Okay, welcome everybody, please sit down. I hope everybody's ready to drink from fire hose. Give it up for Sage. Hopefully not a fire hose. All right. Hi everyone, I'm Sage. I'm going to talk about what's coming up in Ceph Nautilus which is the next release due out at the end of February. All goes well. All right.  We do upstream Ceph releases every nine months these days. So we're just about to the Nautilus release here in February. The next release after this is going to be called Octopus and will be due out November. We're doing a strategy now where you can upgrade every release or every other release. So you'll be able to go luminous to Nautilus or mimic to Octopus but not luminous all the way Octopus. So it gives you an 18 month jump if you do sort of the maximum. Those are the upgrades that we'll be testing and supporting. Okay. So at a high level, yes. There's no mic for the room. Sorry. No PA. Sorry. It's for the video. Yes. All right. So we have four priorities that we were focusing on as far as upstream is concerned. One is usability and management. Ceph has developed a reputation over the years of being hard to understand and hard to use. So a lot of effort has been going in over the past two years to address that to make stuff simpler and easier to manage. A lot of the things I talk about will be around usability. Performance is important. Everybody's moving to all flash. We have to go faster. The new flash NBME cards are ridiculous. So there's a lot of work in performance optimization. There's a whole project called Crimson, or that's essentially rewriting the OSD to go much faster. Work around container ecosystem, so mainly supporting Kubernetes and CSI and so on. Then a lot of features around multi-cluster capabilities for multi-cloud and hybrid cloud. So those are the four main themes that we focus on. All right. So talk a bit about the ease of use thing. So the biggest thing that's happening for Ceph ease of use is the dashboard. So there was an early prototype of the dashboard in Luminous. That was a proof of concept in Mimic. We brought in the open attic project, and that's much better. Then we continue to expanding that with Nautilus. So lots of new features there. So we finally for the first time have community convergence across multiple vendors and lots of users on a single management dashboard for Ceph, and it's actually built into Ceph. So it's part of the Ceph manager dashboard. It's there when you install Ceph. By default, you just have to turn it on and set up an SSL key and so on. And then currently, most of the stuff in the dashboard is around monitoring and management of your RGWs and your buckets and your RBDs and so on, managing Ceph itself. And we're sort of growing into adding more features around managing the cluster. So you'll be able to add nodes and replace those keys and so on, but still work in progress, but lots of progress. Lens is going to be talking about this later today, so we'll get a great demo of that. One of the new exciting pieces in Nautilus and that's just being added is the orchestrator abstraction that I like to call the orchestrator sandwich. And it's essentially an abstract API in the manager that lets Ceph call out to whatever tools being used to deploy Ceph. So there are four plugins that are being worked on currently. One is Rook, which is the operator for Kubernetes that deploys and manages Ceph. There's Ansible, Deepsea, which is the salt-based one that Suza works on. And there's an SSH1 that's going to be sort of a bare-bones-trivial thing. The idea here is that Ceph can call out to the orchestrator and ask it to go provision an OSD on a device, and then the orchestrator will do whatever it needs to do to run the right commands on the right host to do that work. And this is the piece that's going to allow us to have a generic CLI interface or dashboard interface to do these sort of lifecycle management functions. So things like fetching node inventory, creating or destroying demons, blinking device LEDs, which has been a sort of a frequently requested feature. And there'll be sort of a single CLI that will be the same for Ceph, regardless of what tool you use to deploy it. So that's the goal. And eventually, the dashboard will be able to do all this stuff too. So Nautilus includes the framework. And we have sort of in-progress implementations of these four, exactly how far and what features each of those implementations are going to have. And Nautilus remains to be seen. It depends on how much gets done over the next month. But this is all new functionality. So a lot of it's going to get back ported also to Nautilus as well. So we're very excited about finally doing the last mile so to be able to manage the full Ceph cluster from the dashboard and CLI. One of the big new RADOS features in Nautilus is PG autoscaling. So picking a PG num for a RADOS pool has always been sort of a black art. It's sort of the hardest thing to explain to users and have them understand and pick a number that isn't just wrong and going to be problematic. It was always