deliver that solution. And then nine times out of 10, we are that solution. But we have so many partners, if you've seen here, it augments what we already do. So it's a very kind of step-by-stop methodical approach and then the technology's there and ready, waiting to kind of consume that process on the piece. So what information do I need as a prospect, you know, perspective customer, new customer, to be successful? Do I need to document my business processes, my application portfolio, my inventory of assets, all of the above, what else do I need? Yeah, so I mean, there's frameworks, right? ITL, ITSM, all those kind of good things are out there. And they're good fits for many organizations, but many organizations have their own processes. That's absolutely fine. The key is having them consistently written down and understanding what they are. And then along that process, you almost deconstruct it to say, what can we automate or what could get in the way of this being kind of the happy path to delivery, if you will. A lot of organizations don't know what assets they have, right? Often they'll sit on the finance side of the house because they came through procurement. But in terms of, you know, your machine, who knows, with consumerization and BYOD, I can pretty much bring in and out any device I want now. So it's really, you know, what are those table stakes? And then if they don't have them, you know, we have many complimentary apps and services that help us get the information we need. But you still have to ask the question, once you have the data, what do you want to do with it? Right? Having it is one thing. And then there's a whole data quality aspect to it of, can you even trust it? And if you're going to trust it, can you drive automation? If not, it's just going to repeat a big fail. So how do you deal with the folks in IT who say, okay, I think I can get my hands around this. And I can go around the organization and hunt and pack and get this information. But I need to get buy-in from X, from somebody. Who is that somebody? And how do you see organizations facilitating that buy-in? Yeah, I think a lot of the early success we've seen is because if you actually engage the people that have to fulfill the process, right? Too often you see PMOs or larger organizations on the side kind of driving projects, but they don't have a vested interest in the successful outcome because it's not their daily job. Whereas we've seen heads of service desks, service owners absolutely engaged in defining, say, incident or change management because they have a team of people under them who have to deliver that daily as part of an IT service. So they kind of have that carrot and stick approach that yeah, we're going to do something cool and new, but I've got to be kind of to my constituents or my people that we deliver something that makes sense and gives them the efficiencies to deliver their jobs. And then where we've seen it been really successful is start smaller, pick someone who typically has a noisy process or a very high volume, prove the model works, and then grow it, right? And prove the scale works. And as you get bigger and wider, you then bring in the automation piece because you're not going to get 300 new headcount next year, right? So how do you start to do what you do more repeatable? And then that whole shift left concept of level three to level zero, self-service automation. I mean, we saw that this morning in the keynotes, the more you can self-service and automate, the better and the more people are likely to use it. So is there some internal resistance, just kind of natural coming out of the gate that the more I automate, the less they need me around here? And how are people quick to kind of realize the value out opportunity that's in front of them? How does that really work out in the real world? That kind of model shifted because 10, 15 years ago, that meant outsourcing. And everyone was scared because they were going to lose their jobs and all that good stuff. Now we're trying to shift the focus to say, well, go and deliver value added tasks. You know, password resets, whether they're complex or not, you could argue, there's no real value add. And when I'm on social media or wherever, I can reset my password myself. So why do I need to call someone to do that? And it's more like, hey, rather than you being service desk analyst, you're now business application analyst, solving real business problems, you're intimate with the business, what they do, how they use the technology, not just almost like a dispatch service of logging password resets or whatever it may be. So you really have to focus those people into the more value add tasks and simple things like provisioning virtual machines, right? You saw live on stage, we did it in about 20 seconds this morning. You know, that used to be weeks of work. And in some customers, that's still a significant amount of time. But what's the value of someone pressing the button? There isn't one. And if it's a standard data model with taxonomy, as we've seen, go provision it because we've already approved it and we know what it is, so let it go. Whereas go and focus on that 20% that's unpredictable or undefined, that's the value add work and hopefully over time you drive that out of the organization too. So let's end on service now strategy, sort of where we started. If I had a summarize services now strategy, I would start with sort of the why, you know, the old Simon Sinek, don't buy what you do, buy why you do it. But your why to me is you're trying to help organizations turn IT from a cost center into a value producer. Finish that. And what is your, how do you summarize the service now strategy? So I think, you know, IT was often seen as this cost center as you said, right? Over time, now we're actually, we're at that table, right? We're a value added partner to every other line of business and we operate as a business. And I think what we're doing with service now is elevating those people up to have the table stakes at there and have that conversation. But say, look, not just, you know, IT's in the way of a project, et cetera, but let's give IT the tools to be successful and have credibility at the table to say, look, here's all the great things we've done, how we've supported the business, kept the lights on, and here's how we're an innovation partner as well to drive revenue growth rather than just be in the cost center. And just one follow up. Are there too many tools in IT? And are you a part of your mission to sort of consolidate that tool creep? I mean, geeks love tools, right? They love shiny new things and just look at phones, right? We change them so often. A fool with a tool.  But, you know, we see that a lot and if it's going to address an absolute need then it makes sense and then, you know, you go with that. But really, we focus on the how and the shiny objects. If we actually focus on the what, you realize you've probably already got some technology that does it already. Or, you know what, it's a rip and replace, it's something that new. But we're too often to say how we're going to solve the problem versus what problem we're actually going to solve. Excellent, Chris. Well, thanks very much again for coming on theCUBE. Thank you for your time. It was great to see you again. Thanks guys. All right, keep it right there. We'll be back with our next guest. We're live at Moscone West. This is theCUBE.


This is a title and an author that are entirely new to me. It's an excellent and professionally written sci-fi medical thriller. Very much like your typical Michael Crichton. I would call it Andromeda Strain with a little bit of alien mixed in. Parts of it are very gruesome. I got this audiobook on tape a few weeks ago for a dollar. And it is a very engaging listen. It's only drawback is that it is perfectly formulaic. It is the plague disaster story scene for scene right down the middle. You know from page one exactly how it's going to unfold and how it's going to end. I think it's unavoidable with this type of story.


