But good afternoon, everyone. I actually want to go ahead and invite our panelists to come on up and get seated, because I'm going to ask them to introduce themselves to you. They'll be able to describe their backgrounds and their work, but also dig a little bit into what PIT means to us, how we might define it, and how we hope it can be defined going forward. Thank you. So thank you. Our panel. So when we talk about public interest technology, as I just mentioned, the definitions may be evolving, emerging, changing. But we know that we mean technology, and we know that we mean buy with and for people. And so when we talk about those two halves of this work, when we talk about the business model side of the technology and really how you engage PIT into industry and into the private sector, at times these two sides can come balanced, but they can be very far apart. And sometimes there are tensions. So I think a lot of the people in this room and on this panel have thought about the tensions, the balances, and then the need for bringing these two areas together. So one of the things we're going to talk about today is what kinds of models exist for partnering with the private sector for investing in and supporting the work of PIT from the institutional side, from the civil society side, from the public sector side. We'll also talk about the role of private philanthropic and venture capital to seed new models for working together and new business models for where technology happens in the public space, and then also how to successfully partner, or not successfully partner what we've learned, so ways to partner. I think that something that makes PIT very unique and something, honestly, it's really a pleasure as an individual to be here and be thinking back to my own time as a student when I didn't have a sense of what PIT was and I was looking for this exact community and I was a student of international affairs and looking for this intersection of technology and society and trying to find ways to define that in order to look through the course catalog, right? So we've come a long way, even from my recent, fairly recent graduate experiences, but I think the thing that makes us all special here in this room and then what makes this PIT field unique is the fact that we're all translators. So regardless of which side of campus or which side of industry we're coming from, we are translators, and so I think that's, one of the big pieces here is I wanna ask our panelists as translators how they've thought about these differences in bringing the social impact into the public sector or the private sector, rather, and then they've also been innovators and so I wanna hear what sorts of innovative models they've taken in the past to do so and what we can learn from that to partnership looking forward. So with that, I'd like to hand it off to our panelists to introduce themselves and I'll pass it to you first, Professor Sweeney. Thank you, it's great to be here. My name is Latanya Sweeney. I'm the Daniel Paul Professor of Government and Technology at Harvard, and, but most importantly, when my hair was black is when I started doing work in this space. So it's been a while, lots of lessons learned and lots of gray hairs caused as well. So at Harvard, we've been fortunate, we've been able to have a concentration for a while called Tech Science. So we've been at it a little while and our students have done amazing work. They've gone on to change laws and regulations and business practice in a lot of the big tech companies. The kind of approach that we've taken is basically there's a technology life cycle and our goal is to bust these technology society clashes. In what ways are technology causing harms to society and how do we make it in a way that society can have the benefits of those technologies without those harms? And so with that goal and with that vision, we just start working the entire technology life cycle from vision and development through commercialization, marketplace, maybe a legal problem and then to the next generation of technology. And over the time what we've done is we've developed tools in each of those stages, places that and had enough cycles of students where we've had real impact in the real world in each of those areas. What's exciting about the venture capital and the vision and development space or the funding space is that the earlier you can intervene with a technology society clash, the easier it is because the truth is most of the clashes that we hear about happen when the technology's in the marketplace.  They're not gonna change their business package. It's a take it or leave it proposition that we find ourselves in. And if we can find a little bandaid patch policy or a bandaid patch technology and we just sort of hobble ourselves along and then the next wave comes and it's still even more of it. It's only so far we can go. But if you can adjust it early on because most of it's not intentional. At the time it's in the commercialization, by the time it's in the marketplace, there's no way to distinguish the technology from the business case and either one of them could be the cause of the problem. Either one of them at the moment could have been a simple, easy solution to just change because it just happened inadvertently.  Why?  That just wasn't on their radar. And now retrofitting or trying to fit it in has been a nightmare. And so what we've been doing in the, what we like about working with venture capital or in working early in this space with entrepreneurs is if you can teach them how to look for society problems early, help them figure out how to solve their problem in design. And then when they produce something, assess it as to what extent can it make a guarantee. We sort of, in that way, we'll look a little bit like your underwriter's laboratory. Can you at least say guarantee it doesn't have that problem? We have some other problem, but it doesn't have that problem. And so we're trying to start a new program with venture capitalists because they sort of are the pipeline to these products and trying to do it at scale so that we can put technologists in those spaces who can do that issue spotting, who can do those assessments and so forth. At the other end, a lot of times these clashes inspire solutions, and this has happened to a lot of our students as well, where the new solution is a new technology. It might be a new version of an old technology, it might just be a totally different technology altogether. And we were one year, Y Combinator is one of the biggest venture capital companies in Silicon Valley and one of our students won Y Combinator. Now it's a Pitt project and he won Y Combinator. You can imagine the inherent conflict in this. Y Combinator is trying to get return on investment like crazy and he's trying to build an algorithm that's gonna make the cities work better. And so this mismatch makes us realize we also need a venture fund and so Arabella has been working with us. We need a venture fund, or I should say it the other way, I've been working with Arabella, but we need a venture fund to help support any of the products that would come out where it's really in the public interest, that technology. It's not, yes, we want it to be sustainable so that we're not writing a check every year, but at the same time we realize it's not gonna have a hockey stick kind of return on investment. So those are two of the projects that we've done and I hope I didn't go over on my time. Hi, I'm Ish Limkeking, I'm with Cisco Systems. I am responsible for our technology strategy and our purpose organization. The purpose organization is actually pretty new to Cisco. It is, we've always been a purpose-driven company, but a few years ago we sort of took a look at, and actually it strikes me that one of the earlier panelists, Chris, I think from public knowledge, was saying this about the internet. All we focused on at the time was, of course this technology is gonna be great, the more of it the better, and let's just put it out there. Cisco was like that, we talked a lot about connecting everything and without full stop, we're just gonna build the internet, we're gonna make sure we connect everything, and we rethought our purpose, but we rethought our purpose a few years ago, and the new purpose statement is to power inclusive future for all. And if you think about that statement, and there's a lot of work that goes into these kinds of statements, anybody who has been a part of that work at a company, every word of that has a lot of meaning for us as a company, it drives everything we do, it drives what we invest in, it drives the technology decisions we make, and so what we've done is we've created this organization, this purpose organization, that brings together a lot of the assets we've had across the company, whether it's our people organization, our workplace organization, but also things like our country digitization initiative, our government affairs, sustainability, social impact, all of these organizations together to bring together all of these assets in one place that we can connect it to our overall business. So to the extent that we can rethink about a new model and how it comes together, it really creates a different conversation. If you think about, and I'll give you one example, if you think about sustainability, I, driving the technology strategy, I came from the engineering organization. In sustainability, when we work between our engineering organization and sustainability, we have an entirely different focus, and it really a different model than we would have just a few years ago. Most of IT, most big companies in Silicon Valley for the last however many decades of companies have been in existence, have been chasing performance, faster processors, more powerful routers, et cetera, et cetera, right? And the easiest way to do that, if you go way back, is to just use more power. That obviously does not work really well with the reality in most of our customers, the geographies our customers are in. Even in California, we have power shortages all the time. And I couldn't agree more with the statement that you made, that if you think about the problem earlier in the design cycle, engineers solve problems. If you give them a problem with the right constraints, that's what they'll solve. So if the problem was just get the most performance out of this chip, don't care about power, they'll use a lot of power. If you say power is something that matters, then it'll become a design constraint. So it's an example of that, I think, as I guess the T part of Pitt, the extent that we can think of these problems and express them to companies and engineering teams, you can get a different answer that will be a lot easier to do if you get it earlier in the process. So couldn't agree more with what you were saying. Great, hi. What a gorgeous day in Boston. Thank you, PITUN, so much for inviting us all to speak. I'm Ann Cleveland. I'm the executive director of the UC Berkeley Center for Long-Term Cybersecurity, as well as the co-founder of something that we call the Consortium of Cybersecurity Clinics, which you heard about a little bit from my friend and co-founder, Larry Suskind, this morning.  