Alright, so hello everyone, I'm Wu Pengyang and today I'm going to talk about how to construct or publicate what Macro PR is for. This is based on joint work with Zuo Xiaoyu, Ma Hoa, and Wili Sosilo. So a watermarking scheme can embed some information into a digital object without changing it too much. And it will be hard to remove the embedded information without destroying the watermarked object. In this talk, we consider watermarking schemes for programs, that is, the watermarked object is a program. Formally, it consists of three algorithms, namely, the characterization algorithm, which produces a pair of marked key and the stretching key, the marking algorithm, which embeds a message into a program with a marking key, and the correction algorithm, which extracts a message and embeds it in a watermarked circuit with an extraction key. Its correctness requires that the watermarked circuit should roughly preserve the functionality of the original program, and that the extraction algorithm can extract the correct message and embed it in a, yeah, honestly, watermarked circuit. Its mis-corrected requirement is unremovability, which requires that it will be computationally difficult for L03 to remove or modify the message and embed it in a watermarked circuit without changing it too much. So let me hope to have watermarking schemes for general functionalities. However, as shown by Covey and Holmes 2016, it is impossible to watermark a learnable functionality. A natural class of non-learnable functionalities are cryptographic ones, such as the decryption algorithm, the PR evaluation algorithm, and so on. So in the study, we mainly focused on watermarking schemes for cryptographic programs. And in this work, we also followed this and particularly focused on the evaluation algorithm of the PRF. So next, we give a more formal definition of the security of the watermarking scheme for PRF. There are two parties involved in the security definition, the challenger and L03. The challenger will first generate a pair of mark key and a traction key, and it also samples a PRF key. Then the L03 sends a message to the challenger, and the challenger will embed the message into the PRF key with a marker key. It then sends the results secured C star to the L03, and the L03 will create a secured C tilde. And it wins if the C tilde is close to the original watermarked C star, and the traction algorithm fails to attract the original message from C tilde. In this definition, we do not allow the L03 to learn either the marking key or the traction key. So we denote it as a secret key security here. We can also consider a strong L03 that can learn the mark key of the watermarking scheme, and this is called a permanent marking security. Alternatively, we can consider a L03 that learns a traction key but not a mark key, and this is denoted as a public traction security. And finally, we can consider public key security, whereas the L03 learns both the mark key and the traction key. So in real-world applications, if we use a watermarking scheme with the first three security guarantees, then we have to set up a watermarking authority to hold either the marking key or the traction key or both. Such authority is usually a single point of failure, because if a L03 crops the watermarking authority and gets the key holds there, then it is able to remove all messages embedded in all watermarked security. That is a serious security threat to the scheme. And if we use a watermarking scheme with public security, then we do not need such authority, and the problem can be resolved. So in practice, it is preferable to use a watermarking scheme with public key security. Unfortunately, also we have very elegant constructions of watermarking schemes that satisfy the first three security requirements. We do not know how to construct a public key with markable PIF. The goal of this work is therefore to construct the public key with markable PIF. So next we will see how to construct a public key with markable PIF. Our standpoint is a watermarker PIF with public traction and secure mark key. In this scheme, the PRK pay should be kept through it. And to embed a message into the PRK, the marking algorithm will use a secret mark key. And to extract a message from a watermark circuit, the collection algorithm will use a public traction key. So with this scheme, to construct a public key with markable PIF, our initial idea is to generate a fresh mark key and traction key for each PRK. That is, the new PRK PIF now includes the original PRK key, a fresh mark key, and a fresh traction key. In this way, there is no global marking key that should be kept through it. So the scheme should have public key security. After this modification, the marking algorithm can still work because it can use the mark key included in the PRK. But the collection algorithm doesn't work now because it needs to use the traction key. But the traction key is included in the PRK and can't be accessed by the traction algorithm. To solve this problem, we need a mechanism to send a key to the traction algorithm. It seems that the only way to do this is to put a key to the PRF output. And of course, we can't append it to the PRF output directly because it may ruin the determinist of the PRF. We solve this problem by using a PD scheme with pseudoram self-tapped. So let PK and SK be the public key pair of the PK scheme and put them into the public parameter of the Wattmark scheme. We also modify the PRF evaluation algorithm and append an encryption of the traction key to the original PRF output. Here the run list for the encryption is determined by the input X. To Wattmark PRK, the marking algorithm also unbind the message into the first part of the PRF evaluation algorithm. And then it keeps the second part of the evaluation unchanged. And to extract a message from the Wattmarked circuit, the encryption algorithm will first get EK from the second part of the secure port by decrypting it. Then it uses the recovered extraction key to extract the message from the first part of the security. So as the dosary is only allowed to modify the Wattmarked circuit on the spot version of the inputs, the encryption algorithms are likely to get the correct extraction key by decrypting the secure port or random input. And then by the security of the online publicly tractable Wattmarked PRF, the encryption algorithm can finally get the correct message. So the security follows. Also, we need to examine if the scheme has a secure run list. At first glance, the answer should be yes, because the PRF output now includes two parts. The first part is the output of a not-PRF, and the second part is the self-attacks over a Piki scheme with a super-random self-text. However, the self-attacks super-run list only holds against the other three without a secure key. And now as a secure key is put into the parameter, the dosary can learn it and then it can decrease the second part of the PRF output and see if they are all decrypted to the same volume. So it is very easy to distinguish it from the output of a random function. To solve this problem, we use a robust fast-kidbox PRF instead of the Piki scheme. In a nutshell, the robust of a fast-kidbox PRF is the PRF family, where the PRF key is associated with a secure S. A student still requires that given only a request to the PRF algorithm, no one could distinguish it from a random function. But it now additionally requires that it is easy to get a secure S and bind it in the PRF key. Given a secure S that implants the PRF algorithm. And based on this, we also need it to have robust vulnerability, which requires that the secure can be recovered from a secure S that is close to the PRF algorithm. Okay, so now with a robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF, we modify the construction as follows. First, we will include the PRF key of the underlying robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF into the PRF key of the constructed watermarking scheme. And the security embedded there is the creation key for the PRF key. We also replace the subtext in the PRF output with the output of the on-off fast-kidbox PRF. The marking algorithm still works as before. That is, it embeds the message into the first part of the PRF evaluation algorithm and remains a second part on change. And the creation algorithm now gets decayed from the second part of the given circuit. And then it uses the recovery key to get the to track the message from the first part of the security. This works because due to the vulnerability of fast-kidbox PRF, the creation algorithm can get the correct decay from the second part. Also, the robust vulnerability further guarantees that the creation algorithm can get a correct decay from the second part of the watermark circuit, even if it is modified by the A3. And then by security of the underlying publicly credible watermarker PRF, the creation algorithm can get the correct message from the watermark circuit that has been changed by the A3 slightly. So, the security follows now. Also, the pseudonist of the new construction comes from the pseudonist of the publicly credible watermarker PRF and that of the robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF and also the pseudonist holds. So, we have shown how to construct a publicly watermarker PRF from a watermarker PRF with production and a robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF. The first building block can be constructed from indistinability of fast-kidbox PRF as shown by Kohei et al. in 2016. And in this work, we give constructions of robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF from either watermark function or FHE with different trade-offs in their parameters. So, before continuing our discussion, we recall our first attempt again. The attempt fails because the creation algorithm can't get the creation key to perform the creation procedure. So, we note that if we consider a weak notion of watermarking, where the creation algorithm is allowed to use a hint about the PRF key, then this problem can be solved very easily by setting the hint to be the creation key. So, we call this a hinking watermarker PRF. And by using this new notion, we can divide our construction just mentioned into two parts. In the first part, we get a public hinking watermarker PRF from a watermarker PRF with publication. And in the second part, we upgrade the public hinking watermarker PRF to be a standard public watermarker PRF using a robust on-off fast-kidbox PRF. Okay, so next we will see how to get public watermarker PRF from simpler assumptions. Thanks to our general framework, it is sufficient to show how to construct public hinking watermarker PRF from simpler assumptions. So, the construction is built on a puncture PRF. Roughly speaking, a puncture PRF allows one to puncture a PRF key on an input at start. The puncture key functions identically as the original key on all other inputs. And it will hide the real output, a real PRF output on the puncture point x star. So, now with puncture PRF, we construct the public hinking watermarker PRF as follows. The new PRF key, capital K, includes the PRF key of the puncture PRF and the random input x star. We also compute the PRF output y star of x star and compute this star as g of y star, where g is an injective one-way function. The hint is the hint that includes x star as this star. To watermark the PRF evaluation algorithm, the marking algorithm just punctures the PRF key on x star, and the circuit will evaluate with the punctured key. Also, to test if the circuit is work marked, the expression algorithm will test if the circuit is punctured on x star. That is, if the circuit error is cx star is not equal to y star. Since g is an injective function, it is equivalent to test if g of c of x star is not equal to this star. This can be finished by using only the information from the hint and the given circuit. Also, the security of the injective one-way function and the security of the puncture PRF guarantees that the adversary is not able to learn y star from the hint and the watermarked circuit, so it is not able to generate a circuit that outputs y star on input x star. And thus, it can't make a watermarked circuit unmarked, and the security follows. Okay, so by putting the bow construction into our blueprint, we get a public key watermarked PRF from either one-way function or one-way function plus FHE, with different trade-offs in the parameters. The construction has a restriction that it only supports marked binding, that is, the circuit is either marked or unmarked, and unlike the construction from RO, which has message unbending, we also give a construction of a message unbending public key watermarked PRF purely from standard lattice functions by using a pointed FHE scheme. Please see our full paper for the construction. To conclude, in this work, we give a general framework that constructs public key watermarked PRF from a public hinting watermarked PRF, and a robust FASCULAR PRF. We also insetiate boost primitive from different assumptions with different trade-offs. The main trade-offs we consider in this work include whether the scheme supports message binding and how large the parameter amp-snow is. The parameter amp-snow denotes the version or inputs of C star that can be modified by the industry. And if you observe our results, you will see if you hope to have message unbending, and if you don't want to use RO, then you will have a very, very small amp-snow, which is a concrete, exponentially small volume. Also, if you hope to have constant amp-snow, then you have to use FHE, even if you have used RO. And finally, now our constructions can choose an optional amp-snow, which is roughly one or two. So it is an interesting open problem to construct public key watermarked PRF without the restrictions. So now to conclude, in this work, we initiate the study of public key watermarked PRF, and that is just a start. There are many, many interesting open problems in this area. Okay, so that's all. Thanks for attention, and I'm happy to answer your questions.