But before we get into the video can I just ask you guys if you do enjoy this episode if you couldn't leave a like I would appreciate the support as it really does help out and also if you have anything epic to send in send it into the email as well as a link in the top of the video description. We're getting straight into this top 5 and at number 5 we have a clip sent in by AxeLuro223 who starts his game with a nasty Falcon Punch. In at number 4 we have a clip sent in by IndyQD1017 who stands in the face of a blade dancer and then destroys the dude as soon as it ends. In at number 3 we have a clip sent in by Zero Orb not only does he get owned by a normal captain twice the captain also teabags his ghost just to rub it in. Crazy. Clip sent in by HansonKid7 now this is the funniest fail I think I've ever seen in any game ever absolutely hilarious. In at number 1 we have a clip sent in by Dexter747 now forget fails this is the best thing I've ever seen in Destiny absolutely epic. But guys that is the end of my top 5 funny fail and what the fuck moments of the week if you guys did enjoy the episode if you could leave a like I would appreciate the support don't forget if you have anything epic to send in send it into the email address and link in the top of the video description thanks for stopping by as always and peace out until next time. Peace.


Today, I want to show you a 10 minute routine that you can use at the full moon to harness your true power and potential. When you follow the rhythm of the lunar cycle, you can make whatever you're manifesting that much more powerful. The full moon is the peak of that cycle. And you may have noticed there's a lot of energy here. Our emotions and feelings can be heightened at this time. Drama might unfold, and life altering moments might take place. But really, it's a time for truth. The moon is shining a light on whatever needs to be seen. This can offer us clarity and can help us release old emotions, allowing for major change to be possible. So please find yourself in a comfortable space, have a seat on the floor or in a chair, and let's get started. Raise your arms up to your sides and stretch your body.  Start by setting your intention for your meditation. I wish to harness the creative power of the full moon. I choose to release any emotions that may be holding me back or manifesting what I truly want for my life. On your next inhale, sweep your arms up slowly with your palms facing the sky and again stretch. Lengthen your body and exhale back to a prayer posture. Again, breathe in, imagine light shining down to your palms. Exhale, as if to pull that light into your body. Breathe in, receiving the light down to your palms. Breathe out and pull the light into your body. Breathe in, breathe out. Now, rock your sit bones left and right. Root yourself down to the earth. Take a deep breath in, mouth exhale, and rock with rhythm. Feel your root chakra and the stable energy of Mother Earth. Breathe in, breathe out. Slowly stop, hold out your first two fingers, and then press them down into the earth on either side of you, grounding down to the earth and letting yourself become anchored to this moment. See if you can become aware of the weight of gravity, allowing it to do its job, your awareness settling down to your hips, pelvis, root chakra, you're plugged in to the supportive and nurturing energy of the earth. Breathe in, breathe out. Then press your thumbnail into the tip of your first finger.  Once again, ready to receive the light. If you can, deepen your breath down to your lower abdomen. The belly expands gently with your inhale and rest softly with your exhale. Feel the fullness of the inhalation and the emptiness of the exhalation. Feel that you are in a loving, safe space and allow yourself to get curious. Can you notice any patterns in your behavior or emotions lately? Any reoccurring thoughts or feelings may signify divine guidance of what you need to change or accept. Acknowledge whatever arises, breathe and let it be. Tell yourself it's okay, I'm okay.  Feel your connection to this light. There is a nurturing energy here and her light shines into every part of you. Let it illuminate any dark areas of your body. Let it reveal anything that may have previously been unseen. Notice what is coming up for you and imagine the light of the moon washing away energetic debris. From within and around your body, cleansing and lightening your being. Spend a few breaths relaxing and letting the warm, soft light of the moon shine upon you. When you're ready, cup your hands out in front of you and imagine whatever you wish to release is within the palm of your hands. Whatever roadblocks, obstacles, challenges you've been facing, offer them up to the moon. A beam of light shines down to dissipate and dissolve that energy. Anything left behind, you can simply pour out as you release your hands back down. Relax into the freedom of letting go. Breathe and embrace the light and the energy of the full moon. Taking a deep breath in and out. Feel yourself becoming more aware of your body but staying connected to the lighter, freer. Most authentic version of you. One last time stretch your arms up, make a prayer posture, thanking the moon for her wisdom, thanking yourself for making this time. Thank you so much for watching. Please like, subscribe, comments below. And if you'd like to experience a full one hour of brain education, find a body and brain center near you. See you next time.


T.F. Update. Good afternoon, folks, this is Steve Rhodes, coming to you live from the shores of sunny Delray Beach, Florida. This is your 1 p.m. update. And currently, of all the U.S. indices that we track, trading to the upside, including the spot volatile next, which is up 56 pennies, but still below its 50-day exponential moving average. It dials up 51 points, less than two-tenths percent, S&P four-tenths or 18 points, NASDAQ, about a half a percent or 56 points, three-tenths for the Russell, six points.  Let's go take a look at our nine-panel market update chart. We begin. Oh, showing you the wrong chart, sorry about that, folks. Give me a moment here. You'll at least see the nine-panel market update chart. So we begin by taking a look at the ES mini, upper left-hand corner, and what you can see is prices run into resistance. Resistance here, you've got somebody sending trend lines. You have the top of its profile, which is at the 40-37 range. Next chart is a spot volatility. You can see that even though it's trading higher above the close of Friday, it's still below the 50-day exponential moving average. That's the key level. That key level is at 27.06. The NQ is actually attempting to form a new profile. The bottom of which is at 12.308. The top is 12.945. Now, Stevie will not have a confirmation on this profile until 6 o'clock this evening, so we'll circle back on this tomorrow. The US Dollar Index is trading up into resistance, the top of its daily profile, and that's at the 102.30 level. You close above that, the US Dollar Index will continue to move higher. Gold found resistance on Friday at the top of its daily profile at 18.79, pulling back into an area of support between 18.13 and 18.35. Silver has resistance at the center of its weekly profile, so the key level here is 22.26. If price can clear that, then you're looking to move to 22.76 and above that, 23.49. Lightsweed Crude, she is trading above a prior swing. Everything looks bullish here, trading out at 1.1820. Natural gas, with its nice day out here, still has not taken out its TD9 count top. In order to do that, you need to see it close above $9.43. So even though it's a nice day out there, Stevie's going to go with the neutral signal. 30 Year Treasury, sitting right at support, the bottom of the weekly profile out there, 1.3801. Folks, stay tuned for the Traders Ed Show. But if you're off to start your Monday, have a magnificent one, and we'll look forward to seeing you again soon. Take care.