So shout out to the cybersecurity folks within PITUN. So my niche of this is obviously cybersecurity. And as you were saying, Shana, our piece is both about the people and the public interest part. So in 2018 at UC Berkeley, we started something that we call the Citizen Clinic, which is a cybersecurity clinic modeled very much on what law schools do in law clinics. So our students for academic credit give pro bono cybersecurity defense services and consulting to what are sometimes called organizations below the cyber poverty line or just resource strapped organizations or civil society organizations who can't afford the kind of enterprise-level cybersecurity services that larger corporations can. So think about, as Larry explained this morning, small municipalities in rural Massachusetts or small nonprofits who maybe have 10 staff, none of whom have an IT background or K through 12 school districts, some of the clinics serve. So this has been a win-win. It fulfills universities obligations for public service to the community. And crucially, it gives our students hands-on learning experiences with real clients that they can put on their resumes. And we find that it is really helping get that first entry-level job as well as attracting students into the field who wouldn't otherwise have saw a pathway or a place for themselves in the cybersecurity field. So fast forward with Larry and some colleagues at University of Alabama and Indiana University. We all realized that we were doing cybersecurity clinics around the same time and decided to form this national consortium of cybersecurity clinics, which started out as just a community of practice for clinic directors and faculty to share what they were learning because we were all struggling with the same problems. How do you secure your client's data, for example? And PITUN were very grateful for the first seed grant that got the consortium of cybersecurity clinics up and running. And fast forward to 2023. This summer we announced a $20 million plus collaboration between the consortium of cybersecurity clinics and Google.org to expand cybersecurity clinics to 20 states around the nation by 2025 and hopefully growing from there as well. So excited to have a conversation with all of you about what factors had to come together to make that partnership successful and some of the lessons learned that I hope will help any of you in your projects or at least help us all grow the field. Good afternoon all. My name is Alex Baldenko. First let me say it's a humbling and honorable experience to be on this panel with these folks. So thanks for the opportunity. I lead the data science team at Mass Mutual. So not a tech company, not an investment bank. You can think of life insurance, okay? At Mass Mutual we help people secure their future and protect the ones they love. And so I hope with that mission I can weave a different thread into the tapestry of this conversation by saying that mission statement from a relatively different sector has provided me and this organization an opportunity to partner with some really great academic teams and groups to find initiatives, efforts in an area of mutual interest and objective that are multidisciplinary in nature that we can't solve ourselves and that there needs some similar like some hands-on experience from students. So wrapped into that mission of helping people secure their future and protect the ones they love has driven partnerships with the University of Vermont and health and human wellness, both mental and physical, as well as algorithmic fairness with Boston University here. So one other angle I'd like to pull out here maybe it's more nuts and bolts is that employees of Mass Mutual and other companies are actually interested in a lot of the same values that PITUN stands for and works towards. And these types of partnerships provide a mutual benefit. So it's yeah, like it's great to get students interested in aware that Mass Mutual is a company at all and that we do cool stuff. But secondarily, our own employees actually have a lot of social mission on their heart and this is an opportunity to engage in that an authentic way through their employer rather than having to do something else. Yeah, I'll leave it there for now. Thank you. Thank you, good afternoon. My name is Carlos Genatios. I'm the director of engineering and technology at Miami-Dade College. And first of all, I really want to thank New America for all this and also the Boston College. But I've been linked to this project from New America since the beginning and I can't tell you that I'm really amazed and grateful from one side and congratulate them all because you have done a great job. What we feel here is a family and I have a feeling that this is the people that I want to be with. This is the people that I want to discuss the main issues that concern me professionally and personally and you have made it available for us and thanks again, not only for the finances that has allowed me to do all the projects that I've been doing but also for creating this environment, this effort. Thank you all guys. Well, as I said, I'm director of engineering at Miami-Dade College. Miami-Dade College is a college that before pandemic we had 160,000 students. Now we have about 110,000. We have been recovered. But the thing is 80% of the students are first time in their families. 80% of them are minorities, even more than 80%. Sometimes Miami-Dade College says that is the largest institution in Hispanic population and the third one in black population. So when we talk about underserved people, we are there. And some people ask us, how do you do to have so many people from minorities? We just open our doors. People just come in and it's an open institution. And we have to deal with all that kind of problems with people who don't have the basic knowledge to be there. That's one of the examples. And what I, in my task in that college is to create especially new programs related to engineering. And one of the ones that I'm gonna talk here about is EcologySec, which means geographic information systems for environmental awareness and community engagement. This project aims to give the students from high school with a dual enrollment program to begin learning GIS so they can make their living out of GIS with a 21 credit college credit certificate that allows them to make their living, to work in the municipalities and do things. And at the same time, this program is embedded, is stockable into an associate in science degree, which also goes into a bachelor's degree in information technology and if they want to go on, they can continue to FIU to do the certificate degree on GIS.  If the students get in there, they have a track that they can follow and we're there to support them. But that's not the main thing because this is something, this is a program that can be replicated in any college and I don't know why we don't have it in all the colleges in the US. But the thing that we do, the main thing that I have given to this program besides creating it has been to include the environmental risk analysis as part of those projects that the students have to develop while they're learning GIS. When we do that, the students begin to understand the reality in a city like Miami where we do have hurricanes, where we do have flooding, where we do have sea level rise, even though a lot of people want to deny it. But we do have sea level rise and the crazy thing about this is that when I began trying to push this forward into that huge and wonderful college, people didn't pay attention to me. So it was thanks to Petun that I could get some money to begin developing this program and now it's an important program within the college. But if I didn't have Petun, I wouldn't have this. So you sent us so many questions that I don't know how to answer some of them. But when you're talking about why Petun, how do we all approach Petun? I'm sure that each one of us keeps on asking himself, what do I do in the Petun area? In fact, everybody has a different answer. So the main thing to me is the question itself. When we don't frame it, when we don't shut it down, we have the possibility of asking, what are we doing? What are you doing? How can we relate? How are we delivering some good for the humanity, for the people? And in fact, one of the questions at the beginning you sent us or sometimes we've been receiving is, when did you begin working on being in contact with Petun? And I'm all sure that I'm gonna relate to you my story, but I'm sure that most of you could be something similar. I've been doing this all my life. I'm a structural engineer, I'm civil engineer from training. I became professor at the University, Central University in Venezuela, which where I was teaching for 30 years. On my way I was working all the time with especially in low-cost housing and natural disaster risk reduction. When you have to deal with people who suffer a hurricane or people who suffer an earthquake, you really know what you have to do.  Is that public good? Of course it is. So I see that everybody in his own profession has the possibility of doing this kind of things, delivering services for others and that is something that we all know at the end is one of the most grateful things that we can have in life. To have the return of this, giving ourselves to others. Well, sorry for that. But while being professor in these areas and doing research, one day I was called to the government and I became minister of human development and then minister of science and technology. That happened 24 years ago. I was kind of young. And I think I did a great job. But the things were turning so crazy in my country, Venezuela, that I left the government and I went back to the academic but I worked with people who have been, we have been the earthquake engineering family in Latin America is a family. We know everybody in every country. So we always work together. This family was mainly created by a professor at the University of California in Berkeley who was an Argentinian who was called Vitalmo Bertero who died. He had a student from all Latin America and all these guys became a family. They studied together and they went back to the countries and they kept their relationships. And I was like the young kid among all of them, some of them were my professors and whenever they wanted to create a conference and they mentioned that a couple of times. I said, okay, I'll take care of that. So I became the secretary of them all and we created associations one after the other. So we had this family that worked on this kind of things, natural disaster reduction, mainly oriented towards earthquake engineering. And as I mentioned, when you see those disasters happening, you know who are the ones who suffer the most. Why do we do this? And this goes back to beaten again. Because when we work on natural disaster reduction we try to mitigate the impacts of the earthquakes, of the natural hazards, but you know that poverty is already a disaster. Before the disaster happens, the poor, the poor are the ones who are already suffering and they will not, they're sometimes not even able to record from their own conditions. When the hurricane happens or when the earthquake happens, then they're really completely devastated. So when you see those faces, you know what to do, work hard for them. And that's all. So Peter Natyan