Okay, you should have a little splash green. You can say I got it. Beautiful. Okay. Well, welcome everybody to the 25th of January. Where did the 1st month go already of 2024 supply chain and trade finance, a special interest group for hyper ledger here. Glad you're all here either listening after the fact to the recording, or if you, when you're here live, as always, all are welcome. And we're glad that lots of different folks are here from different places, different ideas, different thoughts. And that would be important this year. This, this session, because we're going to be doing some planning for 2024. So there's that. And also anti trust policy notice. Please don't say anything that's confidential that you don't want shared public because this is an open session, et cetera, et cetera there. So those 2 items. And then before we really get started, I also want to thank folks on that are here in person as well as the folks that are listening to this after the fact. For all of your efforts back in 2023, I think we had a really good year was a fun year working with good people, which is always a lot of fun makes it makes a lot easier. I mean, getting that ebook out. It took us a little bit longer than we thought it was going to take, but you know, that's that's always the case. I guess that's part of open source. You know, you kind of go through it. You work through it. Get some good ideas. Keep on going. You know, that that that was, that was a good culmination of all the work from from last year. So, thanks very much with that. I'll also say a couple of things. 1. Andrea, thank you to Andrea. I mean, he's, he's resigned as a active co-chair, but he's still participating and going to be part of our group here. You'll still see the weekly digest coming out from him on Sundays. I don't know if you really scheduled this. I never asked him, but I picture him on Sunday afternoon, sitting there in Pisa, you know, sending out this little LinkedIn thing. Hopefully he schedules it. But anyways, so Andreas still is going to be working together with us and Jeff, another good thing as part of 2023 is that you joined us as one of the co-chairs. So that was good. So, so, so that's 2023, 2024 here. Let me scroll down a little bit here. We're, Alicia, Jeff and I talked and we said, should we just keep this kind of same schedule of meetings? And right now that's the plan is we're going to keep the same schedule of meetings every other Thursday. The time will just it if we have a speaker who needs to have a different time than normal. But in general, we'll be at the same time every other Thursday here. Upcoming events here. In two weeks, Jeff is going to talk. Jeff has more of a technical background in either Alicia or myself, or maybe we had it at one point in time Alicia and we've lost it, but Jeff has kept it. Maybe that's more it. So, so Jeff is going, Jeff has some ideas to share around blockchain more from a technical nature in applying blockchain within a supply chain. I think you even have a demo kind of thing, right? Jeff, that you kind of created. You're on mute, Jeff. That's certainly you're awkward. Well, I'm not with the music. It's a demo and it's a really demonstration of two things. It's a desktop blockchain written in Python. I wrote in Python. So it looks like a blockchain running, but anyway, they'll be in their supply chain records. You'll see how they're brought up, how they're ordered, how they're stored. This is off of that step wise. I just mentioned this. I collected that from fabric, how fabric handles things, Ethereum. So I'll go into that. Hopefully I'll be right out by the eighth. I think so. You'll be as ready as we need. Yeah. And then on the 22nd, the income from Everledger. Everledger is still alive and kicking. They've obviously gone through a few changes. You may have seen that. And Dan's going to share with us some thoughts around using Everledger and G7 and the choreography of working through a lot of the sanctions type of work there. So we're glad that she'll be joining and it also bring in the trade financing goal, which I know is near and dear to your, your heart there. So you have something to rely on to actually create the free finance documents. In the next 2 sessions, if you want to go back, or I guess now it's, it's actually released today here, Alicia and Jeff and David Boswell were on a podcast and talked a little bit about supply chain and trade finance and watching. And you can listen to their deep, insightful comments and ideas on this podcast by clicking on that. Is it up now, Alicia? Yes, it actually went out yesterday. I'm editing that. Thank you for catching that. Okay. No, no, we're just, I just added that in this morning. Okay. The wiki page. Okay. I sent the link. A few people yesterday. By the way, I should also thank Alicia.  I know it helps me because I, and you asked to know, where's the invite for this kind of thing? I know I can go to this page and I know where the, I know where the sessions are. And then I can get the link that actually is going to work to get me into this session because before that, before you did that. I always looking for it. No. So I'm glad that you do that, Alicia. But it's helpful hearing that it's helpful. It makes me think, okay, yes, it's worth putting in the work. There you go. There you go. And you know the weekly news digest is there and upcoming events are there also so you know, good, all good stuff. So discord, she puts stuff out of the discord channel. That's right. That's right. Jeff, Jeff and I talked about maybe we want to try to use discord a little bit more. So Alicia got me on the discord again. I was having all sorts of problems getting there even discord, even discord help desk couldn't help me, but Alicia did. So, yeah, so let's see if we can use discord and you know maybe expand the folks that are interested or at least being able to enable them to get involved. As you said before we start recording here. So, with that, let's get into the meat of today's discussion here. So we just did the intro. Alicia is going to spend a little bit of time here on ways to get involved which is, which is is a part because we want to broaden beyond even the folks that are on here and folks that are listening. There's other out there that folks that have great ideas and they can share and get involved, etc, etc. The other part to say charter, you know, it's probably worthwhile for us now that we've been looking at we haven't looked at in a while. Why do we do and what do we do there. So Alicia, I'll turn it over to you and let you talk a little bit about your thoughts there. I'm going to share your screen directly right here. Stop sharing. I'm going to share desktop. Great. I'm going to start by going over the how to contribute page. Those of you who are here a little bit early you heard me say how I've had some challenges with confluence I created a page and there was a lot in it made a lot of edits, but it was still in draft form and confluence was updated sometimes over the holidays and everything was lost. Luckily, I was able to go in and take JPEG screenshots found a way to take JPEG screenshots of what I had done so I've this morning I started recreating it based on the JPEGs. So right now, but how to contribute page talking about how people can sign in and start up making it easier. I know a lot of people don't know how to do the LF ID, how to create their Linux foundation ID. We have links to both the written directions and YouTube video instructions. Some people like video I prefer written how people can add their name to the member page subscribing to the mailing list come join our meetings. I'm asking people to introduce themselves. Then how people can contribute as a non technical member I haven't written. I haven't added that in yet so let me use my lovely JPEGs. Talk about how people can share their subject matter expertise, organize organize a speaker. People identify speakers all the time sometimes we go out and do the job of inviting them. Me, Tom, Jeff, Ned, I know you've certainly got involved in that. And we want to ask more people to get involved, bring in speakers who they're interested in hearing from doing research on what type of work would matter, starting a project, talking about your own project or a hyper ledger and project in general on your blog on your social media. As Tom mentioned before we have our weekly news digest, which Andreas put so much work into and now every week something goes out. It's very easy to go in here. Just find the one for this week. Hit edit and then add in an article that you think is relevant for supply chain and or trade finance. I find it useful or I think it's useful to put the source of the article at the beginning so that people have an idea of what type of journal they're going to. What do you do?  Is it a news site? Which news site? So it's very easy to add articles here that you think would be relevant and of interest to the group because the more of us who post here, it's going to enable everybody to get a different perspective because we all have very different perspectives on this world. So that's an easy way to do something useful for the SIG. Let's go back to let's go back to the JPEG. Yeah, so contributing to the weekly news digest.   Right now we don't have a lot of technical members or at least not to my knowledge. We've had a few people come in and join periodically and it's even here right now today. I think most of you are more technical than than I am a little bit but not not that much, but there are a lot of ways for technical members to contribute. Finally, oh, I did that. That was some changes. I think I misplaced my that specific JPEG how to contribute going through the tutorials. Reading tutorials about how to create an app looking, you know what to do if you're an experienced developer. There is a need right now we don't have a supply chain and trade trade finance code repository on our wiki or on discord so that's something that could be really helpful posting relevant code to the repository. It would be great if someone could create a GitHub for us. I have used GitHub in the past but I haven't used it a lot and since I'm not a developer. I think it makes sense to have someone who has a lot more experience on it to be involved with that. I saw my Python source code out there. Oh, great. Jeff, that would be fabulous. Let, if you want to let's talk later because it'd be great to have it like associated with the Hyperledger Foundation site and then have it marked for the SIG. Does that make sense? Yeah, because right now it's just associated with me now. Yeah, I can do that. Perfect. Great. Thank you. That that would be good because that's going to help. Well, you gotta let people know. Yeah, that's a huge contribution. You know, it's actually public now, but it's under an ID that I have so I'll do that. I'll make it more obvious. Is it Hyperledger code? No, no, no, it's I use GitHub for all that Python code that I put out there so I can, some used to using GitHub so I'll set up a GitHub for Hyperledger. Perfect. That doesn't mean I'm going to put that code up there. I'm just going to set it up again. Okay, cool. Thank you. Yeah. My code is public. Somebody asked me about it once and saw it and asked about some modules ahead in there on graphics. Okay. So people can see it. Good. Good. That's that's good to hear. Thank you for volunteering for that. People can improve documentation. Think about proposals because we do have a page on the on the SIG Wiki already planning suggestions. I think Jeff is actually going to go over that a little bit more today. And then at the bottom there is the code of conduct for new people. It would be great if you could just review the Hyperledger code of conduct. We are this is an open source community. Everyone is welcome and we want everyone to feel welcome as well. So please do take a look at that. And if you have ideas on how to contribute on how people can contribute, please do feel free to add that to the page right there. Like I said, I'll be working more on this today, but if you have more ideas, it's a community page, not just me. So that's, that's that and then the SIG Charter. Before you go to the Charter real fast. I'm Jeff DeRion. I view you as one of the poster childs for poster children for, you know, how to contribute, you came in, you didn't know any of us. You didn't know what the story was you kind of showed up. Let's see what this is.  