confusing that documentation was hard. So in Nautilus, there are sort of two key things. Previously, if you picked a PG num, you could always increase it so you could increase the level of sharding within a pool, but you couldn't decrease it. So in Nautilus, you can now decrease it and it'll actually merge PG's into fewer. And so if you make a pick a number that's too big, you can fix your mistake. So that's the big key capability. And then on top of that, we have a module in the manager that will auto tune the PG num for you. And so it basically looks at all the RADOS pools in your cluster, looks at how much data they're storing, and how many total PG's you have. And it figures out that, oh, this one should have fewer and this one should have more. And it can either issue a health warning telling you that, that your PG's are too big or too small. So you can do it, or you can just flip the switch and it'll automatically do it for you in the background. And there's a, you might not be able to read this, but there's an example of the command that will just tell you the status. So it'll tell you what pools you have, how much data they have. They might be empty because you just created the cluster, but as an administrator you can tell the plugin how much data you expect to store there. So it can pick an appropriate PG num. Or you can tell it the fraction of the cluster that you expected to be, like this pool will be 20%. And that will feed into the same algorithm. And then it compares how many PG's you currently have versus how many it thinks you should have. And if it's off by more than a factor of three, then it'll basically either do the action or tell you to make the change. And it can either warn, do a health warning, or it can just do it for you. So hopefully this is gonna be able to let most users just not think about this. In sort of the worst case scenario where you deploy every PG with one PG to begin with, and then the pool fills up over time to be a petabyte, it turns out that if you sort of asymptotically look at the total amount of data movement, you basically end up writing everything twice. You'll end up writing the data once, and then it'll move one more time before it ends up in its file location. So sort of the worst case scenario isn't too bad. But if you tell the cluster what's gonna happen, then it'll do better, obviously. All right, device health metrics are sort of another key thing that we've taught stuff about. So the OSDs and monitors now look at what the underlying physical storage devices that they're consuming. Underneath all the layers of LVM and DM and whatever else, they look at the device model and serial number. And they report all that back up to the manager, and the manager maintains this. So they have a set of CIF device commands that will list your physical devices and what demons are using them. And then there is a set of capabilities in the OSD and monitor to scrape all your smart health metrics and store them in rados. And there's a module in the manager that can operate in two modes. One of them has a pre-trained model that will try to predict the device life expectancy based on the smart metrics. And that's the local mode. And you can see that reflected here. And then there's also a cloud mode that is contributed by a company called ProfitStore that will call out to their SAF service and either use their free prediction service that's pretty accurate or their paid service which is super accurate to figure out what the life expectancy is. And then based on an information, CIF can either just issue health warnings saying that this device is gonna fail soon or you have a lot of devices that are gonna fail all at the same time and that's gonna be a problem. Or you can flip the switch and it will automatically mark those devices out so that your cluster will automatically replicate to new replicas before the device fails so you don't have that loss of redundancy. So we're pretty excited about this. Even just having this visibility into what devices are attached to what demons is nice. And this will be tied into the, once we have the orchestrators knowing how to blink LEDs, which I think just deep sea is gonna be the first one to do it. But the others will follow, then you'll be able to tell it to blink this device's LED or you'll be able to tell it to blink this OSD's devices, one or more of them to give you that sort of full closing loop experience. And then one of the last sort of nice bits and pieces that we added to the manager is what we're calling crash reports. So previously if SF demon crashed you would get a splat and a log file on some host somewhere and then system D would restart it and you probably wouldn't even notice. Now whenever a demon crashes it writes a small record to Varlub crash with the process ID of the time stamp and a stack trace and then those are regularly scraped and reported to the manager. So the manager has a database of all the crashes that have happened recently in your cluster. And so you can do SF crash LS, Delissa's crashes and you can get info