is something that comes very spontaneously when you are in face of the reality of the suffering of the people. Professor Natyan. If I can just jump on that point. I think that you just said it really well with, this is, you spoke about your experience, but you've been doing PIT, or PIT your entire career. And I think that a number of our panelists would share the same sentiment. I wonder if we could pause on that one point though and think about what we were talking about earlier. We see that PIT is happening all around us and the heart of it you've just touched on. Like we have to talk about the communities we're serving and the communities we're protecting. I'm wondering from the panel, if we could talk one level up from that for a moment about what it takes to define that though. So I know Alex and Ishi, you work in public, sorry, private sector institutions where you've had to go through a process of defining this is what we mean by PIT internally or this is what we mean by social impact. I'm curious what that process has looked like for you to align the social impact values. Go ahead Ishi. Yeah, so it's really in a private sector context there's always the importance of being able to define what you're trying to do as well as being able to measure it because at the end of the day you wanna make sure that you have the right outcomes that you were seeking out and so that you can apply more resources against it ultimately. And so we, at Cisco we like to measure everything. So we have for all of our different programs we set specific goals. I mean one of the probably the broadest one in our company was in 2019 we set forth an objective to positively impact a billion people by 2025 and which is a ridiculously large number but we started to think about like all the ways that we could impact it and how we can measure whether it was what our employees are doing, what we do at our customer events. We usually have some kind of program that our teams and can bring their customers to to participate in at each one of those events and we're really excited that we're ahead of goal in actually achieving that but that's probably the broadest measure. I think we're gonna be at 1.1 billion at the end of this year. So but if you go through every program that we go through, whether it is our network academy, whether it is the country digitization which is a program where we set up kind of proof of concepts for countries that if they have a connected citizen initiative or a cybersecurity initiative, we will set up a proof of concept for that country and we'll run it and then we'll measure it and we'll see how well it does and if it does really well, we'll do more of them. So and we do that in every single area within our purpose organization. So I think that key, like clear objectives, ability to measure it, be able to credibly kind of track back in a closed loop is a really important process. And Alex? I can build on that real quickly and say once an objective has been articulated with an enterprise, there's the acknowledgement that well, there are researchers, there are people working on the front lines in multiple fields that are already like pushing the boundary of human knowledge and connecting the dots. We're not uniquely positioned to do that ourselves within our own walls. So this starts the process of almost matchmaking with translators that can go across boundaries of organizations to say like, okay, I hear that you're speaking in the language of academia. I'm speaking in the language of my own company. How can we bridge that gap and achieve our common purpose? And that's something that I think is at least worth discussing. We had mentioned as a group the concept of narratives and how the jargon might be quite a little bit different and finding that common ground. I don't have an answer, but I think that's a meaty space on how to partner and drive things forward. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, we have to bring it back to professors Cleveland and Sweeney to respond to that. And I would ask that shared narrative piece and then also, are there other pieces of the work that you have to translate differently to work with successfully? Cause you've both built very successful partnerships in this area. So what are your reactions to this narratives piece and how to define this kind of work? So I'm taking, it's like two, my brain is kind of dealing with, my heart is dealing with one thing and my brain is dealing with the other. I mean, I thought you spoke so passionately about the people who can't help themselves who need our help. And I do find that the work that the students do that they're the most proud of are the ones where they are, they're really making a difference. You know, and that's everything. Well, we bust clashes. So that's everything about, you know, only this community is getting these horrible credit card ads and this community, and irregardless of their income and this community is getting these amazing credit card ads. We have a law against that, but our regulators have no idea how to enforce that in technology. And so they tackle that and show them how they can do that. And that gives them a lot of great pride. You know, they're often very motivated by the anecdotal pain point of individuals. And then we provide them with a way to do the work where we all benefit from it. So that's kind of the heart piece of it, you know. The intellectual piece of it, though, of how do you say it is realizing that those people in that moment that you are saving or you're impacting or you're helping, in some ways is all of us. It's like, but what about me and my credit cards? I mean, yes, you chose a particular one, but all of us are at risk to these same issues. That is everything that you care about, any rule you care about, any right that you care about is totally up for grabs by whether or not technology, design allows it or doesn't allow. Or allows or doesn't allow a regulator to enforce what they could do in a brick and mortar building. If they can't do it online, then do you really have that right? And I think, and so that's the intellectual piece that says, yes, we're kind of all in this position, we're all losing traction of our society. Yeah, well, let me see if I can say anything more eloquent than that. So maybe I'll pick up on something a couple of my co-panelists have touched on, which is the values piece. And I think that's a key part of the academic and private sector partnerships, just in the sense that in my own example, you're negotiating a $20 plus million big bet. It's stressful on the university side, it's stressful on the sponsor side, everybody's got their objectives and their executives that are breathing down their neck. And in those moments of stress with my counterparts on the other side, several times we all just took a deep breath and looked at each other and said, okay, let's remember why we are all here. We share a set of values that we articulated quite early on in the project. We care deeply about students, we had all found that we cared deeply about equity and inclusion in the profession and making sure that not just R1 universities, but that small colleges and community colleges and HBCUs were part of the community of institutions that had an opportunity to apply for funding to start a clinic. We all cared deeply about the fact that small municipalities and K through 12 school districts are getting hit by ransomware from really bad people. And so aligning around those values and what you're really there for helped smooth things over when frictions arise, which they do, which I'll go back to another point that my colleagues pointed out, I think years in particular about metrics. No surprise to anyone in this room, universities and private companies are on quite different time horizons. So at a university six years is like nothing that's no time. And at a company it's like it's an incongruous amount of time to even imagine the future. Like whatever we're doing now we will have forgotten about in six years. And so coming back to those stairs set of values when you're negotiating something like timelines and what does it mean to have a social impact ROI at the company and what does it mean to achieve the public interest objectives of both the university and the company I think is incredibly valuable. I'd like to mention something. When we talk about beating, we talk about models or models or data that deliver good for everybody. When we talk about this disaster reduction models that we use to assess the risks. Well normally we use data and models, sometimes the models are very good in the way they analyze things, but the data is not that good. And when I do this program, there is two parts of the program. One the CCC, the CCC, the college core certificate. And the other one is a research platform that we have developed to be able to assess the reality of the people in the ground. When we use FEMA models to assess the risk we get some results of expected losses, social losses, people who might die. But when you go to reality it's completely different and the risks are lots higher. So we need to use high technology, we use a lot of drones and a lot of hard processing processes to get better results for those and we use the GIS. And then we get things that are completely different. And why do we do it? Because we need the students to get aware of this. Because we need the students to get close to their families and make them aware of their lives. But normally again we want to go to the communities and be able to deliver those services for them. And this is something that we cannot do from the framework of the colleges, of the community colleges. Because community colleges have a great good to make which is delivering the possibilities for people to grow but you cannot do consulting within that framework. So we need to create outside companies, non-profits or other things to get close to the community that we are already engaged with. To give us students opportunity to have internships or for us to be able to work with them because there's something that I always think as working in the educational world. We feel like we teach. Do we really teach? We don't teach. We are like players who expose knowledge to students. Students learn. That's a different issue. We don't teach. Students learn. That's the important part. Communities is the same thing. We want to go to the communities and we want to deliver the tools for them to be able to empower themselves and so we can support them in the claims for the insurances to be able to assess the investments that the villages and the cities have to do for disaster reduction to see if they're worth doing it them or not. So in this sense, we are ready with a group of consultants and people who are ready to deliver the results. We have been delivering them for years already and we need to jump into the profit side or non-for-profit side to be able to deliver those services. And that's where we need you guys to help us do this. For the people who really need it, the ones who are already living the disaster. Sorry for that publicity. Go ahead. I might be able to synthesize something and you raise a good point around like the timeline to deliver results across metrics. And I think to connect that with the concept of finding