Cool. So, I'm glad you're here. We're glad you're here today. And, you know, I think whoever's hopefully, whoever's hopefully some people are going to read this and say, you know, I'd like to get involved. Tom, thank you for bringing it up.  No, it's great. Yeah. Excellent. It's great to see the community girl like that. So then the SIG charter. So right now if we go to the SIG homepage, what is up here as our introduction and scope for the most part was the scope from the trade finance SIG which was created in 2019 with a couple of modifications. When the two SIGs the supply chain SIG and the trade finance SIG were joined in I want to say 2022. The scope was not reworked and it's taken a little while for us to find our foot, our footing. I think it makes sense now for us to really think about what we're doing as a SIG what we want to accomplish. You know, we, we do organize a lot of events. We want to find ways to put more information out there. And by revisiting the scope. We can really think about our identity as a SIG where we want to take that. I know Jeff has mentioned he's interested in being involved in reworking this. Hi, Ned. Are either of you interested in thinking about the scope with us and revising that? Yeah, definitely. Great. Thank you. Back the ways and it looked really almost like we're a McKinsey research group. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, like I said, this was just taking from the prior from prior SIG. Not wrong with that. I just saw it and said, wow, okay. And if you're ever interested in knowing how something used to look before the edits, if you come up here to the upper right hand corner, you're going to see page history. I don't know. I do this regularly. I don't know how often any of you do that. And just scroll down and see when the changes were made, who've changed them, Tom, Andrea. And then you can also go in and see, I'll go look at something I did. You can see what changed was made on, where is it? Usually I get a slightly different response when I click there. Oh, so you can see, you can compare the different versions to see how they've changed. I find it useful just look at the evolution of things. I know not everyone does, but if you're interested, it's fairly easy to do that. And if you're interested and you didn't catch that, just drop me a note and I'm happy to hop on a video call and help you with that. So I'll put something out over the mailing list for the next couple of days, asking who wants to be involved in revisiting the scope, now that we have a better idea of who we are as a SIG. So please do let us know. I'll put something out over Discord as well. Any questions about our scope? Beautiful. Thank you, David. I see you just joined. Thank you. And Barry welcome. Okay. Tom, I think that's, I think that's me for the day. I'm going to stop sharing. Okay. Good. And also, Barry and David welcome here. So let's now we're going to continue our way of working there. We're going to time box these things to one hour so that we're done by the top of the hour here. The thing. So now let's flip over and this is the meat of this is Jeff is going to lead. He's put together some thoughts. They'll share some some ideas of what we could do this year. This is totally open. I mean, we got all sorts of ways we could go. The idea, the thought of these discussions we've had is, let's try whatever we're going to do, let's do something that's achievable, you know, in realistic, right? We're all volunteers, we're all doing this for reasons in addition to money. So we want to do something that achievable realistic and valuable to others within the community of supply chain and trade finance and hyper ledger project specifically. So with Jeff, I'll turn it over to you and let you lead the charge here on the discussion. I'm going to do this. I have some project topics or supply chain topics that put out on the wiki. Oh, that's, do you want to share the screen. And you want me to share or you can or you can show it. Because I'll share my I'll share my screen. What I need to do is. Oh, this real quick. This is what you want. Yeah. So if you scroll down. So everybody on the phone so what I did is, you'll see, I think there's 11 different ideas around there about projects and so I actually did a for myself I had a PowerPoint template that I use that actually sent out the time and elation it's going to be more context around the things that I wrote there. I'm not going to show that PowerPoint I sent it to them yesterday does just say where my thoughts are. So, you know, there's a dozen. There's a dozen but might be one of also there but there's about 11 different project ideas for 24 Now, if you look at these things there's 11 of them, counting, counting that. SIG blog, I think Alicia maybe put that out there. So everybody, obviously, this isn't a corporation where we're going to do all these. The idea around these was to show what topics, what I've investigated again, this is just a template I'm expecting people just throw stuff in there but topics that I've seen in a that weekly news digest or meet up things that I've attended that seem to that appear to be very important and so these are all topics that are important to supply chains and out of all these 11 items on there can we at some point, glean out a project or two out of those. And so that's what you're that's what you're looking at here although again these are mostly around efforts and you want me to go through each one. I think you probably need to do that just give a pile of overview and then we kind of use as a springboard for discussion from folks to be able to share their thoughts on. Yeah, because I stuck this out there I did a for my, so I can remember all the stuff I have a PowerPoint and I have more context from the PowerPoint so I'm going to flip my screen over and hope these matches I'm looking at this. The screen and I'm flipping over to my PowerPoint where I have more context and on it so. So I can read through these and just, again, clean off these are topics that are that are of interest today and supply chains and like collecting this information can we clean out of all this information a project or two for 2024. So, one of the first ones that I have up there is about AI in blockchains and I'm on the long screen. The views of AI and blockchain so that's a big item right now and so what ideas around this is this is more of documenting similar to the ebook what's occurring up today in in AI what strategies are being produced out there today for future use of AI I don't don't envision us going out and having to do a deep dive investigation of the companies that are really using AI because I don't really think there are any that are lying on the sense that it's out there doing its own. Just an example I know somebody that's got a small marketing firm and they're using AI for their marketing techniques in some fashion and I asked her are you serious are you really using that she said no everything that it does with double check. I don't really know what that means when doing double work but that's really an idea around project I've written I guess it'd be some either something similar to ebook. And also, I think I had melted in there somewhat. How does fabric enable AI. It's architecture model specific this white chain. If there's any questions on one day at all. The screen back. The other the next item on there is something else that's somewhat in use today. Again, I've seen some information on this is about NFTs in the supply chain how are NFTs being used today. The efficiency of supply chain and really this is the NFTs can eliminate a lot of the issues with the supply chain is merely around traceability and see who has your materials and so NFTs help. In fraud detection and for fraud detection, which is another kind of topic further down so that's another idea around NFTs and we can. You know, I keep reporting back to the six charter. Do we want to, and the topic such as AI or NFT do we want to put out what's occurring out in the industry today and what the future looks like. The companies are doing with the software purveyors are pushing around AI and their products or do we want to go out and put something together that shows how fabric. And it's engaging with NFTs help supply chains. And then there's a lot there, but I'm just trying to bring up topics around, around these things. And again, I'm looking at another screen so if it doesn't. Yeah. I think if we keep you honest man. Yeah, if we're if we want to talk about how blockchain and other technology. Interactions are being used around product fraud and tampering. It makes sense to discuss how blockchain and IOT devices are being used or DNA testing of product to confirm it did come from XYZ or DNA. Not labeling, but DNA coatings or applications are being used on product with blockchain information embedded so that it can be confirmed that that individual product, whether it be a medication or high end food product or something like that is indeed the product that you're looking at the. The online profile of, I think there's a lot of interesting stuff going and going on there and a lot of people don't realize how much it is blockchain and these other technologies. Exactly. There is there and I forgot I should have wrote this down. There is a high end purse company who now has a little code on items that they receive. I wish I remember who it was maybe ever ledgers involved in this. But what it is, it's the public key of key photography and so you can't hack those and so they read that public key and it goes out to the blockchain. You can tell them that this came from the manufacturer. That's the only way that you can't hack into those and using cryptography to show that this was from never supposed to make it business, not a retread. The other public space. And I keep thinking it's something to do with, you know, it's like, I hate to do this because Alicia's success. What's the expense of purses of Calvin Klein or is it Calvin Klein's not that price anymore. Frata Louis Vuitton Chanel Chanel Chanel Chanel Chanel. Where some people had given those as gifts and the woman was staggered that she gave those to her and they said, don't worry about their cheap their face. I don't spend, yeah, I'm sure I don't spend as much time looking at the fashion market there. There has been a lot of blockchain used for traceability and fashion, especially in Asia. But when it comes to blockchain and in food and beverage ever ledger so we've got Leanne Kemp coming next month. I think back in 2017 18 world of something called the Chi wine vault, and they were used, they were not only using blockchain to trace wine in general but they were working with sensors that were applied to the bottle that could be used to verify whether the bottle itself had been tampered with. In 2017 that was a really big deal that was, that was new. I still periodically seeing news about other companies doing that. And Chi wine vault was the first company I saw doing that type of work. So, really excited about having Leanne come in. Yeah, in general, or right I'd like us to go this year is kind of beyond traceability. It's almost like traceability is the basic thing that blockchain can enable right where you have, you have data that you believe that you know is valid because now you trust that it's on the blockchain. It was put there effectively via the whatever whatever the whatever the mechanism was to get it on there, right. And now that you have that data, what can you do with that isn't a problem on statement is now I can create all sorts of letters of credit and all the trade finance documents solidly off of that stuff, because I have all this information, you know, this is somewhere I keep on coming back to the old Walmart can story right there's no sensor data that was already in place that okay I'm going to be willing to pay an invoice right from a shipper, because now I can believe all this data, and the shipper didn't believe it to there.  