Hi. I apologise slightly a bit as per slide. I picked a PowerPoint template and I didn't have time to change the images from the ecology theme. So, just quick straw poll. Who here has never heard of Gutenberg before anyone? One or two? So, who has actually tried Gutenberg? Okay, so most of you. So, if you don't know what Gutenberg is, it's the new WordPress editor that's coming in WordPress 5. It's not got a release date yet for WordPress.com. It's going to be coming into self-hosted WordPress. And the editor is block based. So, at the moment with the current editor, we're used to writing everything in one giant text box. But this new Gutenberg editor is basically going to separate out content into blocks. So, we're going to have an image block, a paragraph block, a heading block, audio block and so on. Gutenberg was first released as a plugin in June last year. It's currently got over 600,000 active installs. I think more people have actually installed it. But these are the ones that are active at the moment. And the classic editor will be turning into a plugin. It won't be gone completely. But when Gutenberg comes in, that will become the new default WordPress post editor. The release date was going to be November the 19th. You just after this word count that has now been shifted by the eight days onto 27th November. But that's still actually a busy period for people because that's giving Tuesday right after Black Friday and Cyber Monday. And one of the commentators on the WP Weekly podcast just said, there's no time in the holidays that's really good time for code deployment. So, make up that what you will. So, how did we get here with Gutenberg? Well, if we go back, in January 2017, when the whole talk of creating a brand new editor came out, the WordPress design team asked on their blog what makes a great editor. And they asked for feedback from various people on that. So, here are some of the responses that they got from what users wanted from a new editor. So, they were thinking about what does the current editor do well, what does it not do well, what kind of improvements would we like to see. So, some of the themes that come out in these comments are simplification. Some people are saying current editor is too complex. I want it to be simplified down so it's easier for me to use. Another issue is discoverability. So, some things are basically hidden away in the current editor and people haven't used them just because simply they didn't know that they were there. Then another person has commented that we've had quite a large proliferation of WordPress page builders because the editor as it stands is fairly basic and it can't build complex layouts not without using custom code or using short codes or page builder plugins which have come into the market to fill that need. So, somebody is saying well maybe a new editor should be fulfilling part of that need instead of us using all these other plugins. And someone else has said well the user experience for the current editor is not good on mobile. Let's go for a mobile first approach, get it right on mobile and then other devices and desktop will follow. Early in this discussion this idea of blocks came out so people are suggesting that different types of blocks could be portrayed and styled differently on the page so it seems to be a very flexible system. A couple of other comments I've picked out here which I think are also quite pertinent. So, the first one is from a guy called Mark Wiley who works a lot in the third sector, the non-profit sector and he's basically highlighted the need for new editor to be accessible, it should be portable and the job of the editor is not designing, he thinks it's communicating so perhaps that's maybe a kind of play for something anti-page builder not to let's have it build something really complex with lots of columns and things, it should be simple. And someone else saying it has to be something that covers a multitude of users because there is no one way that people use the editor, everybody goes in and does different things with it so something else we have to be mindful of. And I did a very quick Twitter poll just over a year ago basically saying well how do you add content WordPress, do you go straight in and start writing in the editor or do you do something else, do you create your content first from some other medium and then you go to the editor to finish it off, polish it off and publish it and I thought this was quite interesting that the results here were split and I've put in the link to the tweets and you can read through the entire thread because people were mentioning a variety of different tools that they used they were talking about things like Google Docs, Word, Notepad, Grammarly, Evernote and saying well you know it depends sometimes I'll go straight to WordPress editors sometimes I'll go somewhere else and create my content in and I'll come back to WordPress and finish it part of this workflow I think has to have that assumption in it that people are going to add content from other sources so just summarising some of the problems that we have with the existing editor so if you look down at the bottom we've got the screen options section and there's a number of different options there and in this screenshot I've ticked all of them but not everybody knows that this screen options section is here and knows that these boxes are here and ticking all of them actually opens up new options in the editor I've already mentioned short codes so short codes being used sometimes to create layouts or other effects on WordPress and they're taking the place of writing actual PHP code into the editor which would be regarded as unsafe but they're not really pretty when you look at them on the page when you look back at your posts embed discovery is an issue some people don't realise that just simply pasting a YouTube URL will embed that on the page and then there are many other examples and it's not necessarily true WYSIWYG experience when you use the existing editor because as many people have found you can create something in the editor and then when you actually publish it and look at it on the site it doesn't look quite the same as the way you created it so this is the state of aim of Gutenberg from the GitHub repository where it's being created so we've got three elements I think to this so one of them is we want to create a builder so we're going to create something that makes rich posts effortless so that also incorporates something that is easy to use and I think there's a discoverability element to this as well so where people are using things that they don't know how to use things that they don't know how to use then Gutenberg wants to make that more transparent another aim of the whole project is to win users in other markets so people who've got used to the likes of Squarespace or Medium or Wix to try and get some of that news and basically come to WordPress so I kind of stole this a little bit I was at Accessibility Scotland a week ago and one of the speakers there mentioned these UX principles so I thought it would be quite useful to go through them these are from a guy called Peter Morval so these are seven principles of UX that should be incorporated into when you do any kind of software design so first point of being useful that is absolutely not in question an editor is absolutely integral and essential to WordPress we can't get away from that we also want to need it to be usable we need people to use it the way that is intended to be used and it should be something that people actually want to use, desirable then we need to have people find what they need to use in UI they have to be able to complete their objectives somehow Accessibility is also a really important value so about 20% of the