If you're a building material manufacturer that uses case studies to help you sell your product, you need to watch this video. The majority of manufacturer case studies and likely your case studies, as you have them right now, are not set up to help you close the sale. What I'm going to show you today is the exact formula we use with our clients to help them create case studies that convert potential customers to sales. As well as we're going to highlight the biggest mistake that most manufacturers are making with their case studies. I'm Zach Williams with Venvio where we help building material manufacturers outperform their competition by dominating their digital online presence. The problem that most manufacturers have is they focus on the wrong part of the case study. Most manufacturers have a page on the website where they say client success story and say how our product was used here. And it seems like a really logical way to go about structuring case studies but it actually doesn't do very much for your audience. Because your audience doesn't care how your product was used, they care about their problems. They don't care about how you help Gensler, for example. They care about how Gensler achieved a certain result by using your product. It's all about showing results in a way that matters to your audience. To solve this problem for our clients, we developed what we call the case study conversion formula. There are three key parts to this formula. The first one being the benefit. What is the problem and how did your audience solve that problem? This needs to be results based. Your audience should know exactly what they're going to walk away with. Let's say you have a product that's really energy efficient and helps with acoustic sound, for example. Well, then you should say how Gensler achieved a certain sound reduction while being eco-friendly. That would be the title of your case study. It doesn't need to be more complicated. The reason why people would be more inclined to watch that or read that case study is because they want to see how Gensler achieved that certain result. That's what matters to them. So if you target contractors, make your story about how you can be more efficient and make more money. The second part is the story or the content of your case study. And this is the process and the problem that your audience went through to find the solution to their situation. You're not focusing on pushing your product here. Where your product naturally fits in, that's great. Talk about that. But don't make that the focal point of your case study. The third part of the conversion case study formula is really simple. But most manufacturers don't include it at all. It's the action point. What's the next step you want your audience to take? You've captured your audience who told them how to do something great that they want to do. Tell them what to do next. Help them go through the funnel further. The reason it works is because it will humanize your product and will simplify how your product can help them with a problem that they deal with on a daily basis. Remember, people don't want products. They don't want benefits. They want solutions. They want answers to the questions that they deal with on a daily basis. Let me give you one final example. Let's say you sell a roofing product. Instead of making the case study how our product was used on a large subdivision, let's focus on your audience, the contractor or the builder. So structure the case study around how one contractor or builder was able to save time and money on a large subdivision. And then find ways to weave in your product when necessary. This is going to capture your audience and get them to watch or read your case study unlike anything else you've ever produced. So there's actually a link below this video that you can download a template that we put together for this case study conversion formula. So go download that case study conversion formula template right now. Get started on improving your case study. Convert more leads to sales and make more money. Until next time, I'm Zach Williams at Venvio. Go create those case studies. Thanks.


Welcome everyone to the webinar, multi-cloud strategy, a necessary evil foreign enterprise by Rashmi Thambe and Sunit Parek. So without any further delay, over to you Rashmi. Thanks a lot, I'm just sharing my screen. Thanks everyone, and thanks to Agile India for hosting us. Today, myself and Sunit Parek, we will be talking about multi-cloud strategy. Both of us are part of ThoughtWorks. We work, we are part of a service line which focuses on enterprise modernization, clouds and platforms. And without, we have a packed agenda. So without further ado, let me quickly go through the agenda. So we'll first start with demystifying the multi-cloud deployment model because when you hear the term multi-cloud, it actually means many things. And based on our experience of working with many clients, we realize that they mean many overlapping things when they say that they're looking at multi-cloud. So we realize that it is really important to demystify the terms and to really define what does it actually mean by multi-cloud? What are the various flavors of multi-cloud? Then we understand what does the industry say about multi-cloud? Why are the enterprises embracing multi-cloud? What are the key business drivers? But what are the challenges? While most of the enterprises are going towards multi-cloud, there are challenges. Multi-cloud is hard, it's complex. So what are the challenges in the journey? And finally, in order to build a successful and a sustainable multi-cloud strategy, what is our approach? What is it that ThoughtWorks proposes based on three core tenets evaluating your workload, defining a multi-cloud operating model, and governing your multi-cloud environment? So these are the three core tenets of our multi-cloud strategy. And finally, we'll come to the summary of it. So let's first start with the multi-cloud models. What do clients actually mean when they say they are looking at multi-cloud? So journey to cloud for any enterprise usually starts with mono-cloud. Straight forward term, mono-cloud means one cloud when the enterprises are in the very early stage of their cloud journey and looking to a particular public cloud provider for migrating their workloads, then it's called mono-cloud, which is just one cloud. Hybrid cloud, which is when the workloads are running in combination of your on-premise infrastructure as well as your public cloud infrastructure, then you're looking at a hybrid cloud setup. Now things get really, really interesting when you're looking at more than one public cloud provider. This is what is called as a poly-cloud strategy. It's a start of your true multi-cloud journey where you're looking at more than one public cloud providers. And usually the enterprises choose a particular cloud provider based on various factors like various features and services provided by that cloud, service availability in the particular geo, latency, et cetera. So workload going to either one cloud or another depending on these factors and the guidelines for deciding this is what we call as a poly-cloud strategy. Then comes portable cloud. This is a very, very complex or I would say a little bit of a deliberate choice when enterprises are looking at business critical applications to run across two clouds in order to ensure the continuity of the business in order to ensure the high availability, they are looking at portable clouds. So the same workload, which is a very high business critical workload running in two clouds either in active active mode or active passive mode in a typical DR setup. That's what we call as a portable cloud. The reason it is portable is because