Yeah. I think we still need to go back to making sure like how are we confirming that the data being input is correct. I can tell you, or someone created a profile about me on a Wikipedia like but but Ethereum based encyclopedia, and they misread something on my LinkedIn profile. So the data that that or I'm going to assume they misread it I'm going to assume they were not misread it. And it was entered on the Ethereum blockchain incorrectly. So now there is information out there about me that is incorrect and information about you. Yeah, it's nothing malicious. It's nothing malicious it's just saying I have a degree that I don't have. And I am on the Ethereum blockchain it can't be changed. Bobby I see Bobby raising her hand. I'm a politician so you're right. There's a new lab at hyper ledger called AI FAQ, which what we're working on is two parts. One part is to get an open source AI FAQ model out there for people to use. And the second is to get all of hyper ledgers information in there correctly. Correctly, we're starting with a grid if you go to the lab section, and then hit overview. There's a AI FAQ and under it is a grid where we're trying to collect whether it's and transfer to PDFs to feed into the system. And we have it so that we're doing checks and balances so someone person would get the information into the PDF and the other person would have to read it and improve it before it would go into the system, so that everything in there has been vetted for accurate information because right now, what Alicia said if you don't do it that way, you're getting crap. Right. So Bob this is an open source AI effort. Yes. Yeah, here I'm putting the, sorry, I'm putting a link to it in the general chat right now. Thank you, Bobby for saying where it could be found.  We meet every Monday if you want to join us 9am Monday morning. Great. Thank you. 9am. It's on the public calendar. Okay, 9am. Eastern time or Western time Eastern Eastern standard time. Okay. Awesome. And then also, just to follow back, I could have some input into the NFTs and the supply chain. Since that model, the giving chain is still in play with actually Andre's group walk fund and elite web. So we're working on getting the, actually, I'm working on raising money, but we're working on getting the infrastructure in place to start doing some of the supply chain charity events again. Right.  Somebody picks it up collects the NFT that that picture creates, as well as the donation to kind of track the digital twin through the system that is going through the supply chain by transferring just the NFT when you collect or physically collect. So it's kind of like a digital twin thing. But I have two questions for you about the given chain related to that. One, would you love to, would you be interested in doing a webinar for the sake because I think NFT since supply chain, including the, this instance you're talking about giving would be of interest to the SIG. And it would be better closer to April because I'm going to present this at the NFT NYC conference. Oh, great. Excellent. So second question. late March. I'm still in Florida. I don't get back to Jersey until April 1. It's too cold. Oh, yeah, so I'm about to go back to Montreal because I like that called. Second question was, I remember a couple of years ago, there were some blockchain and philanthropy projects that were allowing philanthropists to track their donations and all the way to how were the, how were the recipients using that money. Yep, that's exactly the basis for this block fi elite web solution where it's almost like programmable donations. So if I'm a huge philanthropist and I have a certain pizza pie to donate to people and I can slice it up anyway I want with smart contracts so if like this group is showing that they're using the donation properly then the next next gets released you know the next gets released so they have to kind of like keep track of it earn and keep track of it that way so it's yeah it's fascinating stuff I'd love to you know get my stuff together and present it. As a former government finance person who used to regularly argue with assistant and deputy commissioners and even the commissioner on on how they wanted to spend the money versus what the laws around each pool of money were. Having it automated like that would have saved me a lot of not really what the time so much about the adjuda that angst and that having to argue, because I would have to go into them and show them a lot or show them the grant statements about the only ways that could be used when they were saying, no we need to do this, this something like that would have been oh so helpful. Donations that the charitable donations that would be something that charity navigator they would really be interested in learning about that. We're actually going to be you know introducing this right now we're working on the piece for the supply chain which is one of the reasons why I joined the group. So we're we're we're pretty good with the programmable donations and you know creating a token for for each donation pool and then you know incentivizing people you know it's going to be that way but the hard part always has been like once. So the idea of the giving chain was if there is a catastrophic event it's almost like a 911 system decentralized not based on any government so for instance if I'm sitting here in Florida. There was a tornado down the street last week so say that was a horrific tornado event. The mayor of Fort Lauderdale has a certain amount of, you know, interest in getting this event registered in the giving chain so he would register the event. And then anyone so for instance everybody's got to get shelter in the gym at the high school so we need blankets and cots to go to the high school. So he would register the event and alert everyone in town about you know the giving chain and they would either try to be a part of it in one way or another hopefully. So if I have blankets I put them outside my door I go to the giving chain.org, I see the registered event, I go in, I register as a donor, I put the stuff outside my door I take a picture of it and then I'm done. That picture becomes an NFT and alerts now this is the hard part alerts people in the system to transport the goods. That's a that's a big ask and a big give when you like really look at what that means like who's in the car is the stuff needs to be refrigerate like is it fit like whatever it is it really has a lot of complexity to the supply chain piece of this. And then again the so, for instance, if it's just like the high school kids in their cars, they go to, they've been alerted because the NFT was created that there's a donation, they go to that GPS location, they pick up the blanket they take possession of the NFT. Take a picture of it it becomes part of the metadata, they go on their way when they create the metadata for that NFT that alerts the recipient that a donation is on the way. When the donation gets there the same process happens that the recipient takes that digital picture, and that becomes the last piece of the, the tail of the tape of the of your donation and you can go look at it on the dashboard. So you can see where your physical donation, but again, without having supply chains set up that transport piece is a big ask so that's where we're kind of at with the giving chain. So we're working through some some stuff. Okay, good. I'll save them. Let's do a quick time check we got 17 minutes before the top of the hour. I don't think we're going to get through all these realistically here. Give us this idea of these so is the idea of the idea is to bring these conversations up like with Bobby with the NFTs and so forth so I can keep going through them if you'd like. Yeah, let's do that. Let me add one other thing here because what Jeff and Alicia talked about a little bit is we knew we weren't going to get through all these great depth and you know I on I'm sure you have ideas and then you have ideas. You know, Barry you have ideas David you have ideas Toby you have ideas out there to that we want to get in so this this form here, kind of like, if you're part of the ebook last year you can comment on this form. And we can use this as a vehicle in between these calls to kind of keep the ball rolling here. So, look for a common spring go back to this page here. And this would be a mechanism for us to hopefully at least start you boiling down into which ideas make sense. And the other part Alicia said something here is, you know, even if something's not a project, but it could be a very good webinar. Right. So, you like if you like the idea, and you know somebody who does something in that area, or you know we want to figure out a way to bring that out and we got to go find somebody. And you want to lead the charge of try to find somebody that'd be a beautiful thing also, because we're not going to do all these will probably only do one or two and we might even do not do any of these and some other brilliant idea comes up. Let me leave it at that. Jeff, you want to just tick through these a little bit and let's open it up. Can I actually make one little one quick introduction. For those of you who are interested in making a comment on the page. The way to do that. You see where on the upper right hand corner of the page itself it says log in. You do need to log in with your Linux foundation ID. You need to log in at the bottom of the page there will be a comment field. So then we'll be able to have a comment, have a conversation on this page itself. Let me let me do this. I don't think you're going to see my Google ID. There you go. Yeah. And there you go. Exactly. This is the first comment. I'm also going to edit that grid and those columns. Jeff, I think I might go in later and the older ideas at the very top that are no longer in discussion I might add them to the bottom so that you're more recent additions will be the first ones that are seen when people come to the page. People might not know that it's scrolled out. And I'm going to go save there. Okay. So, so you got the list here. I'd rather stay away. The next one on the list here is this competitive analysis between fabric. I think that's other another group. Yeah, the technology committee. Let's really stay focused on where we're adding value and supply chain trade finance. You see some of these things kind of have some similarity again the ideas I think the skip that could. The next one, the next one. Right here. So we covered that one. Hold on. No, we were talking and maybe we did get down and I just, we got past the NFT we skipped a bit of analysis. The next one after that was going to be risk reduction and supply chains. And then we had some information investigating how and now this ties into like AI. AI. Again, this is a topic that may fold into another one of the items I have up there about how AI can reduce risks and it's look at today with what's going on in the, in the Gulf. It's really going on the Panama Canal with the drought. And the supply chains financially in a sense of what is through the data that AI can come in which also is part of IoT. Which way should I send my own paper. Maybe it's maybe the piece of thought up so much in the Panama Canal or the risk is so high in the Gulf that I'm going to send it on the phone. So that's that's actually going on today. So how specifically can I assist in this reduction? Take that put up in the other topic I had up there. Maybe that forms something bigger on AI and in supply chain. The clock here so. Next one. Yeah, the next one is the unit we touched on this on ebook, but this would be a deeper dive in exactly how we can level how fabric. Performs. How it performs to prevent fraud tampering so on and so forth. So we just kind of typed in there with every larger example. That one there is. Yeah, I was looking at some of these things around. I was actually looking at myself as some respect, just take this almost office around you know we took a lot of technical architecture and hyper ledgers. I couldn't find it and I'm trying to find out who the contact is somebody have a document that shows a fabric. Architecture, the technical model, how that enables the efficiencies and on supply chains. So far so we contact. I do tend to take over your community of hyper like projects with those are coding ideas so forth. So that's