overlapping values, generally at large companies, a mission is something that is robust through time. And so finding that, let's say shared values, shared purpose at the roots of the tree is the way to get there so that through the noise of changing metrics, changing objectives, changing the name of an ESG program, or something else, that through all that change, you can stay at the roots to be stable. That's just something to share because lots of things change, but generally mission and vision are robust. Yeah, big plus one to that. We can keep coming down the line actually. I was going to pose the question, what's one thing as we wrap out the initial, and do we have time for Q and A? We might go and transition into that. So prepare your questions. But if we can keep coming down the line, what's one thing that you think can enable these successful partnerships? Then it sounds like learning, a focus on learning, you mentioned, Professor Canatio, is that there's already some shared language in the approaches and the data methodology, perhaps, that your students need to learn and need to use the tools that they need to use to apply it to this real-life problem. You just mentioned, Alex, the shared values. That shared language is the shared values, perhaps. If we can keep coming, Ann and then Ish, and then we'll wrap up with Professor Sweeney. What's one last note on enablement for these kinds of partnerships? Yeah, sorry, I wasn't sure. We're in line, you were starting. I guess my reflection, which folks will have heard before, is every overnight success was 15 years in the making. And that's because at the heart of any of these partnerships, whether it's with private sector or government or between universities, depends on the relationships that you have. And relationships take time. It seems like it happens overnight, but actually you've been building and strengthening those relationships for a long time, and we would not be in the position we are today if we didn't have a relationship among a national group of universities that could speak with a national voice instead of one of us alone to a huge multinational company where we had also really invested the time to develop relationships. A quick corollary, which is like a way to not build relationships, is to ask for data sharing on day one. Or it's like going on a first date and ask if you wanna share a baking counter or something. And it's a common experience. So I would plus one both of those, but since I'm third, I'll come up with my own. I think that understanding how your partner is, what their objectives are, where they're coming from, and finding that the persistent common thread to it is really important. And when you're working with a Cisco or another technology company, there's often a core purpose around there, around for us, powering an inclusive future. There's often a core technology capability that they bring to the table. But it's not about understanding how the internet works and rounding. It's understanding how our technology and how we think about our technology powers our purpose. And if you can find that thread and have that common, that is persistent. And that will last longer than the next 90 days or the fiscal year, which is often what you'll hear within a lot of companies. And those tend to be very persistent. They tend to be ingrained in the culture of the company. And really, a lot of these issues that we're talking about today, we see our employees and our future employees, these things resonate with them. And so as you think about working with technology companies, these are important things, not just for the bottom line, but also for our people and our future, really the future of the company as we try to attract additional talent, et cetera, et cetera. So. I want to follow after everyone has gone. So I won't, I'll just say exactly the answer from my perspective. And then it is primarily about relationships. It's, you know, I started this, my career was with data privacy, sort of had the opportunity to be first to show this problem to society and being able to watch as laws around the country change based on a little simple experiment that I did back then. And what's interesting is how many of those relationships are still with me and how those relationships made huge changes that people have no idea. But it was literally, it's those relationships that you turn to. And so, and you just don't know where they're gonna come from. I mean, I was a graduate student at the time and just sort of seeing this unbelievable change happening and being able to connect with insurance companies and with public health and the Department of Defense and so forth. People that you wouldn't normally think, I just re-identified your data. I just showed you got a big privacy problem. Things that were on its surface kind of embarrassing to them in the public, a kind of shame on you kind of thing. But actually being able to do that and walk out of that as friends and trying to solve future problems together has been incredibly powerful. I think that's such a beautiful note to round this up out. I think the power of relationships, the power of the existing institutions that we're all at, but then also our trajectories as we go through our careers. And I think that's a great call to action for some networking and some relationship building after this. Is there Q and A or I can't read that actually. 10 more minutes. Okay, okay. Can we open up for Q and A then? All right. Can someone carry the microphone here? Oh, that's good. Thank you. Thanks so much for the panel. Nick Zingali with Cleveland State. So my question, I'm gonna try to get this out without stumbling a bunch. It's a two-part question first for the panel. Do you think there is a widening gap in public perception, the public perception of value between the private sector, government and universities? And if so, what do you think needs to be done to shrink that gap? First, so in one way, this panel has been kind of like la-la land on companies, but there's a flip side of companies too who aren't at this table. And I think the, right now, especially in the United States, there's a lack of trust. We just don't know how to build trust at scale. Companies don't know how to do it, but their business model depends on keeping you in their product. And those kinds of business models, which drive a huge amount of our economy these days, create a real tension point and really do tear at our fabric in a really important way. And I think to the extent that public interest tech also has a message in there and a way to help solve those problems and a path to solving those problems is crucially important. It's not quite the scope of this panel, but that is the flip side. Yeah, a big plus one to that, and I would just add, we're doing a different project around the world that we call Cybersecurity Futures 2030, and around the world in a way that's remarkably distinct from what we heard five years ago when we did this project. People are saying the core concern of cybersecurity is to match the speed of trust with the speed of innovation. And I can't say that anyone has got a silver bullet for that. It's probably a lot of silver buckshot, but I do think there's an increasing recognition that trust is the core problem and it's got to keep up with innovation if we're gonna unlock all of the benefits of technology. Yeah, I'm gonna respond to maybe a reinterpretation of the question, or a different interpretation of the question, which is public trust in private sector, universities, and government, like all three of those combined. And I don't know if there's a loss in public trust, but I think that all three of those parties are dealing with some really challenging problems, and a lot of them are in the public limelight. And so it makes solving and talking about those problems challenging. So I think having some productive forums for those groups to come together, probably primarily through relationships, is the path towards resolving that. And I think there's real tension and friction there. And forums like this are a really great start, but broadening them and making them even more productive and more specific is probably the way to get there. I think this tenet of trust is really important. I think most companies would say that this is one of the most important assets that they can have with their customers, with their partners, with the institutions they work with. And I think if you think about as the reach of the internet and mobile devices, et cetera, has gotten broader and broader and has more of your personal information, et cetera, the notion of that being a steward of that trust becomes more important. And something, Professor, that you said earlier about thinking about some of these issues earlier in the design process and in the thought process and some of these technology trends is really important. I think we're seeing it in real time right now with generative AI. There is a massive amount of things that we could do to improve or irreparably harm the trust among the three tenets that you brought up. And I think it's something that we have to figure out, not just, and there's no one company that's gonna figure that out, there's probably no one university or one government that's gonna be able to figure that out. It is, but I think it's a perfect example of something that is, if we think about it now, we have a chance. And if we kinda let it go, maybe it'll work out, but I don't know that I would bet on that, right? So... I wanna take two words, public perception and trust. There is something behind all this, we all know. The country is getting deeply polarized. So it is very hard for anyone to trust if the narratives are so divergent. See, we don't build agreements to make the country stronger. So I think this is a consequence also of the political reality that we all have to be aware of. I'm coming from a country that we lose the country in a similar situation. Of course, it's quite a different thing, but having such a polarized political environment makes hard for people to understand each other's perspective. Valuable. I think I would actually like to bring an opportunity angle to the trust piece where I think this is an opportunity for Pitt, right? For... Technology has been seen as the silver bullet for trust and it obviously isn't, but I think that when we are able to encourage ourselves as public sector... I keep saying that, private sector organizations to lean into that discomfort and kind of play with the edge, we can't walk away from building technology and so we have to lean into the equity, the privacy, the technical and societal implications of building technology. And so we're actually seeing that at MasterCard, we're seeing that leaning into it as our way to build trust because if we can build without our data, without trust in our data, we're not an entity anymore. And so leaning into data protection from the very beginning and trying to be at the cutting edge of that kind of work, particularly from a societal angle, has actually been a way for us to generate business value but also to think about trust from a strategic and I think a societal element, an angle, I think. Do we have one or two more questions in the room? Go ahead. Hi. Thanks for the panel. It's really nice