population have some kind of disability and absolutely Gutenberg should be accessible to all of those people credibility the editor has to have people having trust and faith in it and finally valuable so there is a lot of excitement about the potential of Gutenberg it should open up the WordPress project in some regards it should open up the possibility to create custom blocks for example so what do users think of Gutenberg so far so it's been out as a plugin for about a year and four months so I was going to say more about these but I'm just going to put the links in so you can go off and explore for yourself but a few people have done some user testing of Gutenberg and David Bissett has recently posted this post about his experience of high school students using Gutenberg and they seem to get on pretty well with it they seem to take to it really well and had no major issues 10-up have done a couple of different user tests they've done one in June and they did one in November and they found that the system usability scale that they tested on that the values had increased in that time but these are all very small scale studies the first study there only had 40 participants the second one had 10 and the third had 5 and also well in the first one most of them were not familiar with WordPress but in the other two they definitely were so the biggest amount of user testing we've had is from WordPress.org people leaving reviews and we've got now this was taken on Wednesday the screenshot we've got over 1500 users of Gutenberg and as you can see is a pretty high proportion of one star reviews it's actually really split there's a reasonable number of five star reviews there's a lot of one star there's not too many people that are somewhere in the middle but you do have to take this maybe with a pinch of salt because these are all time reviews these have not been separated by version and people who tried very very early version of Gutenberg and got a negative impression then that's not representative of where the project is now because it's been through so much development since but having said that this is a quote from actually a really good post that I just found the other day by Eric Dansler of Imagely who makes the next-gen gallery plug-in huge, huge plug-in over a million downloads and he said he looked to the average for the Gutenberg reviews and it does fall in line with what is stated in the star reviews he says it's clear the plug-in is not wearing potential users and he is one of a few, well maybe quite a number of voices high profile voices who've been saying actually maybe we should delay the release you know that's still not got all the bugs and issues ironed out you know maybe waiting a bit longer and sorting that is the right thing to do so other people have been saying the same include Yustafal Cofiolst and Martin Wiley who I mentioned before and Morton Rand Hennigson so I've just got a couple of sample reviews here this is one five star review so this is one person saying great, easy to use love the block system creates attractive blog posts so they've got a good impression clearly and this one is the opposite none of the editors they've used was instructed to the writing process absolute worst editing experience ever solved a problem that didn't exist created a different problem that didn't exist so this is someone who's had a bad first impression will they go back to using Gutenberg, don't know so some of the other criticisms and concerns with Gutenberg I've listed here a big one is backwards compatibility so there is a sense of worry that once five comes in and Gutenberg comes in are all existing sites going to break and obviously a plug in and theme developers have done a lot of work to avoid that happening but Gutenberg completely changes the meta box system that the current editor has and it all has to be rebuilt in the Gutenberg way and we know that the work has progressed on this but we don't know 100% we can't say with certainty that everything will work another point I suppose the last one just want to say briefly on that one if you are a developer and you think great I want to make my own Gutenberg block then that's good and please try but the barator entry is actually quite high I read a comment on a WP Tavern post where somebody was saying to learn everything that they needed to learn because Gutenberg is heavily based on React to JavaScript library it wasn't just learning JavaScript it was learning a lot of other things and he said I think it takes about 450 hours plus per developer to do this so what about accessibility well back in 2016 WordPress made a commitment to release all new update code that goes into WordPress core and bundle teams must conform with the WCAG 2.0 guidelines at level AA I'm not going to go into depth about what the WCAG 2.0 guidelines are it's a long document but basically they cover the major categories of disabilities which are visual motor, auditory and cognitive and this is basically a requirement this is not a nice to have we have to remember that WordPress powers 32% of the web and then if 20% of them have a disability it is not an insignificant number of people just going to skip over this very very quickly I've got three posts on my blog so don't copy the links down the slides will be available later you can see from these different experiences I've had with testing Gutenberg and what's changed in that time so some of the things that I've noticed have improved are if you look on the left we've got a couple of earlier prototypes so on the block selector it was not possible to use the keyboard only a lot of people use with disabilities can only use the keyboard people with motor disabilities or people with visual impairments and it wasn't possible to navigate beyond the blocks that you saw there so there were a lot of unavailable things the calendar widget has also been substantially changed because at the time that I tested it the black line is where the focus is on the page and it was actually behind that widget it wasn't possible to actually pick a date on that calendar widget but fortunately that's all been corrected now it's much better we've also got a lot of keyboard shortcuts have come in from the classic editor and new ones have been invented we've got improved focus management you couldn't publish a post initially now you can do that and the search for blocks is a lot better but we still have some items causing some friction so even though we've got the keyboard shortcuts it still needs a lot of keystrokes to create and publish a post we've got different kind of toolbars per block so we've got paragraph toolbars at the top there we've got a heading one and we've got an image one here and they all look slightly different so it can be a little bit jarring from one to another to another and not seeing the same familiar icons then we've got this three dot menu and that's got another whole set of options and they are including a removed block one which is certainly something that people are going to want to be able to do and maybe that should not be hidden away so what's been going on recently with Gutenberg and accessibility well we had a blow a number of weeks ago when Rian Rietveld left the accessibility team and she published this blow post on why and there were a number of reasons but some of the main ones were that one big problem was that the people in the accessibility team who are all volunteers know accessibility well but they did not know react well which is what Gutenberg is built with so they were putting out bug reports and issues that were simply not getting fixed and then sometimes when they were fixed then in the next iteration of Gutenberg they would actually introduce an accessible code back again which was obviously not good