almost something that I have listed down here but also having my nose is to figure out how we can get more of this information. In other words, the technical aspect of supply chain with fabric versus the non technical aspect, if that makes sense. Yeah, so that could include NFTs and I've mentioned NFTs and people and they say I heard of this I don't know what it is. It isn't a picture I get. Well, it's a little more complex there's, there's key cryptographic key somebody said I need a wallet, not if I get an NFT. I don't think so well to the block interact with it you have to have a wallet. The Bobby probably has more than information either they store the NFTs off chain because it's expensive. How does that work underneath all that stuff so doesn't have to be a deep dive down into the software. Again, it's one of these items around bridging for people, the technical aspects of fabric with those aspects of supply chain. What that makes sense. And I think the document that for this one, I mean, Andrea just published something I on you may have helped him with that. I can't remember. But basically, here's how trade finance actually works. He put it out there on LinkedIn and he put something on in our wiki in the messages. So, I'm assuming he's going to go next to he, here's the diagram of how it could work in blockchain you smile and I on just in India if you have the five minutes I would like to say some of my own comments regarding the my own idea for the one for 20 or 24. Yes, I would like to add my own best effort to support the community to support seek. In any way, it's not a problem, but the I do believe in the geographic diversification of the group members and the anti we need to pay the much more attention on this, I think that is the one of the point which I would like to emphasize on anti I believe that six is our sick is so much important and which sick is need to be promoted at the level of the Linux foundations at the highest level and the I believe that which will bring the so many new comers and the those new comers will bring the new ideas and the new ideas to be able to easily implemented and the when I think of the trade finance linked with the blockchain has not died, but when I look at the real real life examples. So many projects have failed and the when I when I see when I see the those results. I would like to make some kind of the connection with other six directly linked with the digital assess or the real assess real real world assess tokenization. I mean that we need the kind of the constant specific bridge between trade finance and the real real world assess tokenization and the I would like to learn what the other six dealing with these topics or not and the we would like to consider to invite them to make their own presentation. And the that's why it's quite important and the when I look at the global report which has been issued by Deutsche Bank one or two weeks ago, which is the 60 pages, only the one or two pages about the blockchains role that that is that is the not good, but that is the reality we need to be accepted. That that that's that's why we need to pay much more attention about the big brothers like the IBM like the Microsoft Microsoft. As far as I have understood that they are trying to make a kind of the interoperability bridges. That's that's that's the crucial point when we started to think of the trade finance and the, it might be the option IBM and the Microsoft already started to make their own search, their own planning about the interoperability solution. I'm not very much sure whether it's the band any blockchain solution or not, but the interoperability we have IBM or Microsoft will be will be the kind of game changer when I think of the trade finance environment global environment ecosystem and team. And of course, paperless environment is quite important and the but the life is not so much faster than we expect. When we think of the highest level of the implementation of the electronic bill of leading solutions, we need, we need much more time, especially when we think of the main constraint, which is the reliable system. There is no anymore rule, officially announced that which what about about the terms of the conditions of the reliable system, which will be the running on the blockchain, which will be running on the enterprise solution or the public solution, or the permissionless system, whatever it is. We have, we do not have any kind of the solution in our hand when we consider the any kind of the blocks and solutions regarding the e bill of leading and that's why if I need to summarize our sick is so much available. And we need to promote it at the highest level of the Linux foundation. And we need to kind of make a bridge between the real world assessed. Six, if any, at the links hyper ledger groups and the we need to, we need to understand the interoperability solution of the big brothers like IBM and Microsoft when I think of the trade finance, it will be the crucial in global basis. And though those are will be the all sub projects. And I'm much more appreciated to see the Jeff's project which he kindly summarized it and I will review it very deeply, I promise it. And the, it's quite good and the, I'm not promising the entire the my proposals in such a good way, but the, I will try to invite some of my friends about present their blockchain solutions regarding trade finance or, or e bill of leading solution in the coming days. I will be the, I will try to be a good follower and a good supporter of the sick for the coming days. Thank you. And hopefully, hopefully meet with you soon again. Thanks for jumping in. That do well, leading is a big topic that you get on that's you get info or people that can talk more about that that's huge. Yes, absolutely. You are right, but the, I'm not the technical guy, but the, I have the much more ambition to learn the what you are talking about with the, and that's why I'm still at the learning phases. When I look at the real world, it is not much more good for the trade finance, all platforms failed. And that's, that's the reason I have the big question mark in my mind personally, link between the blockchain and the trade finance. That's why we need to make a kind of the separate link. Forget the trade finance terminology. Let's talk about the real world assess tokenization. That would be the another good option. Well, because whenever, whenever you think to the trade finance, it's a matter of the movement of the money of the movement of the goods. When you talk, when you talk of the goods, that's the real world assets. We do not need to say at a traditional terminology, trade finance, it's a traditional terminology, and we need to forget all of those things for the coming years. And that's why we need to make a new world. As I am the old trade finance guy, it's time to build a new world. I attended it. I attended an expert AI thing. The experts on AI, and there were three fellows from IBM on this thing. And this was about a month ago. And those came to like, I don't think it was made up group was interesting. And it was to get the media, the experts, the real experts and I are these guys in their 60s, pushing 70, these IBM fellows, these are the guys out there they're doing a strategy around today that are helping companies understand what to do with AI it's not the Tony old thing that describes with the school is not a basement. It's these very experienced Polish people I was surprised when I attended it the moderator problems 30s but these, these guys were I was like, that actually made sense that they were there they're people who have not developed both IBMs, they are saying it's not about some other AI offering as these guys will are protected and help develop it is in their 60s. So, there's a one thing I want to mention also was some of these. I attend the financial sick will attend the just this my listening in the carbon account said twice the last two presentations they had about supply chain. But it was in their city. And the last one was so they were talking about supply chain and trying to figure out how to do benefits around it like given the link to the people whose companies in Barcelona. That's holding a party with us now. And they pull the ebook down during the conversation we'll talk about it. There's a ton of synergies out there. It was recorded. So let's let's let's break this is a good discussion here. And debating in my mind, I'll throw it out there. I mean, do we use the next session for we we use this this page here to have back and forth comments over the next two weeks or so. And maybe we use a part of the next session or all the next session to find, we try to finalize things.  So, I'm going to throw that out there as an option. We don't have to decide it right now. Here, let's see how what kind of progress we can make. You know, commenting, I asked each of you to comment because very I'm sure you have great ideas. David, you have great ideas. Christoph. So you have good ideas, Toby, Nat, etc. Right. Get your right. Take a look at what Jeff has put out here. Put your thoughts, whatever else.  And it'll kind of come together hopefully, or we might have to wrestle it a little bit because we got too many good ideas. You know, that's a good problem to have if that's the case. And we'll have to just prioritize and pick one out there. So let's think about what deliverables might look like for each of these ideas as well. Yeah, I mean a webinar doesn't mean a blog post doesn't mean another ebook. What, what do we want to want to do related to these topics. Yeah, it was. I was thinking about this yesterday evening, you know, when we. Many of us came from the corporate world and you know how fast Jeff you alluded to this best of things get done right, you know project you got somebody busting you needs to be done by into February or whatever. Well, in this kind of world, I was kind of thinking, you know, it takes two to five times longer. So think about your corporate enterprise experience and how long things take to get done. Not to remember that. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. So, you know, I don't, there's a lot I don't miss about my corporate experience. Yes. But there's a lot of. So, so anyways, with my, my, my thought here is, let's use this, this, this mechanism here the wiki we can put comments that kind of work pretty well for the ebook to kind of keep us rolling. And please put it, please put at least one comment in over the next week or two here. And then we'll see if it takes on a life of its own, then maybe we can do all there. We have a little bit in the next time is, you know, kind of just settling on something. If we need more discussion, then we use the next time for discussion. There. So, again, Jeff, I don't want to put you off, but I also want to, you know, make sure that we know that's okay. Give me a little bit more time to do that presentation because I'm trying to also use it to draw in some technical folks and see the invite. Yeah. Okay, so let's stop at this point in time. They're, they're a lot more thoughts. Hopefully they're rolling. Okay, so let's stop at this point in time there. There are a lot more thoughts. Hopefully they're rolling around in your mind. Get something out there. I generate the first comment. I'll be at not a lot, not very deep there. Please put your additional comments in there thoughts. Let's see where this goes. And, you know, we'll all be talking in a couple of weeks and we can continue the conversation and hopefully start narrowing things down if we can't do that via via the comments back and forth. So I appreciate everyone joining today, adding your thoughts. And you got a chance to see some of our thoughts to kind of kickstart this puppy. Alicia, thanks for talking charter and how you can get involved. You're all here and glad you want to be involved and look forward to the rest of 2024 supply chain and trade financing and how we're going to help this community out there and ourselves and have a little bit of fun along the way too. So with that, I'm going to stop it recording will be up on YouTube. Thanks again. Enjoy the rest of your day. Thanks everybody. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Bye bye. Bye bye. Thank you. Okay, bye everybody.