to hear these industry perspectives. So I mean, it's good that we got on to generative AI, I guess, like it was always going to come up. But now that you've raised it. So, I mean, as soon as these like large language models started coming out, there was a very, I mean, there was an issue within academia very quickly about like, well, what does this mean for assessment? How do we know about plagiarism? All these kind of things. And some of the discussion that was raised was whether there were choices you could have made in the design of these models that would have meant that they would have been, had different places in the world, right? So you could have watermarked them, for instance, and then some of those questions would have gone away. So this question about how do you build in foresight and thinking into the design process is really, really important. But we also know that it's really hard to do it within academic labs but also within companies. So as people that work on this kind of stuff, as people that represent some of these organizations, what do you think are the most important organizational capabilities to do this work? Either that you have seen built, have been involved in building, or that you see are lacking at the moment? I'll jump in. You know, and if we now return back to the scope of the panel in answering that. So the argument to a VC firm or to venture capitalists or to a startup company is really clear. You can lose your technology. You get to the marketplace, and you have a disruptive technology. You can lose it completely. We don't see it happen that often, but we have some great examples. We almost lost face recognition completely. In Super Bowl in 2001 was the first time that face recognition came out, and they surveyed everyone in the crowd and it was for law enforcement, and they wanted to see who had a warrant. It freaked people out. There were laws all around the United States banning face recognition, and all researchers who were working in it, everyone was prepared to lose their funding. Congress was going to basically defund it, and if it hadn't been for 9-11, happening a few months later, face recognition would have just been a goner. There have been other examples. Sony has paid huge amounts of money for a camera that used to see through clothes because it had infrared lights. If you took a photograph in dark clothes, you would literally show your skin and tattoos and stuff like that, and the recall rates and so forth. There are real risks to companies by just ignoring these problems. The problem is we're not able to hold them as accountable because there's a lack of transparency into their technologies, and they sort of masqueraded over. Where are all the places that the Cisco data, not to pick on Cisco, but where are all the places that data goes? I don't know, but shouldn't I know where my data might be? I don't want to go down that pipe. But I did just want to say that that's usually the value proposition that we were making. And the one who comes to the table first is the one who has the most, in my experience, the ones that want to talk to us first are usually the ones with the most egregious technologies because they're scared or they're worried about it. Anyone else want to weigh in?  I think that one of the earlier panelists was saying, specifically actually about AI, it's a tool. And for the most part, most of the companies working on it, I think think of it as a tool. Now, I think it is incumbent on the leaders of those companies and those organizations to think about how it could be used and to think about, you know, what safeguards they might want to bring in. I think some of the examples that she just gave have some pretty obvious challenges and whether it's privacy or just, you know, what's the right thing to do. The one thing that I would say, though, is that it's probably not going to be, it won't be as effective if we just rely on, you know, the inventor of a technology to figure out all the uses of its tool.  I mean, we develop technology, we don't carry any data, by the way, we just move it. It is, you will not, I've been involved in many product development efforts and every time you put it out into the world, somebody finds a different way to use it that you'd never anticipated. And if you don't have some kind of process to understand that, collect it, react to it, think about it, you will always have some unintended consequence and so hopefully you've done enough up front and the more and better input you get from organizations like this or other partnerships or government or what have you, the better chance you have, but it will, I promise you, you will still find some unintended consequence. It's just, it's a truism of almost everything that we've ever developed. I think any technology company's ever developed. I'll just quickly, you know, I do think this is a place where you absolutely need collaboration between the private sector, between government and from, between academia. There really is no silver bullet, but I also want to say a part of the solution has to be, it should not be an individual's responsibility to protect themselves from the harms of something like generative AI models or large language models. You shouldn't have to read through six pages of consent forms and be able to understand it all and opt out of your data being processed with every single corporation on the planet. You know, it shouldn't be individual responsibility and yet we don't see like a movement of individuals demanding better cybersecurity or better AI security from companies and from government in the way, for example, that you start to see grassroots movements of individuals demanding better climate policy, you know, both from the private sector and from government. And so, to me, there's a real missing piece here in what would it take to build a movement where we as people were demanding better AI security in your example from, you know, both regulators and from companies. Go ahead, Carl. You mentioned choices in the design of models. I got those words when you began with. In the risk analysis for environmental hazards models, if we had from the beginning understood that there is a social disparity and that some people suffer more than others because their social vulnerability is higher and when they lose something, they lose everything, if we had that from the beginning, maybe those models could have been designed differently. Now we're trying to solve this but it doesn't work really because the market is already saturated with models with very powerful companies that deliver those solutions for the municipalities. And then we want to point out that there are some communities inside there that are suffering more than it's very hard to go there. And when you try to work with those communities for them to raise their voice, they don't have the money, they don't have the time, they have so many problems that it's almost impossible to work with them. I think that... I'll be very quick, I promise. Back to the initial question, I think maybe this is a controversial perspective to end on, so apologies. But I think that a large established companies that want to retain the trust of their customers might actually have something to offer to startups in that... One thing that I think gets done pretty well in general with generative AI is looking at... There are examples of it being done well is generative AI not being considered a tool and a platform for any use but to look at specific use cases and generally govern them with some sort of internal control partner council that thinks of customers first. And that's by the nature of being an established company that wants to maintain trust and then a startup that's looking for a niche or looking for some market. So there might be something to learn from that specifically. At the beginning of this panel we tried to define what PIT really is at this point in time and how it's defined differently. Professor Hernandez was encouraging us earlier to try to keep that definition as open as possible so I would say we can actually continue to add to it. It sounds like the PIT practitioners and the educators and the folks that are in this room are also going to be then the translators of policy and implications on society. It sounds like we need the PIT practitioners to be focused on ahead of the curve development and making sure that those considerations are at the very beginning of the development process and it sounds like there's also a huge need for perhaps advocacy and activism from this group in terms of being able to organize around what the standards should be, what some of these ethics should be and what some of the implications of society are. So with that, keep defining this. Please join me in a round of applause for our panelists. And also for you and for New America. Yes, thank you. Huge thank you to put you in New America and to Boston University. Thank you.


Now that we've developed these new rules for adding resistors that are in series or in parallel, let's apply it to a circuit. So if you have a look here, I've created a circuit which has got once again our 9-volt battery, and then it's got three resistors. Now if you look very carefully, we've actually got one resistor which is connected directly to the negative terminal. Then there's two resistors which are both connected to the first resistor and both connected to the positive terminal. So what this means is that these two resistors are in parallel with each other and together they are in series with this resistor here. So let's draw a circuit diagram of what this looks like. So here is my circuit diagram and what I'd like to figure out is what is the total effective resistance of all three resistors and also how much current would flow through this circuit. So when it comes to circuits, the best way to solve them is using divide and conquer. So I'm going to start out by looking at the resistors in parallel. So let's look at this section here. So I'm going to call the total resistance of these two resistors RP, which stands for resistance parallel, but you could call it anything you wanted to. And using the formula for resistance in parallel, I get this is equal to 1 over RP equals 1 over 1 ohm plus 1 over 1 ohm. So in this case, 1 divided by 1 is simply 1 and this one divided by 1 is also simply 1. So I can just do this is 1 plus 1 and so that's going to give me 2. So 1 over RP is equal to 2 and the units use inverse ohms. So that means if I was to flip both sides of the equation that I would get, the RP is equal to a half an ohm, which is equal to 0.5 ohms. So I figured out this first bit that I've highlighted in yellow. So to figure out the total resistance, then I'll need to add this yellow bit to the one ohm resistor. Since these two sections are in series, I can use the series resistance formula. So in this case, I'm going to call the total resistance of all of this RT for R total and it's equal to half an ohm plus one ohm, which equals 1.5 ohms. So I figured out the total resistance of the whole circuit. If I want to figure out the current, what I need to do is then use ohms law. And in this case, I get nine volts divided by 1.5 ohms, which gives me six amps. There we go. We calculated the total resistance and the current in the circuit.