the workload has an ability to run on any cloud and it has a cloud agnostic application architecture. So if it's required to move the workload from one cloud to another public cloud, there are obviously efforts involved but it is possible to do that and that's why it's called portable cloud. And last but not the least, distributed cloud. This is the most complex or it's a geographically distributed setup of the workloads across, your on-premise setup across multiple public, private clouds, workloads running on edge. All of this is centrally managed by one public cloud provider. What does it centrally managed means is being able to do uniform policy enforcement and compliance, being able to monitor and manage these environments from one public cloud provider. That this is what is called as a distributed cloud. You can think of, for example, Google has an offering GCP and POS distributed cloud which helps customers do this, which it has a central way of managing workloads which are running across multiple cloud providers on-premise or on-edge, et cetera. So before I move on in the chat, you will see a poll we would like to understand from you based on the scenarios in your enterprises. What do you see most common? And it could be multi-choice. You might have seen both hybrid poly or hybrid poly, portable, et cetera. So let us know what are the typical scenarios that you have come across. So moving on, so multi-cloud, the reason why we have named this session as it's a necessary evill for enterprise. And we don't mean evill in a necessarily negative way. Why evill we mean it is complex. It requires certain set of skills, certain set of maturity and capability to be able to embark on the multi-cloud journey and have a sustainable multi-cloud journey. And that's why we call it as a necessary evill for enterprise. So as you see from your data center to monocloud, hybrid, poly, portable, and distributed, the complexity and the maturity, you have to have more maturity in the organization in terms of skills, in terms of capabilities, in terms of budget, CXO backing, because the journey gets more and more complex. And this is where we advise a lot of clients. For example, we were working with one of the telecom providers in Southeast Asia, who has been working on AWS and looking at GCP as their other cloud provider. When they came to us, they directly started talking about a portable cloud, having ability to run the workloads across clouds. And we showed them this and we told them that, hey, you don't necessarily need that. Do you really have business critical applications with the very high availability requirements? And you probably mean polycloud because you want to choose which went to use AWS and GCP for your workloads. And that's why it's important to, and that's where we help clients based on what their objectives are, how it gets really complex and what kind of deployment model you should choose for the kind of workloads you have. So let's quickly look at what is the industry saying about multi-cloud. You'll see some numbers here. These numbers are from renowned industry analysts, for example, there's a number from IDC, which says 81% of enterprises are looking at multiple public clouds. State of cloud report from Flexera says 89% of enterprises have multi-cloud strategy. The number is same from Gartner. What is interesting is that these numbers are across the flavors that we saw in the earlier slides. For example, when Flexera says 89% have multi-cloud strategy, within that 89% actually they're saying that 80% have a hybrid cloud strategy. So these numbers are, these are mixed, but it sets a trend that in the industry, it is becoming necessary mostly for large enterprises to look at multi-cloud environments. So the 89% number that you saw, the Flexera state of the cloud report, it says 89% enterprises have a multi-cloud strategy and 80% have a hybrid cloud strategy. So this is just a distribution of that 80%. When they say we have a hybrid cloud strategy, for example, 48% of them have, which is pretty large number, half of them are saying that we are looking at multiple public and multiple private. So the private could mean on-premise plus a private cloud setups. 31% says multiple public and one private. So you'll see all more than three fourth of these enterprises are dealing with multiple public cloud providers and private cloud providers. And that's how these numbers are distributed. So why is this number so high? And why the enterprises, when we know that multi-cloud is complex, it really requires maturity. What is it that is driving these enterprises to go to multi-cloud? So some of the key drivers, for example, that we are now listing all of them, I'm going to talk about four key drivers here based on the use cases that we have seen. For example, leveraging best of breed services from multiple cloud providers. In our experiences, we've seen that a typical example where in the clients are embracing GCP for running their data and machine learning workloads and AWS for containerized workloads. So this depends on, for example, you choose a particular cloud, and this is what polycloud strategy is. You choose a particular slide cloud for a particular set of or particular types of workload, depending on the features or services that are provided by that cloud provider. So if you're already an AWSR as your shop, you may be looking at GCP for running your data workload. Just one example, there could be many such examples. Other reason that we have seen is to manage vendor lock-in. And this is especially very relevant for large enterprises who are looking to hedge their business risks. They do not want to completely dependant on one particular cloud provider. And they also want to leverage across cloud providers to negotiate their billing charges, et cetera. So that's why this is especially required for large enterprises to look at multiple cloud scenarios to manage to avoid the vendor lock-in because then that increases your business risk to multifold that if you're completely, if all your business critical applications are running on one particular cloud provider, it increases the business risk. Other use cases that we have seen is addressing the business continuity. For example, in India, one of the largest banks that we are working with who is running their banking and lending platform on AWS is looking at GCP as their DR cloud for the business continuity. And this is also true because of some of the policy guidelines that are coming from RBI, especially if the banks are running workloads in cloud, they need to have a DR capability on another cloud. Other scenario that we have seen is to manage competition. This is true for many of the online retail companies wherein initially when they embraced cloud, they went ahead with AWS, but now Amazon being their key competitor in online retail, they're looking at other cloud options like AWS and Azure, sorry, looking at Azure and GCP as a second cloud provider to address the competition aspect of it because they are in the same business as Amazon. And last but not the least, there are some geopolitical dynamics. For example, multinational companies when they do M&As in other regions, maybe the other company is running on other cloud. Sometimes there are country-specific data residencer requirements because of which they need to consider another cloud. Other reason is, for example, China as part of their digital Silk Route initiative. It has plans of putting more than 1 million companies on cloud in areas like Saudi Arabia, Laos, Turkey, et cetera. So multinational companies who are operating in these regions have to look at multi-cloud as an option if they wanna be relevant in those particular geographies. So I'll take a pause here. Again, you