I'm going to look into that because I want to make an entire video on it. And I almost want to like call some of these medical schools and ask them why they're charging so much. Welcome back to the channel, everybody. For those of you who are new around here, my name is Michael AKA Dr. Chalini and I am a board certified diagnostic and interventional radiologist in New Jersey. Now on today's video, as you've probably seen by the title, we're going to be talking about why there are so few doctors in America. And the reason we're talking about this is because I happen to come across an article from the Atlantic talking about why there are so few doctors in America and they had some pretty good points. So I kind of wanted to go through the article, give my take on the article and talk about it because it's a pretty important topic. So let's get into it. As always, I'll leave a link to this article in the description box below so you can check it out and read it for yourself. I found it through the Doximity app on my phone and I think I get access to this article, but I'm not sure if everybody does. So it may be behind a paywall. So if you can't get access to the article, just watch this video. OK, so let's get into the article. They first start talking about this person named Elizabeth Erickson, who is a freshman in college, who always wanted to be a doctor. I'll go ahead and read the first paragraph because this is kind of how we start off here. So by time Elizabeth Erickson was a freshman at Davidson College in 2002, she knew she always wanted to become a doctor because she understood that the earliest health interventions are amongst the most important. She set herself on the pediatric track. After four years of pre-med classes, she went straight to medical school at Wake Forest University, which took another four years, then came three years of residency at Duke University. Shout out Durham, North Carolina, where I used to live. And that took her another four years. In 2014, she joined the faculty of Duke School of Medicine. And this last line is so crucial to this article and what we're going to talk about today. Her dream was finally realized at the steep price of 12 consecutive years of learning and training, plus about $400,000 in student debt. That seems about common for what we've been talking on the channel so far. So let's get into the rest of the article. The next part of the article basically talks about how this story would be exceptional in just about every other country in the world, except for US, because this is actually quite common in the US. The US has the longest and most expensive medical education system in the developed world. And to top it off, the lowest number of physicians per capita, which doesn't make any sense when you say it like that. As many of you may also know, there is a huge scarcity of primary care physicians and many are operating in a scarcity of framework with not enough resources. So this is a good part of the article here. We start talking about the knitted ready of why there are so few doctors in America. So let's start here. Imagine you were planning a conspiracy to limit the number of doctors in America. Certainly you'd make sure to have a costly, lengthy, credentialing system like we do. You would also tell politicians that America has too many doctors already. That way you could purposefully constrain the number of medical school students. You might freeze or slash funding for residencies and medical scholarships. You'd also fight proposals to allow nurses to do the work of physicians. And because none of this would stop foreign trained doctors from slipping into the country and committing the crime of helping sick people get better, you'd throw in some rules that makes it onerous for immigrant doctors, especially from neighboring countries like Mexico and Canada. OK, so let's backtrack a little bit. This article states that in the late 20th century, medical groups asserted that America had an oversupply of physicians. In response to this, medical schools restricted class sizes in these times. From 1980 to 2005, the U.S. added about 60 million people. But the number of medical school matriculants stayed the same. 17 years later, we are still trying to climb out of that hole. So let's look at this graph that we show here. So as you can see here, this shows the U.S. population and medical school matriculants indexed to 1980. The blue line demonstrates empty graduates in the U.S. and the green line represents the U.S. population. As you can see, there's a steady progression of U.S. population with a matching number of doctors until about 1980, when it kind of dipped a little bit and leveled off till about 2005. And now we're still trying to dig out of that hole and we're not exactly matching the population right now. I think this graph is perfect and it shows exactly what went wrong from 1980 to 2005. So let's talk about the American education system for physicians. The U.S. is one of the only developed countries making aspiring doctors get a four-year bachelor's degree followed by a four-year medical training degree. Most European countries have a six-year continuous program for their physicians. So they are already two years ahead of us. Then comes residency of tourists, which can be anything from three to seven years depending on your specialty. And of course, our favorite part about the U.S. medical system, that lovely huge sum of student debt that you're burdened with when you graduate. Now, I think I've beaten a dead horse on this topic, but I've said it many times and many medical students finished with somewhere in the neighborhood of 200 to even $400 plus in student debt, which is insane to think about. And every time I say that statistic gives me a little, well, chills. So the questions this article talks about and the questions I've had for a long time now are, what is the advantage of extra years of medical training for the U.S. physicians? The author makes a great point here comparing U.S. doctors to Swiss doctors. And he says, are American doctors 33% better than Swiss doctors since we have 33% longer medical education system, which I think is pretty funny. And a nice little aside on this topic is that Americans die earlier than their European counterparts at virtually every age in every income level. And I'll leave a link to that article as well in the description. Okay, so let's look at this chart for medical education across multiple countries. So as you can see down here, the United States has a significantly longer track compared to their European counterparts. It takes us four years of undergrad training plus four years of medical school before even going to residency. And most of our European counterparts have six years total, with the exception of course for South Korea, Ireland and Australia having similar to the American system. So what does this all equate to when we have medical students who have long education paths and amass a massive amount of student debt. They do what any doctor does and they subspecialize much like I did. So why do we do that? Well, the salaries are higher for subspecialists and the supply is limited, which means you can actually pay off your loans. We'll get to this chart in the article as well. You'll see here how the United States has a very small percentage of general practitioners or primary care physicians compared to the specialists. In part due to the reasons I mentioned above. So as you can see here, United States is way at the bottom and we have a small portion of general practitioners compared to the massive amount of specialists. And this is physicians per 10,000 people by the way versus say Norway, who is over 50% general practitioners versus specialists. I think a lot of it comes down to the student debt burden. It's definitely not the lifestyle because the lifestyle of a primary care physician is pretty good. It's the usual eight to five job. I don't think a lot of them take call. Some may take call in the hospital, but most of it is clinic-based, outpatient-based and not that bad. Well, I say that relatively because I know they're burdened with seeing an enormous patient load, but all things considered, if the patient load was down, you can practice how a primary care physician is supposed to practice. It's a pretty good lifestyle. Now this article goes on to talk more about how some doctors actually object to more competition for the same reason that homeowners object to more local construction. Docs are afraid of competition because it ultimately cuts into their piece of the pie. However, if you look at it a different way, more docs in one region can actually make life better for that particular doctor because they're not burdened with longer hours or seeing excessive amounts of patients, which proves the quality of life and prevents burnout. I love this line from the article here. It states, Dr. Burnout and brutal 16-hour shifts for residents in MDs aren't necessary tests of willpower. They're just the inevitable result of not having enough people to do the work that today's hospitals demand. That basically hits the nail on the head in every possible way. So it's kind of a rhetorical question, but why do we need more doctors? Well, for one, the pandemic has proven a significant burden to the healthcare system and most importantly, healthcare workers. And regarding the census, which states in the next 12 years, we will have more senior citizens than children in America for the first time in history. I think we're gonna need more doctors. Older patient population means sicker patients, which means demand for hospitals and doctors. All right, so what's the solution to this problem of so few doctors in America? Well, I think it's obvious. We just create more doctors. It's that easy. Okay, so it's obviously not that easy as this is clearly a deeper systemic issue. In the article, they pose this question to a healthcare policy analyst who stated the following. The first thing I would do is expand the residency system so that more doctors can become residents after medical school. This might be the key to the bottleneck. Medical schools say they can't easily expand because there aren't enough residency slots to fill for their graduates, which is very true. And every year we have the problem where we have too many graduates for residency spots and some medical graduates, AKA doctors, do not match into residency, which leaves them residency-less. Imagine having gone through eight years of training only to not be able to match into a residency program because there aren't enough spots. And ultimately, they may have to scramble into a residency that they don't wanna do just so they can start working. The article goes on to talk about how there aren't enough residency slots because Washington purposefully limited federal residency financing. More funding equals more residents, equals more growth of medical schools, which means more doctors. Now, how do we obtain doctors? Well, we get doctors two different ways through medical training or we import them. We happen to not be good at either. When NAFTA was originally negotiated, Canadians and Mexicans didn't wanna lose their own doctors to the American market and the US didn't wanna threaten their own US doctors. So they basically created a whole bunch of red tape for Mexican and Canadian doctors to practice in the US. So how else would we increase the supply of US doctors since we're bad at training and we're also bad at importing them? Well, we could add more nurse practitioners which should function as doctors in rural or underserved areas, but we're not gonna touch on that topic because it's a little too dicey right now at the moment and I'm sure people in the comments would go a little crazy once we start talking about that. So that's just something we're not gonna touch on today. So how else could we fix this problem? Well, we could extend care to underserved areas via legal telemedicine. But the problem is we have to get reimbursement from the government for the physicians doing those telemedicine consults because during the pandemic it was allowed but it's not really 100% so far. So there's more work to be done in the telemedicine slash reimbursement space. Another good point this healthcare policy analyst stated is that we can't expand the number of doctors unless we also expand the number of clinics and hospitals especially to the underserved parts of the country. Basically, we have to have more funding for hospital infrastructure. So in conclusion, this all seems really simple. More doctors, more healthcare infrastructures and more care equals better healthcare outcomes. But as always, we have to crawl before we run. The article makes a great point here and states that if we put an influx of physicians into society then we lower wages for physicians which is okay but the problem we would face is that we'd have to ensure that the wage drop occurs before student debt declines because then we would have a bigger issue altogether. If wages drop before student debt drops then we have doctors making low wages with no way to pay off their massive student debt burden. And then we have a whole other problem. Speaking of which, why the heck are universities and medical schools charging so much for tuition? I feel like if we just nipped that in the bud we would solve a lot of these problems going forward. But for some reason, nobody's talking about the extreme costs of medical education. I'm gonna look into that because I wanna make an entire video on it and I almost wanna like call some of these medical schools and ask them why they're charging so much. I'm curious to see their answer. So let me know in the comments below if you think that's a good idea. I'll probably be banned at a lot of medical schools but I'll do it for the video. Okay, so that officially concludes this video. Hopefully you all enjoyed it and hopefully you understand why there are so few doctors in America. If you have any questions, leave them in the comments below and make sure you smash the like, subscribe button, follow me on Instagram and TikTok if you don't already. And as always, I'll see you all on the next video. Bye.