So, Ludovic, I'm going to talk about GNU Geeks and how we managed to build a complete GNU Linux distribution out of a minimalistic language, if not the minimalistic language which is scheme, that parenthesis thing that you've heard about just before. All right. Before I go into presenting Geeks, let me just talk about something you know which is GNU Linux. So, I like potlucks. So, potlucks are these parties where people join together and everybody bring their own dish, and that's pretty cool. That's a good way to discover new dishes, new taste, things that perhaps you wouldn't cook yourself, right? You get to discover lots of new things. GNU Linux is a bit like this, right? It grew sort of organically and people brought their own dishes, and you get to discover lots of things if you look carefully at how your system or your laptop actually works. So, you will find that there are things written in C, there are things written in Perl, there are things written in Python, there are lots of things, and perhaps a bunch of Bash scripts with a whole rich collection of custom configuration language on top of it, right? So, that's very tasteful. This is great in a way, but if you look at it from the perspective of someone who's actually trying to understand how this all works together, or from the perspective of someone who's trying to learn or trying to modify things, that's maybe not so great. That's a whole lot of things to learn, a whole lot of languages, configuration languages, XMLJS, and you name it, all that. And trying to bring some unification to all this is one of the goals of Geeks. So, let me go into that. So, Geeks, who has already heard about Geeks in this room? All right, that's quite a lot of people, that's good. That's a good thing because I didn't plan to really present it in detail. But basically, if you went to Ricardo's talk before, for example, Geeks is actually a whole bunch of things. So you wouldn't have to think of Geeks as a package manager, and it's true. That's a package manager that you can use to install package, you get transactional upgrades, you get wallbacks, non-route installation of packages, that kind of feature, which is quite unusual and pretty cool, I think. But it's also a whole tool set of tools that deal with packages one way or another. So we have tools, for example, that can create environments on the fly like Geeks environment. So it's pretty much like virtual-env, if you're in Python. We have tools that can create darker images, application bundles, if that's something you need. We have all sorts of tools. And we also have an actual standalone system that you can run on your machine. And that's a standalone GNULINX distribution. Also, yeah, as I was preparing this talk for the minimalistic language tracker, I was like, what kind of minimalism are we talking about? So this is not this kind of minimalism, not in terms of number of lines of code. But there is some sort of a minimalistic feel to it, especially in the use of the language, which I'm gonna talk about. Yeah, we have a wonderful reference card if you want to know more about how to use Geeks as for all these features that I talk about. So you can find it on the web or you can find it on paper right here. This is wonderful. What's not on the reference card is this thing, which is how you manage a complete system, a standalone system. Distribution that you install on your machine or that you create in a VM or in a container. So this is just what we get with Geeks. You get to basically declare your system configuration entirely, including accounts, services, locats, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. This is a very simple system configuration. Yeah, I think even if you're not a schemer, even if you're kind of afraid of parenthesis that happens, I'm being told. You can still, I guess, understand what's happening here. You could imagine that these are curly braces and maybe that works better for you, I don't know.  You can instantiate it on actual bare metal hardware, etc., etc. This is really nice. So how did we get there? Why did we end up using scheme and all the things to build this system? So the other day I wanted to learn about Terraform, which is an infrastructure as code tool. I'm not very familiar with this kind of tool. And so I ended up watching a keynote by one of the Terraform people, explaining the new features of the upcoming version of Terraform. And one thing that struck me in this part, the person was presenting. So Terraform actually has its own configuration language like many tools. So it's called the HashiCorp configuration language, ATL. It's a very corporate name, I guess. And so it's a language, a DSL, the mean specific language that allows you to configure your infrastructure, basically. And the person was presenting the new features of the language and that person was saying, look, here's one of my favorite new features. The new four key words allows you to iterate over lists and generate lists and map. This gives you a whole bunch of new flexibility. And I thought this is exactly what we want to do with geeks. We want to give you a whole bunch of new flexibility. That's the point. So we happen to take a different approach, technically. But the end result is the same, we have a whole bunch of new flexibility. So if you're familiar or even not familiar with Lisp, you're probably familiar with all the mystic around Lisp. That Lisp is somehow magic, like a thing of wizard. And Chris Weber, who is sitting here, rightfully noted that the wizardry thing is a double H third. It's a good thing in the sense that, wow, you can do so many things. But at the same time, it sounds like black magic, which is kind of not so great. I don't think it's black magic, but I do think it has very important features. So there is this famous quote that Lisp is not the right tool for any particular domain, basically. But it allows you to attack new problems by implementing new languages. That's basically what we're doing here. It's not a new idea, it's just the idea of embedding domain-specific languages in general purpose programming languages. And that's basically what we're doing here. I should also mention, since we're in the scheme, sorry. In the minimalistic language, there are room that the scheme standard, yeah. The scheme, I'm sorry. The scheme standard has this famous quote also that I could put it here, which is that programming languages should not be designed by pulling features on top of features, but by removing the weaknesses that make those features appear necessary. So there's a whole thing about minimalism in scheme and Lisp. So how did it all start? So the initial thing in Geeks, well, the initial thing was playing with reproducible software deployment via Nix. And the third thing that we came up with was this way to represent package definitions. All right, so if you've ever hacked Linux, GNU, Linux distribution, you've probably added this kind of package definition. This one you have parentheses, so it does look very declarative. It could be JSON, it could be YAML. It's very similar. But it's actually code. And you can see there's a string up in there that actually concatenates string.  Yeah, this is actually code. It looks like a purely declarative thing, but it's really code. So you can write functions that create packages out of other packages or parameterized packages, you can do all sort of things. That's how it started. Then if you're using the standalone Geeks on your machine, you get to, as I said before, you can select which system services are running on your machine. So for example, if you write this thing, this creates a system object for OpenSSH with a default configuration. Right, that's pretty simple. But obviously, you can also specify a configuration. So you say, all right, OpenSSH configuration. I want X11 forwarding, and I want to permit root login, but using public keys. Something like that. And you can do that for a whole bunch of services. So this one is a bit more interesting, maybe. This is Seagit. So Seagit, it sees web interface for Git that allows you to browse repositories and so on in a web interface. It's if you're going to set it up by hand, it can be quite tedious, because you need to set up nginx, you need to set up fcgiwrap, this kind of thing. But as it turns out, if you're using Geeks, you can just say this. And it's going to ensure that nginx and fcgiwrap are actually set up correctly. Somehow on your system, it will just work. So I think that's pretty cool. Did I get the configuration right? Because I think the authors are right here. I hope so. And you don't get to, this is the same basic language, right? You don't get to learn a new configuration language every time. That's my point. But like I said, it's also code. So let's say you can say, I want to take the default list of desktop services that you would normally use to configure your laptop, for example. But I want to remove the NTP service that's provided as part of that default list of services. And so this is actually schemed. The lambda keywords means that we're defining a function, basically. That takes a service. And then we look at the kind of the service. And if it's actually the NTP service, then we remove it from that list. That's programming. We can do a bit more advanced things like, I want to say, all right, I'm taking this desktop services list. But I want to change some of the configuration for these services. Let's say I want to change how MinGetTTY is configured by adding a message of the day, or I want to change UPower to specify what happens if I close the lead, etc., etc. Again, this is configuration embedded in a general purpose language. So there are still open issues, like often people see this and they say, well, all right, that looks interesting. That allows you to actually program your configuration, which can be useful. But are you really going to write bindings for every configuration file out there? And the answer so far is yes. And yeah, it turns out to work so far. I mean, it's not too much of a pain. Sometimes we have cheat codes that allows us to escape from the scheme bindings if we really need to. But in general, it just works, and that's a reasonable thing to do. So we'll see how it goes. All right, so to summarize with Geeks being embedded in a general purpose language, we get all this programmability that I showed before. But we also get the ability to build new tools that would otherwise be pretty hard to build if we didn't have a general purpose language available. So among these tools, we have an Emacs interface. So if Emacs is your thing, you can actually manage your whole package set directly from within Emacs. I like it. And then we have tools like Geeks Refresh, which automatically updates packages, Geeks Lint, which lints, Geeks Graph, Geeks System Extension Graph, which allows you to inspect your operating system declaration, basically if you want to see how services fit together. All right, but since we're doing scheme a whole lot, what if we try to unify beyond this glue layer, basically? I've only talked about the glue layer that glues, packages, services, etc. together, but what if we went a bit beyond? So there are often questions about Nix versus Geeks, what's the difference, etc., etc. So from a technical viewpoint, this is an example. Nix uses DSL, a domain-specific language that's an external language designed specifically for the purpose of the Nix package manager. It looks like this, so curly braces, as you can see. So you have functions, function calls, it's a functional programming language, lazily evaluated. It's really cool, but it remains a domain-specific language, right? So it's really designed for this particular domain, for defining packages and so on, but it's not designed to do anything, roughly. So for example, in a package definition in Nix, what you would do is insert bash snippets to define the actions that you want to do during the package build, right? So you have the package definition that's within the Nix language. And right here you have a bash snippet that's going to run when you actually build the package. This is, it does a job, right? It can be pretty convenient at times, but there's a catch to