and again the keyboard testing for new components that were introduced into the editor are not enough done before that happened and in Rian's resignation post she mentioned this quote from Andrea Fertia who's also on the accessibility team and I put the highlights in here he has basically said what they found is the user experience is very complicated and that for people with accessibility the new editor is barely usable he says and one big big problem with this accessibility has not been incorporated in the design process and if you do know anything about accessibility you know that it's something that should always be thought about from the beginning because thinking about it at a later stage means basically remediating things which is a lot harder to do than simply building it the right way in the first place and finally Gutenberg is described as a regression in terms of accessibility level compared to the previous editor and I think that's fairly telling so after this a few weeks later we got this post on the accessibility status of Gutenberg and again I put the link in so that you can go off and read this and fill for yourself I'm a part of the team we have a weekly meeting on a Friday afternoon on a slap so here is an example of a couple of the things that they highlighted in the post so cognitive load this is me using the mouse to scroll through the post but you can see there's a lot going on that there's things popping up we've got different toolbars if I click on different things the sidebar is changing this is perhaps a lot for some people to take in and then maybe what you'd call inconsistency in your eyes so going back to different toolbars doing different things and the classic editor as we know it the buttons basically stay in the one place and it's the same ones but people know where they are with that Gutenberg is definitely a step away from that another of the concerns that the team highlighted accessibility anti-patterns so here we've got an example basically when you type an editor it's like one giant form and a good accessible practice would be everything that goes on the form to label it but we don't have that here we've got placeholders we've got the add title one and we've got another one underneath now when we have the cursor in add title that's fine we can still see that we have to add the title there but when we put the cursor below we immediately lose the message that we haven't been concentrating then we might get stuck what do we actually do here and this is another one about iconography so I recommend you check out this post the best icon is a text label it's got some goods and actually using examples of how putting in icons can work or not work for you but here I've got an example this is the top bar of the editor and going through the various parts and some of these things are fairly obvious what they do because the text there preview publish we understand what those do but then when we go back to some of the other things okay that's add block undo and redo we've probably seen but what's content structure what's block navigation and then some of the other ones at the other end settings what does that do what are tools and options again what does that do it's not obvious so yes we've got keyboard shortcuts in now and this is very good we've got a long list of them and we've got them for windows and maps one issue that we've got here is with keyboard shortcuts it's good if users can actually choose the wrong and that's not possible currently with Gutenberg they can't map them to the keyboard so we've got a number of different types of keystrokes that they would like to use we've also had a few cases of where their shortcuts have been changed I know that the one to delete a block was changed recently because someone found that that was the keystroke that actually restarted Linux so this one I'm not going to go through everything this is quite long and this is actually like a five minute long screen cap so I don't have time to go through it all but you can see where the green line is there that's a chrome add-on that I put on which is basically showing you where the focus on the page is if you are using the keyboard only you're basically using the tab key mainly and the shift and tab to go backward and forward to the various interactive elements so you can see as I'm going through here just how much keystrokes there are aside from actually typing in the content and yes we have got the shortcuts now to move between different parts of the editor but it's still a lot a lot of keystrokes so at the end of the accessibility team statement they've basically thumbed up and they have noted that the progress that Gutenberg has made because quite a lot of work is being done and don't forget this that the team is committed to making this as accessible as possible and it is a core value of WordPress that it should be accessible but they're saying we believe it's less accessible than the existing editor although there are some accessibility features that the classic editor doesn't offer that Gutenberg does but the final statement is basically saying we can't recommend Gutenberg in its current state for anyone who has to use assistive technology so the current thinking is when version 5 ships there's going to be a message in the admin saying do you use excessive assistive technology well if you do maybe you should be looking at carrying on with a classic editor Gutenberg might not be there without you so going back to our UX diagram how does Gutenberg measure up well we know that 600,000 people we know that 600,000 installs of Gutenberg but there are also 500,000 of the classic editor plugin now does that mean that people are testing both or does it mean that they've installed classic editor because they don't like Gutenberg we don't know in terms of usability we've seen mixed reactions there some people find the new interface very intuitive and some people find it very unintuitive and again in terms of desirability very polarising reactions some people love Gutenberg some people really hate it there's not too many in the middle whether things are findable that's an interesting one because discoverability was one of the goals for the new editor but ironically it seems that people are still saying but a lot of things are hidden away I know that they've just changed for example people are saying oh I couldn't edit a perm link in Gutenberg and it does come up once you've put the title and it comes up above but people weren't finding that so in the next iteration there's going to be a section in the sidebar as well for that accessibility definitely the commitments there but it's not ready yet and one of the key issues from that was that it just wasn't factored in from the beginning credibility well we can see some people left the bad reviews they've tried it they don't like it they've been turned off by Gutenberg already going to come back to it again they might or they might not and in terms of how valuable it is well plug in the theme developers have done a lot of preparation but we have to wait and see what happens with the final release but you know there could be some really good and progressive stuff coming out in this area so if you want to help to make Gutenberg better what can you do well you can try the plug in as it is just now or you can also download WordPress 5 as a beta version it's constantly being updated I think we're on beta 5 just now you can add a response there's a Gutenberg post where you can give your feedback you can leave a review on the Gutenberg plugin page if you have a GitHub account you can create an issue there and if you're in Clown you can also join the WordPress accessible team and I've been working on the Gutenberg user manual for assistive technologies and I'd love some help with that or feedback, you're more than welcome thank you very much