A corner from Cardiff fast, a head-up by Morrison, straight into the piece-threat, assisted by Harry Wilson, and a free head-up for Sean Morrison from six yards out. A blue towel to dry the ball, and it comes from Vox, it's an extremely long one. Flipped on the six-yard box, breaks down for Kiefermore, and somehow blocked away. Well, there's a crucial touch in there right in front of the goal. Begovic might well have got the touch, but as it sat up for Kiefermore's guilty of giving it away as he tries to bring it out of defence, Harry Wilson wants to shoot himself, hits Steve Cook, then N'Gi runs in, Riko dives in, that might be a penalty, and that is a penalty, as Riko committed himself, and N'Gi went over, and Cardiff City have a golden opportunity here against Begovic. Here he comes right-footed, smashes it home, an unstoppable penalty. Begovic scores the right way, but you don't save those. It is Bournemouth-Nill, Cardiff City two. You've got to know what the two elsewhere through his Milosava set-up. He tries to steal in, but he's saved from Phillips. Brilliant goalkeeping, Sturridge's first side of goal, whipped in from the left-hand side. Great run made by Sturridge across the defender, but Dylan Phillips kept it out with his legs. I don't know how he's done that, the keeper. Absolutely three yards out, Sam's got a great connection on it. It goes for Cardiff, and they're happy to keep possession, but then that was poor, and Stalyslas comes away, and Marlon Pact tried to pull him back, but Stalyslas persevered. Stalyslas all pressure on here, Pact will get booked in a minute. Stalyslas throws it through. Into Dandrumah, onto his left foot, takes an affection, and then headed again to go. Cherry's one, Cardiff two. It's a great break back, Stalyslas. You're all about keeping up the pitch, isn't it? Once we got the outnumbered, it was a deflected shot. But Shane Long was there for the knock-in, which is what his job's there for. Another goal for him, that's great to see. Now, come on, let's get back in this game.


Okay, we're back live here inside the Cube in San Francisco for EMC's V-spec launch, and our next guests are Peter Colyopoulos from Arrow, not Arrow Electronics, Arrow E. C-S. A-C-S, and Barbara Speedcheck from Brocade. Guys, welcome to the Cube. So this is a conversation around the channel business, however you want to frame that, relative to services, high-end services, cloud, mobile, and social. The world is evolving very fast, relatively fast, since like 2007. I kind of look at the iPhones, they kind of the seminal moment of the world we live in, was that Macintosh moment back in the 80s, but the iPhone kind of set the tone for this whole revolution, you go back to the iTunes. The cloud was making its way in here, you got cloud computing, mobile, and now social. It's crazy, so the customers are crazy. We heard another panelist say, there's margin and mystery, right? So margins were great in the early PC days, client server, and then margins go down, specialization happens, polarization in the channel, and then fight for services, and now we're in a whole new growth market. So I'd like to get your take on, Peter, what you guys see as the main driver right now for the channel business. Is it customer confusion? Is it just an economic boom that we're hitting? What do you see as the core thrust, or as driving this thermal growth? Well, I think that, John, I think there's a couple of things. So first of all, the model has typically been selling hardware and software, right, and sort of being happy with what margins are in the product, and as time has gone on, the squeeze has gone on for margins on both hardware and software, and then there's a run toward services, and services can be rich if you're reselling, it's not so rich, reselling the services. If you're developing your own services and creating practices and then driving that into the customers, it can be very profitable, and I think you'll see that most of the successful channel partners out there have got that blend set up, right, X amount of hardware and software product and Y amount of services, and what they're seeing with cloud, and I think that's the mystery part of it, there's a lot of areas that the customer needs education on, right, which way should I go, public, private, hybrid, how does this all fit in, what about my data migration, what about all my data, how do I get it on, how do I get it off, what's the security that I should use, and I think it's in those areas that the partner base has been able to come up with services that they can offer to the customer to help guide them, right, to help guide them through the mystery and get them to a place where they say, okay, here's a good way to start, right, and now I can sort of begin to follow up on that, and I think that's going to probably continue for a couple more years, you'll see the move to more services, and then what's going to end up having is how do we monetize the cloud model, right, in terms of, you know, getting more OPEX revenue, if you will, if you're a partner, as opposed to getting CAPEX revenue, right, and that's where the model is clearly headed.  You mean OPEX being more integrated in with the customer? Yeah. From a services standpoint. Yeah, exactly, from a services standpoint. The old days run their health desk to now actually run stuff for them. Right. Run backup, run recovery, disaster recovery, things like that. Either on-prem or off-prem, or, you know, providing services around, you know, I'll sell cloud by the bite or storage by the infrastructure as a service, you know, getting that service revenue in that becomes much more recurring, right, and that model is something that's going to happen, I think the big question is, okay, so how fast? How fast does that transition happen? And I think that's, you know, an open question. So would you say that over the past few years, prior to where we are, like now, there was an elite core of folks that had a lot of assets, like you guys, who were, you know, well-capitalized, a lot of customer install base and new service. You had the ability to invest in an elite core that could actually solve some of these higher end problems. But for the most part, to do it's really hard, right? The barriers to entry to come in and say, hey, I'm going to be a cloud broker or service provider. It was kind of hard. You really kind of had to have your act together. But now, this announcement today kind of highlights to me that, okay, when we've got some turnkey things we can actually put in there. So kind of, it opens the door up for more guys to come in, more competition for you, maybe more partners. I think more partners, and I think, again, what it's trying to do, and, you know, if you look at the continuum, and Jeremy talked about it, but if you look at the continuum of component pieces, all the way up to, you know, pre-built solutions, you know, this is somewhere in the middle of that continuum. So it offers the choice in that, well, okay, I don't have those three parts, but I like these three parts. Now I can still be participating. And of course, you'll be able to work with the install basis origin site. So, you know, the example I always use is, so what if I'm the guy who bought, you know, a piece of equipment yesterday, and today something new comes out and I can't use what I bought yesterday, right? That's sort of a bad position to put a customer in. I think this kind of an announcement allows you, no, you don't have to give that up. You can still incorporate it and you can still get leverage from that. And still succeed in terms of moving the customer to that maybe first starting place in the cloud. So I think it helps accelerate those people who may have been reluctant for any number of reasons to adopt cloud, to now being able to get it in the game. It's a trust too. It's like a viability from a product standpoint, mark product market fit, if you will. And then trust, having someone who's not going to drop the ball and actually follow through. Barbara, what are you seeing? Okay, now the vendor equation is interesting, obviously, because you have in the channel business, all the big whales in there in strength. We had Cisco on earlier and they were pumping their chest up.  I mean, there's this different perspective, but they've always been entrenched, right? And so you have a lot of the gear or products, hardware products that have evolved into full-blown solutions that kind of integrate into other areas. You have some partnership here. I have a little VCE here. I got this purpose-built machine here. As a vendor, how do you navigate the channel relationships and programs? Yeah. What are your key thoughts there? Yeah, a couple of thoughts. So first of all, I want to comment and expand a little bit on the whole transitioning comment because I think the channel transformation has never been bigger than right now because you mentioned the iPhone, but whether it's records to electronic books to electronic, I mean, there's been this classic product to customer broken chain, but there's also been a major deconstruction of the IT network, right? With virtualization and cloud and the customers needing more like agile, application-aware environments, I think one of the solutions you offer is you put those stacks together, right? And one of the key messages to channel partners was the only way to differentiate is if you take the complexity out by taking those stacks, right, and putting them in front of the customers, which is what you refer to. You know, a lot of what Cisco does, they income in and our competition, you know, puts them into, especially the powerful incumbent vendors can put them together, but what is exciting about this announcement is I think the ability to have this in a more modular, flexible architecture augments that whole desire of channel partners for transformation again because what they want to do is, they're, I wouldn't even call it, they just want to do services, right? That stands for like services. It used to be break fix or implementation.  So what we do as Brocade as a vendor, we've been saying the last two years, we help you to stay this point of integration. I think stacks and monolithic architectures usually are not that good for the channel partners. Well, that's a good lock-in for most people, but I think that's where I see that, the kind of vendor gymnastics go on as the lock-in. They have to use the stack and they use the scare tactics or their pricing or price pressure. You know, but I think what you're, if I understand you correctly, what you're saying is that channel partners want, essentially push-button delivery, right? I mean, Lego blocks. I don't want to have to spend money to hire talent at its cost, right?  