it, which is that these are just strings, right? And you end up mixing two different programming languages. And in fact, you end up concatenating strings that happen to form bash programs and sometimes that can be tricky. One example is escapes. There's obviously clashes between the Nix syntax and the bash syntax like Nix uses dollars, bash uses dollars. So how do you escape things? That creates a whole class of problems and a whole class of issues. I guess sometimes it can be tricky to find the right way to escape things. And so since we have a general purpose language at hand, it came naturally that we could after all use scheme not only to glue things together but also to actually perform specific actions. So one example that I like is the initial RAM disk. If you're familiar with how the initial RAM disk for Linux is usually made, it's a mixture of C programs that invoke bash script that do all sorts of things. And eventually you end up with a CPIO archive. It can be quite tricky and inside that archive you typically have C programs that use a custom C library, blah, blah, blah, it's a whole world. So what we're doing here is that we're using scheme again. So what if we just write scheme that's going to run into that initial RAM disk when you boot your system? That's what we're doing. It simplifies things because we can reuse code, we already know the language. We can, it's a general purpose language anyway, so we can do anything basically and it does the work. So this is actual code and what we are doing here is that there is a special hash tilled thing there which means we're actually doing code staging. So this is pretty much the equivalent of concatenating strings together to create a program but here we're generating a scheme program. And this is all scheme so we know that the syntax is going to be valid. We can easily refer to existing objects in scheme via hash dollar. And so we know we're basically generating valid code. We can reuse scheme libraries and so on and so forth. And we end up with scheme inside the initial RAM disk. I like to show the diagram which explains how the system, the standalone geeks works. Basically we have the Linux kernel, we have the initial RAM disk which runs Guile. But we also have the init system which is called good new shepherd which also uses Guile and then possibly we have application that may or may not use Guile, all right. So that's the idea. And because we have this init system in scheme, well we can also use this hash till thing to generate the bits of configuration for the init system. So instead of generating unit files for example, which would be just the strings that we concatenate together. We can actually have access to the API of the init system. We can generate its configuration. We can share code, reuse existing code inside the init system. So one example that I like is, well, all right. This is the definition of a service that mounts and unmounts file systems. We have access to the mount procedure to perform the mount syscall, basically, so we can do that. And yeah, this is the example that I like. So this is, you have the B2B IRC gateway. This is its service definition. But if you want to run it in a container, you can just say, all right, I'm importing the GNU build Linux container library inside my shepherd PID one environment. And now I say make fork exact constructor slash container, which is a function provided by this library. And I'm running that demo in a container, right? So we're just reusing existing guide code directly in the service manager. That's really cool, I think. All right, so I think it's about time to wrap up. So what we do have is that we're using a minimalistic language that some people view as academic, right? It has very basic features. It has macros, basically, but simply using macros, we can build embedded domain specific languages of all kinds. And that's how we end up defining complete systems. I think it's pretty hackable. We have a single git repositories that contains the whole system, including package definitions. So you can basically grab the whole system, you can navigate interfaces. And I think that's pretty unusual for a complete GNU Linux distribution to be searchable and hackable in this way. And we use code staging techniques, so this hash till thing that I showed before, to basically allow us to glue together different layers of scheme code that are going to run at different moments in time. And this is it, I invite you to join us now and share the parenthesis. You can install the distribution, you can get one of these reference cards, you can use it, report issues, and you can share your ideas. We were supposed to release 1.0 for FOSDOM, but I don't have networking access, so I'm not going to do it right now. And there are other reasons. But anyway, it's going to happen very soon, so I invite you to give it a try and report what you think about it. Thank you. Any questions? Yes. Just some configuration management at the beginning. My question is, how it looks behind this code? How it generates the configuration? Is it just, I say, templating of the configuration of files? Or do you use some smarter approach, like what Electra do or I don't know what to do. Or is it something that understands the configuration format you want to generate? So the question is, how do we generate configuration files from the scheme snippet that we have? In many cases, the configuration file format is basically a key value thing. And so we have a generic system that allows us to define bindings for this type of configuration file, basically. And that automatically takes care of generating the configuration file. And then we also have more ad hoc ways of generating special configuration files, for example. Okay, and do you have also some tools for different configuration or some converting existing configuration to scheme? Do we have tools to convert existing configurations to scheme? No, we don't have them. But that's why we usually provide a way to specify, if you don't want to use the scheme version because you already have different configuration files, usually you can do it. We'll provide an escape hatch that allows you to say, all right, I'm using this configuration file for NGINX, for example. Yes, all right, so the question is, do we have any plans to support transactional upgrades at the system level, right? It's actually already the case, so problem solved. So when you instantiate a system with a different configuration, it actually creates a new generation of the system. So you can, at any time, when you boot your system, you can choose in the grab menu which generation you want to boot. And you can boot an older generation of your system. You can roll back to an older version of your system, basically. Yeah, all right. So the question is whether we could manage a whole fleet of systems and that stateful systems you're saying that do not use Geeks. Did I get that right or? That's outside the scope of Geeks, I would say. So Geeks is really concerned with configuring Geeks systems. And we could, in theory, manage a whole fleet of Geeks machines. For example, we don't do that yet. We don't have the tooling yet to do that. But I know that, for example, NICSOS has tools to do that. So we could say have basically a single configuration template and apply it to a whole number of machines. That's what we could do, yeah. One question. So this contributing to Geeks is actually with a pre-instance that you can just change something and install it as if you had your change of accuracy that's hands down the best contribution experience I've ever had in a Geeks distribution, so that's really cool. So not really a question but a comment. Which is that Geeks is wonderful. Basically you can easily contribute to it. Okay, all right, one last question maybe, are we still, yes? Does it automatically, do I need to use ransom code to generate it? So what happens if you change your system configuration? Is it automatically reconfigured? Right, so no, it's not automatically reconfigured.  And that will instantiate the new configuration. So, yeah, that's the idea. Thank you, Lido. All right, thank you.


I worked at Tesla, I was there full time. So that's where I started to get more, I guess, experienced in computer vision and I was specifically working on object tracking and so that's when things started to click for me. I was like, oh, I could use some of this to track like the tennis ball with an iPhone camera. And so that's when we decided to switch to using computer vision. And then within six months, we built a kind of working version and at that point we had enough experience that we knew like we just need to release it right away. We're not gonna wait to perfect this. Yeah, smart. It just needs to go out the door. Yeah, break it. It was right to release it early. Yeah. Because that helped us get like a lot more feedback and data.


Okay, so let's have a look at question five from the loops one practical so this question is pretty cool a Lot of people's initial Thoughts is that they have to use some arcs for this when actually you're just drawing a lot of lines So to achieve this here We just need a loop that has four lines and one for each One of these patterns what we're going to do is look one by one at each corner Starting with this one here And then do each of the corners so we'll start with this one here first I'll show you what the pattern actually is Because it's a bit hard to say With this diagram here. It just looks like a bit of a an arc But what's actually happening is? So for this corner here, you're drawing a line from here to here Then you're going a little bit further down on the y-axis For this point here and on the point down the bottom you're going a little bit further on the x-axis So you're drawing a point from here to here Then we go down the y-axis across on the x here And so on so if you keep drawing these lines here And you can already hopefully start to see that I haven't drawn them very evenly But it starts to create that cool pattern there. So To work this one out what I'm going to do is I'm going to write Some code for the first three or four lines And once we've done that we can start to pick up a pattern and then design a loop that will help us achieve that pattern so I've just done a screen 800 by 800 The question didn't see how big it was.  I might do it Let's say every 20 pixels 20 40 60 80 so that obviously is not to scale But you get the idea 20 60 40 80 Like that. Okay, so let's go line by line and write some some code So our first line here We want to be drawing a point from here to here So if we look at this point here, that's at zero on the x-axis and 20 on the y And it's corresponding point. It's going down here So we've shifted a little bit over on the x-axis. So let's just keep it even. Let's say it's 20 on the x-axis and The point for the y is The full height so we can say 800 or we can just say height. I want to stay I might even just say H To make life a bit easier Okay, let's have a look at the second line So the second line here is a little bit lower and a little bit more across So we have a look at this point here. That's at x equals zero and y equals 40 and Then it's Corresponding point. Oh, what did I do here? I mixed up my 40 and my 60 you get the idea so this point here will be 40 on the x-axis and the full height And then I'll do just one more line So Now what I want to do is have a look at what's similar what's different in each line And then for the things that are different come up with a pattern So one similarity for each of these lines is that the first x-coordinate is always zero And the last y-coordinate is always the height So when we have our line Those two will always be the same and Then for all the other coordinates, they're the same in each line And they're increasing by 20 each time so We could just Have a test. We don't have to get the correct code straight away. We could just play around with it and see the effect So what if I created a loop that started at 20? Increase by 20 each time which is what these coordinates are doing and kept on doing that until we got to 780 must be less than 800 Hi Plus plus. Oh, no, not plus plus. We want to plus 20 each time We want to