about them. And then additionally there is a, this is actually new in Mimic. There's a telemetry module that's in SF manager that is opt in. Obviously you have to turn it on but it will regularly phone home just very basic information about your cluster to SF developers saying this cluster exists, it has this many OSD's, it's running this version, it's this big, these are the services I'm using so that we have a sense of what people are deploying. So in Mimic that telemetry module also has the ability to phone home these crash reports. So if you opt in which I encourage everyone to do but you obviously don't have to do then we'll find out what crashes are actually being seen by real users in the wild on what versions and what those stack traces are so we can tell what's broken, what's broken the most and how we should prioritize our work and so on. So we're really looking forward to this actually getting deployed and being used in the wild. So those are sort of some of the things we're doing around management and usability. Other things that are happening in Rados that are a little bit more under the covers that are exciting. So Messenger 2 is a new specification and implementation of the on-wire protocol for Ceph. There was a talk yesterday that Ricardo did talking about this in a bit more detail. If you caught that there's also a recording. The main sort of user-visible feature that this is gonna deliver is for the first time we'll finally have encryption on the wire. So all the traffic that Ceph is doing between demons and between clients can be encrypted if you turn that on.  There's improved feature negotiation. The encapsulation of authentication protocols is cleaner and better. Sort of paving the way for us to add Kerberos support hopefully by Octopus. And there's also all the infrastructure to do a dual stack so that all your Ceph demons can be using both IPV4 and V6 and both clients will be able to connect. Today you can do either V4 or V6 only one or the other. This will let you do both, which some people will probably like. We're also moving to our official IANA assigned port number for the monitors 3,300, which has been sort of a long time coming. So messenger two is this is actually the last thing that we're trying to finish up for the Nautilus release before we get out the door. So hopefully we'll get that sorted soon. A few other things, odds and ends on the Rado side. In the past it was hard to predict how much memory an OSD demon would consume and to control that by adjusting cache sizes. There's a new setting now called OSD memory target. That's just one setting, one number. You say, I want my OSD to use three gigabytes. And then the OSD will figure out all the stuff it has to do internally to fit within that memory envelope. Whether it's adjusting the size of the blue store cache or whatever else in it. Internally it's monitoring the RSS size and doing sort of a dynamic controller to make sure that happens. So that simplifies configuration management considerably. There's also a set of commands around NUMA. So the OSDs are looking at what NUMA node their network interface controller is attached to. And they also, if it's an SSD or NVMe, they'll look at what NUMA node their SSD is attached to and it reports that to the monitor. And there's a new command, Ceph OSD NUMA status that tells you the OSD and what NUMA node they're on. And then there's a single setting you can set that will pin an OSD to a particular NUMA node. And you can see that also in that output. So this simplifies the process of, for these high performance nodes of pinning OSDs to certain nodes. Hopefully if you have a balanced machine, the network and the flash are on the same NUMA node you can just pin the OSD there and you'll get better performance. Previously this was a super tedious process.  But much simpler now. In Mimic we added centralized configuration management. So instead of having a Ceph comp file that was spread across the Zillion nodes it's all stored in the monitor. That's obviously still a Nautilus and we've improved it particularly around the manager modules. So you don't have to, you can set settings for manager modules and you'll have to restart the daemon. And there's better reporting for help, help for the descriptions for the options and what the legal values are and so on. So a lot of that just got cleaned up but works much better in Nautilus. There's also a new command that will spit out sort of a minimal Ceph.conf that you can put on a new node that has just enough information to contact the monitors and then everything else you can stuff in the monitor configuration database. So lots of stuff that just uses the configuration. There's also a new manager module called the progress module that attempts to essentially establish some state around long running events. So for example, if an OSD fails and there's a recovery operation that has to happen, it'll establish a progress event for that recovery and it'll actually tell you you're 50% recovered or 70% with the new TA and so on. So there's a new