For more videos on people's struggles, please subscribe to our YouTube channel. Hello to everyone and welcome to the tent issue of the People's Health Dispatch, where we bring news about health workers and about what's going on in the field of public health and global health. And today we are talking to Lee Haynes, who is from People's Health Movement North America, and we're going to have a brief discussion about what has been going on in the U.S. when it comes to abortion care and reproductive rights. So, hello, Lee. Welcome. Thank you, Anna. Hello. Hi, everyone. Thanks for having me. Thanks for joining us. And so maybe we can just start from what has been going on over the weekend. And so apparently in Texas, there were quite a few mobilizations and demonstrations by people. So could you give us some updates on that? Yeah, I was really excited to see that the mobilizations there made international. So that was really exciting. In Texas, folks gathered at the state capitol in Austin, Texas, but also in cities around the state to protest the very restrictive abortion law that was recently passed in the state. And what was really exciting about the mobilizations is that the mobilizations happen across the country because people, not just women, so looking at pictures, there were young women, older women, women, you know, of all races and classes, just looking at pictures. But I was also very happy to see solidarity from men who understand the importance of reproductive rights and justice. And so people all across the country really recognized the threat to reproductive freedom and reproductive justice of this Texas law and how if it stands or continues to stand, then the rights of people in other states, particularly more conservative states like Texas, will be threatened. So it actually sounds like a very good thing that happened over the weekend. Yeah, it was amazing. And so if you look at what has been going on for the past few months, does it correspond to what's been going on? So has the mobilization been on for a while? Or have people taken to the streets before the law was introduced? Whenever, I mean, ever since I think that there was kind of a resurgence of a women's movement, I don't want to say that a women's movement had sort of died out. But whenever Donald Trump was elected into office, there was, you know, huge women's march in Washington, D.C., and in different places across the country. And those happen periodically. And so I think that part of this is definitely that momentum. But also, I'm thinking about the Supreme Court and and the conservative lean of the court being against abortion, I'll say, and seemingly to be waiting for the opportunity to overturn law or case law that has upheld rights to abortion. I think that people really sense the urgency of that since Donald Trump's election. And even now, as at the state level, legislatures are controlled in many states by Republican, the Republican conservative party. And so we have also heard, you know, when the law in Texas was introduced, it was also paralleled by different, let's say, trends in Latin American countries, for example, where decriminalization was was supported in many of the parliaments and chambers. So that was interesting to see how, you know, the different trends happened so very close. But also what I wanted to ask that, of course, we have also heard that the abortion ban in Texas will have a very different impact on people of different classes. So have there been any experiences or testimonies already on how the ban will impact like different people in different communities? Yeah, I think that just to say a little bit about the ban, which in case some people don't know, it's and it's really interesting, as you say, considering the kind of international trend, because I know that Mexico recently basically legalized abortion and so are decriminalized. And so what is, I guess, the kind of strategic legal maneuver that the state of Texas has done is removed the duty from the state to kind of enforce, I guess, restrictions around abortion and has moved that duty to private citizens. So a private citizen can sue and bring a civil procedure against an individual, not necessarily not the woman or the person who is having an abortion, but against anyone who may have helped her or helped the person have an abortion. So for example, if my neighbor, if I think my neighbor has had an abortion, then I can file a lawsuit against the doctor, I can file a lawsuit if they took a cab to the abortion clinic or who drove them there, I can file a lawsuit for up to $10,000 against that person. And so the law kind of gives this power to private citizens to police what people are doing with their bodies. And when it comes to how this might differentially impact people, number one, and this is just from my, I guess, personal experiences growing up in Texas, I feel like there could be a very racist aspect to the law because there is a lot of policing of the bodies of people of color. And so I could very much see a person, a white person calling the police on my cousin or someone just out of racist stereotypes about and racist stereotypes and controlling of bodies of color. There is also the aspect of people not being able to afford leaving the state to get an abortion. So the law bans abortions before six weeks. So if a person, you know, number one finds out that they're pregnant soon enough, then they have to leave the state of Texas to get an abortion. Well, I should say they have to leave the state if they don't find out in time. So if they're past six weeks pregnant. And Texas is full, it's, you know, has a few urban centers where there are things like airports able to fly out of state, but that costs money. Where I'm from is a very rural area. The closest state where I, for example, could go get an abortion is about it's Oklahoma, which is about eight hours or so away by car. There's no the airport is like two hours away. So that really prohibits poor people from being able to access abortion. People who can afford a flight or afford gas or have a good car to get out of state would be able to go and access their abortion care. So yeah, so I think that those are, I mean, just not to be exhaustive, but those are some of the main concerns that people have about what this law has brought on. And you also mentioned that it will actually have a very, very concrete impact on not only the people who are going to need the abortion, but also on those who assist them. So are there any signs or updates on what has been happening with abortion clinics? How are their staff reacting? So what do they see as a response to what's going on now? What I've seen and what I've heard is that, I mean, there's a lot of anger because the law isn't based on science or medicine. There's the whole kind of, I mean, I'm not a doctor, but there's the kind of heartbeat debate and whether or not there is actually a heartbeat at six weeks and medical professionals say that what's heard on the ultrasound is not actually a heartbeat. So there's that reaction from, you know, kind of like the practice medical scientific standpoint, but then there's also doctors, nurses, healthcare workers who feel very strongly that this is unethical because there's no provision for protecting, for example, the life of the pregnant person or if it's the person who needs an abortion is a victim of incest or rape, these people will be, you know, ultimately forced to carry these babies until term if they don't find out they're pregnant in time to have an abortion. There is recently one doctor did go ahead and do what he thought was best for his patient and performed an abortion after the six-week cutoff