draw a line So the first coordinates always zero. We're going to say that our eye represents our X and Y coordinates for each line and Then the last one is the full height So let's have a look at this test code. See how it goes and there we go. That looks pretty cool to me I'm happy with doing it every 20 We could adjust that as well if we wanted if we wanted Every 40 bit more spaced out It's up to you what you do here I might make it more scalable Does it start in a corner? Yeah, okay, so maybe I'll start at zero I'm gonna start at zero. I'm gonna go until I get to We'll say that the width and height have to be the same. So I'm just gonna write width and I'm gonna do it every If we do it every 20 then it would be we want to plus width divided by 40 Some bad maths going on today. No, okay. Good maths today. That's good. Okay. So now we've got that corner there Now we want to do the same thing with each of our other corners like that Okay, so if we do this top left corner here So we've done this one you go from here to here here to here and this Goes to show how handy it is having a pen and paper when you're doing an exam because being able to draw it out and try writing it out with some test Coordinates really helps you identify what the pattern is So Let's say that that's 780 760 740 etc. All right, so let's come up with some code So let's go our first line our first line is at 780 across the x-axis And I'm talking about this line here this point 780 on the x-axis and zero on the y And then it's corresponding boy point. It goes across here It's not lighting up quite well But we'll say that it's zero on the x and about 20 on the y We have a look at our next point here. It's gone across in the x-axis. So now it's at 760 It's y is zero and Then the corresponding point here. Well, that's way too far down. That should be up here We've got 40. Oh, no, we don't Our x is zero That's what happens when you rush our x is zero and our y is 40 And then We've got This here Okay, so we want to have a look at our patterns again. So we can see that Our first y-coordinate and our second x-coordinate are both zero all the time So those two values are the same each time And here we've got something a little bit different which might be a bit tricky For our first x-coordinate, it is decreasing by 20 each time And then in our fourth y-coordinate, or sorry, our second y-coordinate, it's increasing by 20 each time Or increasing by whatever value we have it. So We need to find another way of representing that first x-coordinate here and If we have a look at what we're doing is we're starting at the very At the width and every time we're minusing 20 each time from the width. So 780 can actually be represented as width minus 20 760 can be represented as width minus 40. So if I Replace those here width minus 20 width minus 40 so now We've got these each match up So we can use this same loop here So for this line, we've got our first coordinate is the width minus Our i value our y is zero Next x is zero and there we go. That works pretty well So we've done that one there. Let's have a look at the next Hopefully I can do this one a little bit neater And the others that just did not match up in the slightest Okay, so let's do the top right corner now I want to do it with our coordinates and then I write the coordinates on so from here And then we've got 20 40 60 80 Definitely not the scale again 20 40 60 80 That's shocking, but we get the idea Okay, so again, we're going to do the same thing. So we've got this point here is 20 zero corresponding point is The full width here so I'm gonna write w And our y is 20. We have a look at our second line here. We've got 40 zero in The corresponding point here is at the full width and 40 so I'm not going to do that third line here. We can already see the pattern coming up here very similar again we've got Our first y coordinate will always be zero and our first or sorry our second x coordinate will always be the width and Then again, we've got our 20 40 60 for our other two coordinates So this first one would be the value of I and we've got zero Width and then I again We want to double-check perfect So just one more corner to go So go here to here Here to here It's a little better So let's do our points again. We've got 20 40 60 80 And here if we're starting from This is 800 down here So we'll say this is 780 760 740 720 again Okay So once again, we've got this point here Or this first line the width Also the x coordinate is the width And the y is 20 and the corresponding point here x is 780 and The y is the full height We have a look at our next one here. We've got x is the width and y is 40 in the corresponding point we've got the x is 760 and The y is the full height So I'm just going to stop it to again this time. So let's look at what's similar so Our first x and our second y are width and height respectively So they are always the same And then we've got a similar situation to that second line Where we can represent this coordinate here 780 is the same as The width minus 20 and 760 Is the same as the width minus 40 So now we've got our Same values here. Cool. All right. So Fingers crossed down next line works. So we've got width And that value here is represented by our i We've got width minus i We've got height And if we have a look here perfect Looks pretty cool It's a bit brighter maybe because I did stroke weight is to try stroke weight one Yeah, that's a bit better Awesome So if you adjust these values here Those lines will either get closer together or further away and because we wrote them in terms of width and height We've made it scalable as well. So Can make a tiny one Maybe not that big There we go. That's cool Yeah, so The question does look quite tricky, but once you see the pattern Drawing it out in a piece of paper really helps once you see the pattern It's actually really easy to shave and also it looks pretty cool. So Good question to show off with


The chairman and chief executive officer of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, Buber Marwa, has explained how the agency busted a 258.74 kilograms of a crystal methamphetamine laboratory in VGC Leckie and Nisei community in the Nambra state. The MDLEA said this in a press conference where he stated how the agency deployed all available assets to locate the primary sources of the manufacturers of the dangerous drugs, which according to him has yielded positive results after seven months of painstaking investigation. Marwa said the investigation recorded a breakthrough when the officers and men of the agency successfully burst into two methamphetamine manufacturing facilities called MEF laboratories both in Lagos and Nambra state. MEF production constitutes the public health and also to let you know the moments of her and I of the parents involved in this unforeseen activity that since we launched the offensive action against the cartel behind the methamphetamine scourge we have arrested four kingpins on the book now they have added two parents and another book. This no doubt is a loud statement to those involved in the criminal industry drug trade that it is time for them to quit or risk losing it all that is losing their freedom, investment and assets acquired through proceeds of these illegal activities.


Now more than ever, we want you to feel safe at Mimichigan Health for your care. As an orthopedic surgeon, I want to remind you not to delay orthopedic care. Postponing care of injuries of the muscles, bones, and joints could lead to increased pain, further injury, as well as in some cases permanent damage. I want to reassure you that we are taking all the necessary precautions to keep you safe. Mimichigan Health is your go-to place for all of your orthopedic care needs.


Leslie, do you want to tell me what your concerns are that have brought you into the clinic today? He's had a couple of ear infections lately so we just want to make sure that the problems have resolved. Okay. You say he's had a couple of infections. How many infections would you say he's had in the last year? He's had two over the last year that were quite bad. When taking a history for a child client, the majority of the questions are aimed at the parent or the caregiver. The audiologist will ask about the parent's view of the child's hearing, pregnancy and birth history, speech and language development, developmental milestones and ear health history. So Angus, this is the first time you're coming for a hearing test. This is all new. We'll have to teach you what to do. Some questions or comments will be directed at the child directly, partly to establish rapport, but also to gauge the child's hearing abilities in an informal way before beginning to test. Would I be correct in saying that the ear infections were just treated with antibiotics? Yes.  Temporometry is very important in young children as they are so prone to middle ear disorders, such as the tightest media with a fusion or glue ear. We're going to do now as a quick test just to see if we can pick up any fluid in the middle ear, just to make sure that that infection has cleared and that we have reliable results from today. All right, I'm going to pop this on your shoulder. I'm going to put a wee tube on the end of this and pop it in your ear. We're going to see if your ear can draw us a picture. What we're hoping for, Angus, is that we can get a nice mountain picture from your ear. All right, so you've got to sit nice and still and we'll see what picture we get drawn. Let's give a blue one a try. It's a nice and soft wee tip. Let's pop that on your shoulder. There we go, nice and comfy. All right, you watch the screen from here. I'm going to pop this wee tube in your ear. There we go, we've got a wee mountain that your ear drew. All right, let's quickly see what's happening on the other ear. Here we're going to do the other ear. Let's see what this one tells us. Let's have a look. Ready, let's watch there. Nice and still like a statue. Look at that, another beautiful mountain. That tells us that ear's working nicely, your ear drum's moving. You don't have any infection, it's gotten better. Now we can go and test your ears. We're going to play a listening game, Angus. Right, Angus, let's have a wee look in your ear and see if I can see any dinosaurs in there. As for adult clients, Autoscopy can reveal important information about possible pathologies in pediatric clients. Oh, that looks all good to go. We can play our listening game. Preschool-aged children are tested using play audiometry. It's similar in principle to standard diagnostic audiometry, but instead of a button push, it uses a more engaging response mode, such as placing pegs in a pegboard. We're going to take a block, and we're going to hold it up to our ear and listen, and when we hear a sound, we're going to put the peg in. All right, listening nicely, let's try one together. Wow, that was quick. With younger children, the audiologist demonstrates what is required of them by presenting sounds free-field via speakers or headphones resting on the table, before trying to place transducers over or in the child's ears. Great job. I'm going to see if I can catch you out now with the soft sound, so you've got to listen really carefully. Job, you've got the hang of this. Right, let's put in the special listening earphones. So I'm going to pop this one in your ear. Right, remember to listen for the sound. As soon as you hear it, you're going to put it in. Let's listen. Let's listen first. Good job. Wow, that was a pretty soft one. It's going to get even softer now, so I want you to listen carefully. Great job. Another orange one. Right, listen carefully. You're listening, Angus. It's going to be a soft one. I'm going to try and catch you out. Oh, there wasn't a sound here. You've got to listen carefully. Let's hold it up and listen together, see if we can hear the soft one listening. Good job. So this graph is called an audiogram. Across here we've got pitch. And down this side we've got different loudness levels, so going from very, very soft sounds to very loud sounds. At the completion of testing, the audiologist will explain the results to the parents or caregiver and make recommendations, depending on the findings.