And if I could hire just basically the equivalent of consultants slash techs that get it and push buttons and work with customers, that's a much better solution because it's not when they're more of them. And that's a great key differentiator because you absolutely ride the customers are looking for that ride. They want to outsource that skill set because it's high cost, it's a whole discussion, CapEx versus OpEx. But the big question is where's the point of integration? And that's where, I don't think the lock-in discussion is only about the cost and so on. It's also from a channel perspective, if they're the point of integration of the solution, which is what VSpecs gives to them, that means they can do that wraparound, if they can do that service to the customer. And what VSpecs does with this whole support layer that we've put together, EMC, to bring in all these ecosystems of vendors together, enables the reseller, even if it's a smaller one, if they're servicing the SME space, that usually have then the same challenge with skill sets and certifications. The whole wrapper we do around VSpecs enables them to do exactly that point of integration for a customer. Yeah, I mean, Peter, I want to get your comment on that too because if you think about it, what I hear from in marketplaces, I was just talking to a CEO, just took his company public in the past eight months and this company's going gangbusters, kind of a confidential conversation, but he said, look, I can't hire engineers fast enough. We're outsourcing most of our R&D, not because we don't want to outsource R&D, it's because the talent, to get the talent in, I can't meet my deadlines for go-to-market. So the concept of shadow IT was brought up earlier, again, one of my favorite words that gets kicked around is that people just want to get the job done, right? The customers have delivery times, they have SLA's to their business. You guys want to go out and actually sell them products to meet that and you get paid and you add value, you get paid more margin for the more value, right? So with that in mind, what is the key areas for that point? How do you eliminate some of those shadow IT problems that a customer may have?  Does this kind of product from EMC kind of help there? And if it does, how you compare and contrast with the other vendors? Well, I think it does, I think that one of the things that we look at is there's a number of ways you can try to eliminate or substitute for the shadow IT. One of it is, and one of the things that we try to bring as a distributor is we have people that are certified that we have on staff to be able to do staff augmentation both on the vendor side as well as on the partner side. So any time you're looking at resource, right, it's always about, certainly from a partner standpoint, coverage and capability, right? Can I get the right coverage? Can I get the right capability of someone to do it? And if one or the other is short, which usually it is somewhere, or I can't put the right person in the right place, what do you do about that? Do I pass up on the business? Do I partner with another partner? Or can I go back to my distributor who acts as a safety net for me? And they have resource that I can subcontract and put them on site, get it done and deliver for the customer. I think that's, we certainly do that and we certainly view that as one of the differentiators for ourselves. I think from the customer standpoint, the idea of push button, I think the reason that they wanna do push button and you talked about some of that already is I wanna get out of the maintenance of the equipment and the watching it and waiting for updates and trying to make sure that my firmware levels are right. And I wanna move on to more value add for my company with IT, right? And if you look at some numbers on how much money is spent in a current budget on just keeping everything running, as opposed to me doing something that can help generate revenue, it's at a kilter. And I don't think anybody ever imagined it would get into that situation, but as things got more complex and you got sprawling the IT center, that's what happens. You see partners, channel partners and integrators, well, we've talked about solution providers, ISV, SVRs, being app providers, I mean, like getting into the app business on an accelerated basis where they're actually writing apps, actually doing the agile, fundamentally integrating that in-house as a function, almost like an ad agency would have a creative department. You know, that's a good question. I don't know if they're all ready for that. There are some that are starting to go that way, but I think the model is going to get interesting with cloud and we talked about this, you know, when people talk about, well, what about adoption of cloud? How's that all going to happen? And one of the differences with adoption of cloud is it actually started on the consumer side, much more so than on the B2B side, which is something that's never happened before where the consumer actually adopts first. So it's not going away anytime soon. The question is, and I think it's a real question that I don't profess to have the answer to, but all right, so the way we build applications today is that the way we're going to build them in the cloud? Or do you end up having things like an enterprise app store? Yeah, I was just going to say that, right? That kind of divides it up and you start to go to a different one. And again, this is the whole realms of SOA architecture is what I was going to be cataloged. So I mean, I think ultimately, I agree. I think my view is, and this is kind of what my prediction is, is that to get to win the channel business, you got to have like an HP who said the old Bible catalog of all the parts. You got to have a part of this. And those part lists are now prefabricated infrastructure. Oh, you want some private cloud to support low latency, 10 zillion users, multi-tensile product? If I can answer that, I think that same catalog and modular architecture goes to services because we were talking about, do we have partners that write apps now? Do we actually have partners that do hosting? Do we have really managed services? I mean, these are all big words, but this is all what I call the cloud of entity. This order, they're all trying to find their place, including distribution, right? Do you guys are, do we do cloud aggregation? Do we add our own services? Some of them are adding huge service organizations like yourselves, but I think the modularity is key because you will note this classic, we used to have the VARs and the SIs and these nomenclatures, I think, are gonna explode over the next couple of years. And I hear partners talking about it now, are they there, right? But I think as a vendor, the more you can do in terms of modular offerings, helping them on their way, the more successful you can be. We tried to vet that out on another interview, but what's the layout of the current channel, if you want to call it an ecosystem? Weird solution providers and subcategories, the old classic ISVs. Well, I got only a couple of minutes, so I want to kind of ask some different questions, which is going forward. Obviously, the channels used to having some support and the partnerships are critical. EMC's talking here about their brand, is the flagship into the accounts, that's their logo. You guys can draft under it and provide services. What's going to be different, Pete, and Barbara, in your mind, going forward over the next five to 10 years with the channel, is obviously supporting margin and getting out business opportunities, joint selling, no channel conflict, the normal table stakes. Beyond the table stakes, what do you see that's new? What that could be a new offering, Pete, that you say, you know, I see this could be a new level of equivalent of a co-op or MDF, like fun. Interesting, so one of the things that we began offering to our partners, and we'll continue to build it out, is if you look at the value chain and you look at where distribution sits, just think where they are, okay? There's only a couple of people who have the whole picture of what's being sold to a particular customer, and we're one of those people. So what if I'm able to monetize that data using things like advanced analytics? You're the big data business. And I'm in the big data business, and I got big data, I got a lot of it. Customer data, trend data. Customer data, trending data, and that's what we've actually released in our advanced analytics. You're the splunk of the channel. Yeah, I don't think I'd quite go that far yet. But certainly, if you talk about a value that you can bring, as I like to talk to our sales people about it, and they always get a chocolate, I said, let me make this really simple. How about if I can find you better leads faster? Yes. To me, that's a huge win for the partners, and I'm using data that I already have, that I'm able to leverage, and I'm able to point them in the right direction on, what's the probability if you buy A, you're going to buy B? I think that's a huge thing that actually the partner, and I would ask Barbara, I'll bet every one of your partners complains about, we all say we're doing demand generation, right? They go, yeah, well, the leads I get, yeah, they're sort of okay. We all sort of suffer through that. What about if you can make that, I'll give you less leads, but I got a better hit rate. Huge win. I'd love to have you hook up with Alice Williams, one of our senior editor writers and editors about that story. I think, because we are obviously big data is only one of our wheel houses that we love to program in. I think that's a real successor. I want to think what we're theming up this year is how people are using big data. So we looked at having a category of big data and like a publication, but no, we see data as a fundamental disruptive enabler, like TCPIP did back in the old networking days, like the computing cycle on the PC. So it's not a category, it's every category. So that's a great example of differentiation and competitive advantage. I think using the data that you got as a lever for predictive analytics, obviously at the end of the day it's about sales, right? So you got to drive business, market research, how to serve your customers. So that would be really something I'd love to see you should do. And I think that's a real cutting edge case that I'd love to do a little side report on that. Okay, well guys, thanks for joining us on theCUBE. Big data is again rearing its head here as an advantage. Again, big data is big. This is theCUBE. We'll be right back with more information and interviews right back to this.