period, if I can say it that way. And there hasn't been any, like no one's filed any civil suit against him, but from a legal perspective, that's important or it's an important thing to have happened with this law because, you know, it reached the Supreme Court already and the Supreme Court of the U.S. refused to rule on kind of the constitutionality of the law because there's no state action required, it's all for private citizens. And so if somebody does, you know, file the civil suit against the law against the doctor who performed an abortion, then this can kind of make its way through the courts in order to determine whether or not this abortion ban in Texas is legal and can stand or not. And so how does this impact what's happening in other states? Have you seen any, like, shows of solidarity which are out of the ordinary or can you see similar trends happening in other states and what is being done there? Well, I mean, the one trend, which is not a good trend, is that other states are emboldened to pass more restrictive abortion laws. For example, I believe it's in Mississippi where they have a law that's as restrictive or more restrictive as the Texas law. I'm sorry, I'm not sure of the details, but that law is going to be debated and voted on in their legislature. And so there's a lot of outcry and protest of that law potentially passing. And I also think that the demonstrations over the weekend are a beautiful show of solidarity. I don't know, I think maybe people know that Texans, we get made fun of a lot. And yeah, on internet forums, it's very much like, ah, Texans want to go their own way and they shouldn't have voted for these people if they didn't want to have that happen to them. But that the kind of feeling of solidarity from the broader public in the U.S. is, I feel it, it's very welcome. And so I think that people really do understand like the threat, not only for Texans, but also across the country. And finally, they're the lower house of the Congress, the House of Representatives of the U.S. government has been talking about actually codifying abortion in statute right now. The right to abortion is protected only by case law. It's not part of any like actual statute. And so the House of Representatives at the national level has been talking about drafting a law and, you know, kind of debating a bill to codify the right to abortion, which is an incredible step. Okay, so that's actually sounds great. And it's a good way to wrap up. So do you see that happening? Or do you see anything in particular that's needed to make it happen? Gosh, I really want to be optimistic and say, yes, I see it happening. But the way that the U.S. government is functioning these days where pretty religious evangelical religious and very conservative, but also just kind of anti the other side. I think that the bill may pass through the House of Representatives, but not likely the Senate. There will be elections coming up at the end of next year for this House of Representatives and the Senate. So depending on what happens there and who gets more control of the houses of Congress, then there is a chance that it might go through. But as far as what needs to happen, I think that, you know, people should certainly keep showing up to demonstrations, keep voicing their anger and dissatisfaction with what's happening with abortion rights in individual states, but also in the country. And there is also, you know, the opportunities to be able to contact your representatives at any level, very local, state, national level to voice your concerns. And especially what these laws mean for people's lives because, you know, the folks, and this is the story all over the world, the folks who are making laws generally don't have a good understanding or feel for, you know, the daily, really personal impacts of their decisions on people's lives. Thanks. Thanks so much, Lee, for agreeing to do this. Thanks for speaking to us.


Okay, we're back here live inside theCUBE. This is SiliconANGLE's exclusive coverage of O'Reilly Media Stratoconference. This is day three of wall-to-wall coverage. We go all day, talk to the thought leaders, tracking the signal from the noise. This is theCUBE, our flagship program. When we do extract the signal from the noise, this is day three, we go all day. And then at 12 o'clock, we have a one hour produced news segment that highlights day three and highlights the top news analysis of the conference where we do our patented breaking analysis and break down all the top news for you. I'm John Furrier, the founder of SiliconANGLE and I'm joined with my co-host. I'm Dave Vellante of wikibon.org and John, as you know, over the last couple of years we've been tracking the whole in-memory trend. We certainly heard a lot of that a couple years ago at SAP Sapphire with Hannah and you really can't go to Sapphire these days without getting a big dose of that. We heard from SAP this morning about in-memory. We've had a number of interesting innovative startups on theCUBE talking about in-memory. It's intriguing, John, it's kind of ironic. People joke that Hadoop is the new tape, but in fact, things like in-memory and Flash play a critical role because why people want to have access, fast access, near real-time access to certain data, particularly metadata. So we're going to talk about that. We have Bill Bain, who is the founder and CEO of Scale Out Software, a startup and a company that's focused on this in-memory with a little different angle on it. So first of all, Bill, welcome to theCUBE. Thank you very much. So you heard my intro. It's in-memory is taken the world by storm. We're seeing a lot of activity around Flash. Scale Out Software has something called a data grid. So tell us what is an in-memory data grid? In-memory data grid is a middleware software technology that's actually been in use for more than a decade. This technology emerged in the early 2000s after the explosion in the use of web server farms and it originally was employed to scale access to data by allowing data that's shared across a cluster of servers to be uniformly accessible across the cluster and to be able to handle growing workloads by simply adding servers. It also incorporates high availability and many other features in particular analytics. So what's the new twist that Scale Out Software brings to the sort of in-memory grid business? Well, the new twist is what we call Scale Out Analytics Server. We introduced this product last October and what it does is it integrates MapReduce style computation, parallel data computation into the scalable in-memory data grid and this enables operational data, live data such as web shopping carts or financial hedging strategies or even trading positions in a trading market to be able to use MapReduce to both update their data and to analyze it in real time within milliseconds or seconds. So yeah, okay, I've been wanting to ask you what you meant by real time, sort of people talk about real time, just in time, in time, but what does real time mean to you? Okay, well real time, it's different people will define real time differently. It's not hard real time in the sense of an aircraft control system. It's near real time in the sense that we can return results in seconds, whereas other systems which are pulling data from disk will return results in hours typically or even days depending on the way the overall analytics architecture is organized. So we're organized to analyze data as it's flowing through millisecond by millisecond through a system. To give you an example of a trading platform where market prices are flowing through on a millisecond by millisecond basis, you want to have the ability to do a MapReduce operation, return results and steer a trading decisions within a few seconds and that's what this technology can do. So John and I often talk about things like an ad serving network before you lose the customer or in your situation, the example you just gave before the price changes before you miss the trade opportunity. Exactly.  