will see another question in the chat and we would like to hear from you. What are the key business drivers that you have seen out of all of this? Or if you think your business driver doesn't fall into this, please let us know by answering the question in the chat. Again, a multi-choice question. What sort of business drivers that you have seen in your enterprises of people embracing multi-cloud? Okay, so with that, sorry, there's one more slide. So as I was saying earlier, these are the key business use cases for multi-cloud that we have seen are in our experience, it is poly-cloud, which is choosing a cloud for a type of workload, as well as disaster recovery for business continuity. Some of the other, and it also matches with this statistics that comes from Plexera State of the Cloud report, which is DR failover apps on different cloud, which is a poly-cloud strategy. And then there are other use cases, like integration across clouds, workload mobility across clouds, which is the portability part of it, and so on and so forth. So this is exactly what we have also seen. These two are the top-to-use cases that we have seen in our experience. So with that, I will stop the share and I will invite Sunita to talk about the next section. So I think we have understood from the discussions that we had so far that multi-cloud is the necessary for every organization now, because of many drivers, business drivers that we end up in, choosing more than one cloud service providers, right? And to start that journey, we first need to understand what are the challenges in adopting the multi-cloud strategy. So let's look at those challenges first, and then go into the next, which is the strategy or the solution part of it, right? So the first challenge in adopting the multi-cloud strategy is that how we are going to provision our infrastructure and manage them across the cloud service provider, right? And I think we have been doing some meta-cloud formation templates and all that so far, but now we have to think about a proper way to manage them. There are really good tools available nowadays, like Terraform, Pulumi and all that, but still we need to have that proper cross-platform provisioning strategy for us, right? So that is first challenge that it starts with. Second, once we have this out of the box, the second challenge is having the uniform security and compliance policy real-out. This is very important for large organizations to not get into some defaults and compliance issues, right? And security has been one of the primary threat to moving to cloud. So if you don't have a uniform security across cloud service providers, it's going to put you on the backseat again. So this is another challenge that we figured out how to do all the security and compliance stuff on one cloud service provider. Now we have to go and put it on the another. You have a different tool set, different ways to implement the actual security. Some securities are provided by the cloud service provider, some are not, all that complexity starts gripping in. Then comes the application. So you got the infrastructure setup, security setup, maybe, and then comes the application, right? Now, if you have to build the portable apps across CSPs, how you are going to have your architecture, which is cloud agnostic, right? And all that is going to play the role there. Moving on, application is set up across, but then to work them, we need to have a data replication availability across the stateful workloads, right? If you have a, let's say, Redis cluster in one of the cloud service provider, how you replicate across if you have to put the caches there, right? If you have a database, how you replicate? If you are using PolyCloud, so application is running on one of the cloud and your data workloads are running on another cloud, you have to move this data across, right? So you have to replicate the data into the another cloud. So all that needs to be sorted out. Then comes the network topology, how you are going to connect your network from on-prem to your cloud service providers from the public, coming to the actual cloud service providers. You need to set up at both the places. And to do all of this, you need to have an in-house or when there is a skill and capability management, you need to now have capability for both our multiple cloud service providers. And you need to think about how we can have a fungible people who can go across and work across multiple cloud service providers. And the last, once we have set up, we got the skills done, the last challenge is the cost. We need to now manage cost and optimize resources usage across the multiple cloud service provider. Now these are the key or the list of the challenges that you will get into once you start adopting the multi-cloud strategy. Here we have tried to put the one view of increased effort and complexity. So with cross-platform infrastructure provisioning, your efforts and complexity increases. But this problem is kind of solved in a way with the help of Terraform and Pulumi and all those tools, right? Security and compliance policy rollout becomes more difficult and challenging because every CSPs have their own tools. Tools like Open Policy Agent and all that will help you further there. So similarly, we go on for the each list and your capability development within the organization is going to be major challenge. And that's where your significant increase in effort and hiring and having people across is going to be required, right? So this is the map of the effort and complexity increase across different challenges. With that, I would like to move to the next part. So we looked at the different deployment models of multi-cloud. We looked at the drivers for adopting multi-cloud. We looked at challenges for adopting the multi-cloud. Now comes the approach to build your own multi-cloud strategy. So we have been working with many clients, customer over the last many years and come with some structured way of solving this problem. And that has helped us a lot and we are sharing that model with everyone here. So we start with the multi-cloud strategy talking about three tenets of the multi-cloud setup that we have to do. The first is to evaluate your workload. Like assess your workload, distribute them, have a clear guidelines and policy around what kind of workloads to be deployed where and all. We'll deep dive into this again. Once you've decided that this workload needs to be deployed in a certain way, let's say polycloud or maybe portable cloud or a true distributed cloud, we need to come up with the operating model for them. And in operating model, we are going to talk about three key aspects, people, process and technology. You have to look at operating model across all these three. And the last, once you have that ready and set up, all that is running. Now you need to start governing your multi-cloud environment and need to have very clear way to govern the multi-cloud environment. And we always say that it should be in a practitioner's view. So you make the team aware of governing their own environments and it becomes more prominent in the multi-cloud because you have so many people working on different types of applications across the clouds. So it's a key three tenets. The first is evaluate, second is operate and third is govern. So we are going to look into this very quickly, each one of these. Over to you, Rashmi. Yeah. So starting with the first part of the framework, evaluating your workload. Before we start with the workload assessment part of it, we need to understand what are the key architecture patterns when you're building applications on cloud. So we have classified it in two key architecture patterns. First one being a cloud agnostic architecture. So when