People want to scale out. They want to scale up and scale out with horizontal scalable systems. The need for performance and security is obviously top of mind. I was just talking with the CEO of DataStacks and their specialty is real time with Cassandra. But there really isn't a lot of real use cases out there for real time. We start in Paula with Hadoop, but there is a lot of need and the people who are doing it are doing it in memory and what we're finding is there's those flagship applications out there, although small relative to the overall market right now but it's growing very rapidly. Can you talk about your view of the dynamics of that in-memory database? Because now you have multiple tiers. Now you have in-memory, you have flash and you have disk. Right. So first of all, in-memory data grids can be coupled with SSDs to expand their storage capacity. Although today you can store a terabyte to 10 terabytes of data in memory on a large cluster. So it's within the scope of something like 60% of all analytics applications. That said, most of our customers, we have about 370 customers over an eight year period. And our customers are typically storing less than a terabyte, typically hundreds of gigabytes of fast changing live data, whether it be shopping carts as I mentioned, or it could be manufacturing data. We have a very large new service. It's the caching news data that's changing by the second. So there are many use cases actually. Gaming servers, the one we heard yesterday in the keynote would apply for analyzing the game state and being able to optimize the experience. Now what's interesting and unusual is that these are operational systems. They're systems in which the data is being updated and used in real time. So what we're doing is layering MapReduce analytics on top of that and bringing the power that we've seen with Hadoop to this community of users, which is typically a different community than the analysts and BI experts that we normally see at conference like this. Talk about the dynamic there because there's a lot of use cases right now that is cutting edge with live data. It's real time where there's financial services you mentioned games for example. Talk about where the evolution is on the enterprise side because the enterprise side is moving fast to dashboards and real time business management. You know we were at SAP as Dave mentioned, they talk about the speed of business. So can you talk about what your experiences are and talking and seeing the enterprise and just your perspective on that market and how fast it's changing? Well I think what we're seeing is that we're more and more incorporating this technology to accelerate operational systems. We're not seeing this technology used for example in today although we will see that change in systems like we saw introduced by Intel for caching HDFS. So with those platforms, we're starting to see memory coming in as a caching layer but we're talking about bridging this whole usage model from the high end that we're seeing these technologies like from EMC and Intel into operational deployments that have been ongoing for many years. Dave what's your take on this conversation because we had a great panel on yesterday around high performance computing and obviously the scientific side we're talking about some Python developers and you're seeing a lot of the scientific community obviously active in this space because you want to have a process but also high performance computing vendors are coming in with God boxes and large systems. What's the trend there? I think that, well first thing is we all know that the disk spinning disk has been a bottleneck in systems forever and the best IO is no IO. And so with the advent of Flash and the productivity impacts of putting data in memory you're starting to see clearly justifiable expenditures on these types of technologies. So that's sort of points one and one A. I think the second thing is there's a lot of confusion in the marketplace. Is it in memory? Do I actually, you were talking about before Bill, you can actually add a layer of Flash to persist the storage. It may be a little bit slower from a response time standpoint but it's probably substantially less expensive. So there's a balancing act going on, a lot of experimentation going on and people are trying to squint through that and learn more. One of the companies that we had on at Oracle Open World Aerospike sort of does that. Focuses mostly on the Flash piece and claims it's less expensive. So that's a lot, customers are confused. So help us understand kind of what the right use case is maybe for each of those types of architectures. Right, well so of course traditional how to map reduce is great for analyzing petabytes of data that are offline have been taken from an online system or even a system like Cassandra or MongoDB and moved into HDFS for analysis. Another use case of course, is to store data directly in memory or cache it from HDFS for a smaller data set and be able to do quick turns to do many analyses on the same data repeatedly and to lower the latency, remove the IO process, the IO time and the network time which are the two key bottlenecks that we see in Hadoop. And we're going to see this technology employed in that area more and more to reduce those two key overheads. Yeah and as you eliminate this, particularly the mechanical spinning disk overheads, the network bandwidth becomes a key bottleneck. And then of course the other point I guess I would make is there seems to be a lot of activity around metadata access and metadata management and accessing that from server memory as opposed to slow disk. Absolutely and that's been used for many years. I think companies like Iceland have been using in-memory storage for metadata for several years. I think what's really emerging in this conference that I've seen that's interesting is that the increasing use now of the Hadoop infrastructure for relational database queries to be able to speed up SQL queries. And our experience over about a 10 year period now is that doing query, parallel query can create a new bottleneck which has not been discussed yet that I've seen at the show. And that is the bottleneck when you return large volumes of data that have been queried. That creates a network bottleneck there and then a computational bottleneck. So one of the things you can do with MapReduce and we're doing with our technology is unrolling that and moving the MapReduce back into the query engine so you don't just do the parallel query but you do a sophisticated analysis of the data in place. So you eliminate moving the data off the server in order to both query it and then analyze it. Yeah, you know that's a great point. I don't know if it's, John, it was Alistair or Ed Dumbbell yesterday was on theCUBE saying they had a friend that they did some work and it took them actually four hours and 15 minutes to return the result. And they said, that's strange, four hours and 15 minutes. Was that, oh, it took four hours to move the data and 15 minutes to analyze it. So to that last point, Bill. Okay, listen, we're out of time. Bill Bain of Scale Out Software, really appreciate you coming on theCUBE. Good to have you. And we'll be right back with our next segment. Thank you.


The study found that direct observation of procedural skills, DOPS, is an effective assessment method for improving procedural skills in obstetrics and gynecology post-graduate students, with a significant increase in main scores from initial attempts to third attempts.


We're like the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change. To avert the worst consequences of climate crisis, we have nine years left. We're going to pass the point of no return within the next eight to 10 years. You've probably heard the claim that we have a dozen years or less to stop climate change from inflicting permanent damage on the planet. We've already waited too long to deal with this climate crisis. We can't wait any longer. President Biden cited the deadline when announcing that the U.S. would rejoin the Paris Climate Accord, an international agreement to curb greenhouse gases. I'm signing today an executive order to supercharge our administration's ambitious plan to confront the existential threat of climate change. It is an existential threat. And we're told by all the leading scientists in the world, we don't have much time. I read the report that the people claiming a 2030 deadline are relying upon, and they have misread it. Aaron Brown is a mathematician and statistician who was taught at NYU and UCSD. He's also the former Chief Risk Officer at the Hedge Fund AQR Capital Management. Brown says that activists and politicians are misrepresenting the science in a rush to implement unwise solutions. I'm here to say our house is on fire. We must change almost everything in our current societies. Rather than protecting the most at-risk ecosystems and populations, these proposals are likely to backfire and cause further harm both to the environment and to the most vulnerable people on the planet. Whether you think climate change is an existential issue, or merely one of several important threats we face in the future, is a completely separate issue from how quickly we should act. People pushing a 2030 deadline are committing us to very risky solutions that could backfire. Based on all the evidence, I think we have more time. We can consider reasonable solutions that don't risk the economy and don't risk the planet, and the people will actually stick to for the long term. I don't want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. So where did the claim that we have until 2030 come from? Among the first to popularize it was teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg, who in speaking before the UN chastised world leaders for their inaction. People are suffering. People are dying. And all you can talk about is the money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth.  Thunberg took the 2030 deadline from a 2018 special report by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or IPCC, authored by the world's top climate scientists and widely considered the gold standard in the field. This is a report that was actually asked for by governments under the Paris Agreement. They're going to get together in Poland later in the year to talk about the next steps. And our report is the only named input into their negotiations. Many politicians, activists and journalists like Thunberg have cited the report as the basis for their claim starting in 2018 that there were just 12 years to save the planet or that 2030 was a cliff. Reports that came out from the leading scientist in this world who told us that we have 12 years. The scientists are absolutely unanimous on this, that we have no more than 12 years. Scientists tell us a thousand times all of us could be at a point of no return. But after the IPCC report was released, prominent climate scientists, including some of the report's authors, publicly raised doubts about the 2030 deadline. The panel did not say that we have 12 years left to save the world. IPCC working group co-chair James Schia told the Associated Press. The hotter it gets, the worse it gets, but there is no cliff edge. Please stop saying something globally bad is going to happen in 2030, wrote fellow leading report author Miles Allen.  We are less than 12 years away from not being able to undo our mistakes. These numbers aren't anyone's opinions or political views. This is the current best available science. Did climate activists misread the report, or was it a purposeful attempt to mislead the public? That's not clear, but the IPCC report does use vague language that made it susceptible to misinterpretation. The foreword, for example, states that without a, quote, sharp decline in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, there will be irreversible loss of the most fragile ecosystems and crisis after crisis for the most vulnerable people and societies. The fall off a cliff idea is not supported by the IPCC report. It's true that risks increase as temperatures ratchet up, but there's no sudden tipping point where climate change becomes irreversible. Properly read, the report is actually an argument for predictable, sustainable solutions over several decades using experimentation and ovation, not a rush toward risky short-term solutions that focus entirely on warming to the detriment of general environmental stewardship. So what does the IPCC report say about the year 2030? The most specific claim it makes is that, quote, global warming is likely to reach 1.5 degrees Celsius between 2030 and 2052 if it continues to increase at the current rate. There isn't a scientific consensus that reaching 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels will mean global catastrophe. But let's assume that the activists are correct that staying under that level should be the goal of public policy. When will we hit 1.5 degrees of warming under the author's assumptions? By calculating the current rate of global warming and plotting it out along a graph, we see that the answer to the question they pose is the year 2052. But remember that they gave a 22-year range starting in 2030 and ending in 2052. How did they get there? The 2030 date that activists have trumpeted appears in this chart in the report. In the worst case scenario, or the top of the shaded area, we see that warming hits 1.5 degrees by the year 2030. In the best case scenario, or the bottom of the shaded area, we see that warming actually never hits 1.5 degrees. But what most commentators haven't paid attention to is that this is not a measure of actual warming. This chart is actually showing estimates of anthropogenic warming, or warming that the authors hypothesize is caused by humans. The gray line shows the actual changes in the planet's surface temperatures, and the orange shaded area represents the author's estimates of what humans are contributing to the overall warming trend. So the worst case scenario that gets us to 1.5 degrees by 2030 does not represent actual temperature increases, but the upper limit of how much the authors think humans could possibly be contributing if our activities were happening in isolation. So what explains the difference between actual global warming and the global warming caused by humans? The authors believe that if anthropogenic warming is up here, there must be a naturally occurring cooling force that has brought temperatures down. If human-caused warming is down here, that means there's been a naturally occurring warming effect that has brought temperatures up. They aren't sure which is happening, which is why they're not sure whether global warming caused by humans is up here or down there. The point is that the 2030 date, as it appeared in the IPCC report, was the worst case scenario not in terms of actual global warming, but in terms of warming caused only by humans, independent of what's actually happening in the environment. People making the sky as following claims probably haven't read the report and think that it's saying actual temperatures will increase by 1.5 degrees in 2030. The range of dates the report discusses are actually about human contribution to global warming. If you think the problem of global warming is higher temperatures, melting ice caps, rising sea levels, then you care about the date the report projects actual temperatures will reach 1.5 degrees, which is 2052 if things continue at the current rate. Is it possible that actual warming could result in baseline temperatures above 1.5 degrees by 2030? The rate of global warming would have to speed up to about three times what we have observed in past decades, which no serious climate scientists, including the authors of the IPCC report, claim is likely to happen. So why did the IPCC report focus on a date, which is the worst case scenario