you're building applications mostly using, let's say open source frameworks, for example, you're using Postgres for database, Kafka for messaging, Kubernetes for containers, container orchestration, Docker for containers. Basically you make choices, which are available on all cloud providers. You make, for example, Kubernetes, if you go with Kubernetes as your container orchestration model, then you have managed Kubernetes offerings from each of the cloud providers. So if you are on AWS, you are using EKS, on GCP, you can use GK, which is Google Kubernetes Engine on Azure, you can use Azure Kubernetes. So these are some of the choices that you make when you're building an application in a cloud agnostic architecture. When you do that, the application becomes portable. So then you're looking at a portable cloud strategy, as in it's a deliberate way of building an application so that this application is portable across cloud and if there is a need to port this application from one cloud to another so that you are not tied to the underlying cloud platform. The opposite end of the spectrum is cloud specialized architecture, wherein you are making, and again, this is also a deliberate choice when you are making use of the underlying cloud provider services for building the application. For example, let's say you're building an application on AWS, you're making use of AWS lambdas for serverless, SQS, SNS for messaging, Kinesis for streaming, and Fargate for your managed Kubernetes, rather managed content orchestration and so on. So basically these choices are the reason why you would go for this is, then you're looking at a poly cloud strategy. You have decided to make the most of all the underlying services that the cloud provides and you do not want to make this application a cloud agnostic application and why is that? So we'll talk about that in the next slide. When do you make these choices and what are the trade-offs in these choices? So let's take an example. So let's take an example of let's say a telecom company, the company that I was talking about earlier, for example. So on the X axis, you have architecture styles. There's a cloud agnostic architecture, two cloud specialized architecture. And on the Y axis, you have the criticality of business application. So your business criticality of an application from low to high. So for a typical telecom provider, for example, a network operation related workloads, these are very, very business critical workloads. You cannot have downtime for these workloads, where these have very high availability SLAs around these workloads. So because of the high availability expectations here, when you are looking at building or migrating these applications or modernizing these applications in the multi-cloud environment, you should think of cloud agnostic because you may need to set up your DR on another cloud in either inactive, active or active passive manner. So for that, it is important to have a cloud agnostic architecture and not have too much tied with the underlying cloud platform. So that's when you look at agnostic architecture for a high business critical application. Again, on the other end of the spectrum, let's say you're looking at a promotional website. This is, again, it has let's say a medium and high tier requirements while you want users to quickly come on your site and look at the promotion. So your time to market is very, very quick. And then it makes a lot of sense to make use of underlying cloud specialized services, cloud specialized serverless services to do a very quick go-to market of this. And you are not looking at porting this across clouds because business criticality of this application, while you need this application running, it is still at a lower level as compared to a network operator. That's where you're looking at a cloud specialized architecture. And then another example, order management, the sits in between, order management is also very critical for a telecom company. But here you could architecture wise, you could look at not going too much on agnostic or on specialized, but maybe making use of some of the managed services from the cloud providers which are available across clouds, like by using managed Kafka, managed Kubernetes or basically all the services which has complimentary services from other cloud providers. But again, there are trade-offs. For example, if you are too much on the cloud agnostic side of the architecture, it will give you a lot of flexibility. And on the specialized side, it will do it'll entail in lot of vendor lock-in. But there are other trade-offs, for example, the flexibility comes with high efforts and longer timelines. You will take much longer time to do a go-to market of these applications versus on the other side, if you are going with underlying cloud, if you are building applications with a specialized architecture, these are lower efforts, quick turnaround time. But with that, that's why this is called as trade-off with the lower efforts, you get minimum flexibility. With higher efforts, you get maximum flexibility. So these are some of the guidelines that we suggest to our clients. Again, these are guidelines and they change, they're subject to change for every kind of workload, every kind of client requirements, et cetera. But these are some of the blueprints of the guidelines. So let's look at what are the choices that cloud providers give us. I'm taking an example of AWS here. If you look at services from AWS, they can be bucketed into three very high-level buckets, self-managed services like EC2, Kafka, Cassandra, AWS managed services like Amazon, Redshift, Elastic Cache, RDS, et cetera. And serverless services, which like S3, Lambda, DynamoDB, SQS, et cetera. Again, going back to the earlier slide, when you make architecture choices on the two parts, whether you're going to agnostic, when you go to agnostic, you're using self-managed services. When you're going on the two specialized side of the architecture, you are making use of serverless services and same trade-off supply here. On this side, you have maximum flexibility, but higher efforts. On the other side, you have vendor locking, but quick turnaround time. So depending on the kind of workload you have, the kind of HR requirements it has, the criticality of that workload, these choices of architecture and the services that you use differ. So how do we help clients to make these choices? So this is where our framework comes in, depending on each type of workload, whether it's a business-critical consumer-facing workload with which very high HR requirements or whether it's a backend workload or a workload being used by, maybe these are internal applications, employee applications, or these are some new innovative workloads that you're looking at. Depending on these types of workloads, there are three steps. First is, choose your cloud architecture pattern, or whether you want to go agnostic versus specialized, looking at all the trade-offs that you saw in earlier slide. Make use of the tech stack choice. If you're going to agnostic, then maybe you are somewhere here between self-manage and manage. If you're going to specialize, you are in serverless. And then finally, you will arrive at your multi-cloud deployment model, depending on the choices that you have made. Those models could be, for example, if you have gone agnostic with a self-manage stack, then you are looking at a portable cloud option or vice versa. For example, for specialized serverless, you're looking at a polycloud option. This is how we have defined a metrics or decision metrics to help our clients to choose these options for all the workloads. So with that, we are done with the first part of the framework, which is evaluation. Again, I'll invite Sunit for the next part, which is the operate. So once we have made the decision on, okay, what kind of workload goes where and all that, now we have to come to the operating model for that. In operating model, we talk about three parts. The first part is the people, the organization teams, its capabilities, how you put them, how you structure them, all that stuff. The second part is your processes, your practices, standard operating procedures, KPIs of governance and tracking and all that stuff. And the third part comes the technology where you define your text tag, sensible defaults, guidelines, so that every application knows what is their path and how they can be set up. So all that three aspects, people, process and technology needs to be looked at when we are looking at the operating model. And further, I think this is again huge, we have divided into three, but again, we have to look at dividing it further. So we say that, okay, when you're looking at technology, which is the most complex when it comes to the cloud and when it becomes multi-cloud, it adds up on that, right? So we divide them into again four categories, your days infrastructure, your operational infrastructure, your orchestration and integration infrastructure and application and storage related layer. So these are like four different categories inside the technology and these are the examples of it, right? So when we are looking at the base infrastructure, how you are going to set up your network, right? How you are going to set up your infrastructure security, right? All your WAF and all that across the edge and everything. When it comes to operational, you have to think about how you are going to monitor and observe your system, how you are going to do the secret management and all that. Third layer, when it comes to orchestration, you need to have your API platform, API gateway, how you are going to manage your queues, your service catalog, container orchestration management, all that stuff. And the fourth layer is where you get, how you're going to manage your application lifecycle, stateful workloads, databases, object stores and all that, right? So we divided that into four category. We need to deep dive again into each of these in respect to multi-cloud. We'll give you some example further. And for the business and processes, we have to look at, okay, how we are going to manage our SLAs across the multiple cloud service provider. What kind of application should have, what kind of SLAs? Production environment should have shortly SLAs, but non-product environment should also have some SLAs, right? What kind of metrics and KPIs we are going to measure, right? The top most layer is the people, where you say that how you are going to organize your team and put them across so that you don't have duplication, but you don't have a centralized way of managing also, right? So it has to be thought about that, how you're going to build your skill and technology and capability, right? How you're going to define roles and responsibility. And on top of all of this, your cloud strategy is going to bring a change in the organization. And how you are going to manage this change overall is key. So you need to look at many aspects of people, process and technology. Let's look at two of them in this session. So the first one is observability and monitoring. And second one is the container management. These are classical too. And difficult to manage across multiple cloud service providers. But with the tool and the setups that we have in today, marketplace, I think there are many cloud agnostic tooling available there. So one of the things that we always recommend or we always go for in building our cloud strategy is that having this centralized observability and monitoring. Now the centralized unified observability and monitoring can bring a lot of insights which are correlated, right? Something happened at the infrastructure level and because of that, my transactions reduced. I think this correlation will happen only if you have your business metrics, your infrastructure metrics, all of them are flowing at one place. And if you have multiple cloud service provider, you have to surely think about some solution which is agnostic to the cloud service provider. And when you are defining this, always you should be able to see inside any cloud, any environment, any app from single pane of glass. And that's the key here. Choose any tool, but think about this strategy very carefully and this is one of the most important part when we are defining the multi-cloud strategy. Also, now the data which is there in the metrics and logs and all that needs to be governed by the rate. So you need to think about building a separate account for operational and application data along with your sub-account with IM policy and all that. And the tools like Datadog and all have similar structure like account management structure that we have in AWS and all the cloud service provider. You'll see that in the Datadog also. So when you push the data, automatically your team will see data only related to your applications. So all of that is important as well. Moving on to managing the Kubernetes cluster across CSPs, lot of tools are available in the market. Rancher was the first one that I was aware of when it started like four, five years back. Google Anthos is like moving very fast in the space where you can manage your Kubernetes cluster across multiple cloud service provider, including on-prem. And if the plan is to move all the workloads to container, this could be a very powerful strategy to go with Google Anthos. And if Google Anthos, Google GCP is in your list of cloud service providers, right? Again, for two examples we have seen, we need to think about all of these individual pieces here and create the blueprint for our organization. Moving on to the last part quickly, once we have set up with evaluating the workload, deciding where which kind of workload will go defining the operating model, governance is important, right? Otherwise it'll go out of the hand very soon. Our philosophy is to always have lightweight governance driven by the technology guild, which is more from the practitioner's view. The people who are on the ground are able to fit back to build the policy or the governance for their overall infrastructure. We say here three steps. First, bring real-time insights. Again, real-time insights is key here. You should not have end of the day insights, right? When your application goes down, you need to know what's happening at the real time. That could be very powerful tool to get the insights first. Second part is to have the automated governance with fitness functions and alerts. So we don't think about saying that, okay, we'll have reports every month and we'll see where the teams are doing. Have the governance in an automation way with defining the fitness functions. Third part, once you have these two in place, why only certain group of people need to do the governance? How we can shift this governance to the development team? So the team are self-governing in a way, right? So every team knows and govern their cloud cost management, for example. Every team knows that, okay, what are the security and compliance things that we have to make sure and they have a checklist that they can go through, right? So all of this, again, with a unified experience which will help to build the cloud agnostic. For example, if you're choosing Google Anthos, then they have a config management, policy management across cloud service provider, but only for Kubernetes as of now. So that could be a powerful way of linking this governance along with your operating model. Now, for example, Dora 4 key metrics is the industry leading way to measure and