not in terms of actual global warming, but of human contributions to warming, as if they were happening in a vacuum? After the report's release, co-chair of the working group Deborah Roberts justified their presentation of the data and conclusions as an effort to project a line in the sand and what it says to our species that this is the moment and we must act now, and I hope it mobilizes people and dense the mood of complacency. But Brown says that distorting the science is the opposite of what the IPCC authors and other climate scientists should be doing. It's a very dangerous game if you want strong, sensible long-term solutions to climate change to scare people into them by making wild short-term predictions. That can backfire in one of two ways. You may scare people into doing short-term irrational solutions that do more harm than good, or 2030 might roll around and it's not as much warmer as you said it was going to be, and you could take a lot of steam out of the movement to do anything at all. If we were to accept 2030 as a meaningful deadline, the only path forward is politically unfeasible, economically devastating, and immensely risky. According to the IPCC, limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees would require rapid and far-reaching transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities, all taking place in under a decade. Emissions reductions as currently envisioned won't work. Supporters of the Paris Climate Accord acknowledged that if fully implemented, it still won't come close to keeping warming under its goal of 1.5 degrees. Even if we did everything that we said we were going to do when we signed up in Paris, we would see a rise in the Earth's temperature which is catastrophic. Just reducing emissions is not enough. Our greenhouse gas emissions has to stop. Zero in 2050 means nothing if high emission continues even for a few years. They're not thinking through the implications of what they're calling for. If we need a solution by 2030, that means geoengineering and other dramatic untested strategies with unpredictable effects. Investing millions of jobs and wind, solar, and carbon capture. The supposed 2030 deadline has become a justification for diverting massive resources into largely unproven direct carbon capture and geoengineering projects, and at the same time for shutting down much of the global economy. People who really believe 2030 is a disaster year have to focus on geoengineering, scattering beads to reflect sunlight, injecting aerosols in the stratosphere. Rushing these things through without proper testing has entirely unpredictable consequences and could backfire to much worse environmental damage than the problem they're intended to solve. The only other thing that works on this horizon is bans. We ban coal, we ban air travel, we shut down many electrical power plants, and mainly we have to do it in China and India. This has unpredictable economic effects, except we know it will cause a considerable decline in gross domestic product. That means we reverse the rise out of poverty for much of the world, and we create economic problems larger than we got in the great financial crisis of 2008 and they're permanent. But what if, as the reports underlying data suggest, we actually have more time to limit global warming to below catastrophic levels? If we have 30 years to address climate change, then we have much more palatable options. First of all, the economy and technology are naturally moving away from fossil fuels, then we can give entrepreneurship and bottom-up innovation a time to work. We can adopt policies that gently nudge the economy in the right direction without creating the disruption and misery of sudden bans. If we have more time, we can get away from the pure focus on temperature. We can consider balanced solutions that consider all environmental issues and all economic issues. We can try to reduce the total human environmental impact. Sensible solutions can build a better world for our grandchildren. Scientists tell us that this is the decisive decade. We no longer have time to leave out the science. Activists, politicians, and journalists who trumpet 2030 as a meaningful deadline may be doing so in a desperate attempt to get the public to take the threat of global warming seriously. This is our World War II. I feel a need for all of us to breathe fire. After New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez invoked the 12-year deadline, she responded to critics by tweeting, you'd have to have the social intelligence of a sea sponge to think it's literal. But the best way to address climate change is not to mislead people and stoke panic, but to rationally assess the science and chart the best course for both the planet and the people living on it. There's a partisan divide on this issue between people who think it's a very serious problem with a short fuse and people who think it's not much of a problem with a long fuse. I think most sensible people should regard it as a serious problem with a long fuse. There isn't much place for this in the media and on campaign trails. The key factor is for the last 50 years we have been reducing the amount of energy it takes to create a dollar of wealth. If that trend continues and can be accelerated, it means we can have a booming economy, we can have prosperity for all, we can bring people out of poverty all over the world without using a lot of energy and therefore without a big environmental footprint. We don't have to choose between prosperity and a good environment. We can have both.


This video explains what to do with works by more than one author, both in your notes and in your bibliography, according to the sixteenth edition of the Chicago Manual of Style. Let's start with what to do if you have less than four authors. When you have two to three authors, list them all. Separate the author's names with commas and include and before the last author's name. In your bibliography, list all author's names as well. Invert the first author's name, their last name goes before their first name, and the second and third author's names are written normally. Next, let's look at what to do when you have four to ten authors. In your notes, only the name of the first author is included, followed by the abbreviation at all. There is no comma after at all. But in your bibliography, list all of the author's names, do not use at all. If you have more than ten authors, in your note, you would only list the first author's name, followed by at all. In your bibliography, list the first seven author's names, followed by at all. For more information about notes bibliography style, check out our videos on how to cite a book, e-book, journal, newspaper or magazine, website, or theses or dissertation. Visit the Munn Libraries website for our Chicago Style Guide and to chat live with library staff. Thanks for watching.


So in the news, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp have been back on for more than 24 hours. But Monday's 6 hour shutdown is still lingering in the minds of Nigerians and other people around the world. It's a reminder of the experience of 2019 when Facebook shut down for 24 hours, its biggest outage to date. This is how some Nigerians felt about the recent blackout. I was angry because I was expecting some messages from WhatsApp and like some pictures on Facebook. So I was really upset but I have nothing to do. There's no way of getting information and passing information on somebody. You know, people please throw stuff on him. Most people, like my wife yesterday, she was very very angry. But then what can we do? I thought it was networked in. I brought out my badge, she reset and do every manual stuff but it's still the same thing. I'm like okay. Maybe it's a problem. We are supposed to have an event yesterday. So it actually affected us getting to reach our people on time. So we had to be using text messages, I was like how do we get these people? It affected us because we ended up, people didn't turn up as much as we have expected because we couldn't reach them, especially on WhatsApp and of course on Facebook too. There's been a message from my sister in Ibadu. So I couldn't send messages to her, she couldn't send to me so I was wondering. So I kept quiet. So it was this morning that I read on my WhatsApp chats that life can be stopped like that.