look at how each teams are doing, right? And how each applications are doing, how frequently we are deploying. So lead time, deployment frequency, MTTR, change fail percentage are the key to measure and that can be measured across the teams. So now this way, we look at all three parts of the overall building the structured way in a structured way, building the multi-cloud strategy for your organization. So the first part that we always talk about is do it only if you need it, right? So now these three will be given most of the time, right? I think data center, we are moving to cloud. So you will first have your cloud set up there and hybrid cloud will be given because you have your workloads running on the data center most of the time and now you are moving the workloads that needs to be connected. So this will be given. We say that this is not that difficult and can be managed very nicely. However, once you start and make choices about polycloud that is still manageable, not too difficult, but I think leveraging the best of the bread is the way. So you are doing your innovation experiment, faster time to market with this. So there is a advantage there. But after this, it becomes more and more complex. So we caution a lot to our clients and that, okay, build cloud agnostic applications. Don't try to overdo by 100%. It's okay to have a 5% duplication there, but doing it that way will give you that flexibility as well as ability to move at any point of time, right? And then comes the distributed cloud for very highly critical applications running across the multiple cloud managed centrally is the way to go there. And that is the most difficult. So most of the time we have realized that when in the industry people are talking about multi-cloud, it is either hybrid cloud or polycloud. Sometime it is portable cloud, very rare, it is distributed cloud. And to achieve all of this, apply the strategy of three tenants, evaluate your workload, define the operating model and have the proper governance structure in place. That's all from us. Rashmi, you want to add something at the end? I think we just have a minute left in case of any questions. Otherwise, you know, you can always talk to us in the hangout. Thanks, Sunita and Rashmi for a wonderful cloud session. So we are exactly on time.


almost unprecedented levels of acute food insecurity, hunger, and near famine-like conditions in Gaza. It's really an unprecedented situation. We have categories for how we measure acute food insecurity, the IPC phase classifications, and in IPC 3, 4, and 5, which takes us from emergency to crisis to catastrophe. All 2.2 million people in Gaza are in those categories. We've never seen that before. Sadly, it's difficult for us to be on the front line to provide really any kind of agricultural production support because candidly most of it has likely been very significantly damaged if not destroyed. Prior to the conflict, the people of Gaza had a very self-sustaining fruit and vegetable production sector very much populated with greenhouses. There was a very robust livestock backyard, small-scale livestock production sector. We're recognizing from our damage assessments that the majority of these animal inventories, but also the infrastructure that is needed for that kind of specialty crop production, is virtually completely destroyed. We estimate that there's about $40 billion worth of damage to the Ukrainian agricultural system infrastructure. And that comes in the shape of so many different damages. That's damage to infrastructure like grain silos, laboratories, ports. It's damage to farms themselves, whether it's contamination and destruction of land, destruction of livestock, damaged equipment, whether that's tractors or other kinds of machinery that's so critically needed. And obviously, we also saw so many of the farmers themselves actually move into military service. The priority for this year is really working to demine agricultural farmland. And so FAO is working alongside WFP and another NGO that is expert in the field of demining because what we're finding is that a very large proportion of the agricultural lands, the farmland, actually has IED or other kinds of devices that have been either intentionally or are just left there because of the military activity. We are watching very closely the coming El Nino pattern. And oftentimes with an El Nino we see and experience a very protracted or prolonged period of drought or dryness reduced amounts of rainfall. And that's especially the case as we're moving into this particular year in the Latin America region, specifically what we call the dry corridor. This is really important for us to focus on because this is where a very important aspect of agricultural support comes in the space of being able to provide anticipatory action support. So predict and understand either a drought situation or extended periods of rainfall to be able to help farmers better plan for water storage, water harvesting, water management. We can help them in identifying ways that they can be better prepared in terms of planting their crops or taking care of their livestock. The dry corridor is really important to us because what we're seeing there is a very concerning amount of migration. Afghanistan is now FAO's single largest country program. We have over 400 colleagues who are there. We are in every one of the 34 provinces in the country and the work that we are doing is really making a difference. We are seeing finally a reversal, a return to the positive trends of reduced numbers of people who are in these food insecure situations. It doesn't mean that the problem is solved but the work that FAO has been doing there with other partners to reach somewhere on the order of seven or eight million farmers last year with a goal to reach 10 million in this coming year with winter wheat seed, with animal vaccines, these types of agricultural production saving inputs that are so needed is making a difference. Conflicts go on for years. Climate crises, climate issues become protracted. Eight years, ten years, droughts, floods that continue to come. So we have to carefully all of us find new ways to think about the right balance, the right approach including support for farmers, support for pastoralists, support for fishermen and women into these responses because agriculture is what can be I think a part of the longer term solution to not only working on hunger related issues but as we know ultimately gets to the place where you're really trying to build resilience back into the economies, into the lives, into the circumstances that are a result of all of these very difficult situations.


Education used to mean the delivery of knowledge, skills and information from teachers to students. But for all of us, we're working towards something bigger. Our goals are about realizing something more. We're opening doors, building a better future, and making real difference in our world. Ensuring the teachers in our province are the best that they can be. And helping students and teachers unlock and achieve their highest potential. Connecting schools and students with one another through the use of technology. A technology that can take students out of their place and virtually transport them to Paris. People think we're so far removed with what really happens in schools. But every day I'm looking for ways to improve what and how students are learning. Making government accountable for our actions. Collaborating with citizens and demonstrating transparency in everything we do. I'm working for my future. My child's future. Our grandchildren's future. I'm working to educate the leaders of tomorrow. Because of the end. Every student. Every student. Every student matters. Matters. Every student matters.