command, Ceph progress that you can see those events. Eventually we're gonna actually incorporate that into Ceph-S that didn't quite happen for Nautilus but hopefully by the next release. And this is a little thing but it's annoyed a lot of people when you have misplaced data that the cluster is simply rebalancing and moving somewhere else but the data isn't re-degraded. That's no longer a health warning. It shouldn't make your pager go off. You can go. You can enjoy your weekend. So it's a little thing. There's a setting you can adjust this but by default you won't get health worn when we're just moving data around which I'm sure some of you will appreciate. On the blue store side. So blue store was introduced in Luminus. It's the new default. It's been, it's good. People are happy. In Nautilus there are a few new things. There's a new implementation of the allocator that's used internally. So it's a bitmap and memory instead of a red-black tree essentially. So it's faster. It has predictable memory usage that's independent of fragmentation levels and there are certain behaviors of the old allocator that could lead to a sort of pathological fragmentation that this one doesn't have. So it's just better. So that's there. You won't notice for the most part. And it's just the in-memory allocator so you just restart the OSD and you'll get the new allocator behavior. So nothing on disk. There's also more intelligent cache management. It turns out that one of the hardest bits in or one of the harder bits in blue store was managing the size of the ROXDB cache for metadata versus the cache that blue store implements for all the data and onodes. Because you wanna, there's certain things in ROXDB that are really important to cache like the indexes and all the SST files. And so blue store is now smart enough to make sure that that higher priority stuff is being cached depending on how much memory you have and how big your store is and all the other stuff. So it's doing internally monitoring all that and making sure that it's doing the right thing. So that's much, much better and generally just get better performance. We also modified the on-disk format. So new OSDs will get this and you can do an FS check repair to convert old ones. But it basically, we are tracking more fine grained utilization metrics on a per pool basis. So for example, if a particular pool has compression enabled, we're tracking the amount of user data stored versus the compressed size afterwards. And also the amount of data stored for metadata internally to blue store or the OMAP metadata or the file data. Just much more granular understanding of where your disk usage is going. And that all bubbles up into CFDF and the detail view so you can actually see what's going on. And lots of performance improvements, just optimizations here and there. A few other rados things. In Luminous, we introduced the device class concept. So you could tag OSDs as either HDD or an SSD or any other type actually. And you could easily write crush rules that would only target one class or another. But prior to that, you sort of had to manually craft a crush map to do this and you ended up with this manually maintained hierarchy like shadow hierarchy with different nodes. It was sort of tedious, but lots of cluster did this prior to Luminous. And so there's now a feature in the crush tool to basically take that old style manually managed hierarchy and convert it to the new style without reshuffling all your data. So certain large installations will appreciate that. There's also a limit on the PG length. There was sort of a few corner cases where the memory utilization of the OSD could grow in strange recovery situations. That's fixed. So there's no hard limit, hard cap on the amount of memory that we use for recovery metadata. And one of the nice examples, sort of academic research translating into the open source project. There's a new erasure code style called clay code, coupled layered something. I can't remember exactly. That's basically a more optimal balance of IO and recovery bandwidth. So if you have like an eight plus three code, but you only lose one replica, then you have to read less metadata in order to do the recovery than if you had lost three of the additional parity or three of the nodes or whatever. So that's new. And it's in there. It's marked experimental because it's a new erasure code.  It should be pretty good. On the Rados gateway side. So this is the S3 gateway. We have a few new things, mostly around the Federation stuff. The first one and I think the most exciting is a new pub sub Federation capability. So you can create a zone that's essentially generating events when you have things like putting into a bucket or creating a bucket or deleting a bucket. It'll generate an event stream that you can subscribe to. So there's a polling interface where you can just ask it for events. I think this is the interface that we was used for a demo with Knative, which is a Kubernetes function as a service serverless thing. That was, there was a talk about this at KubeCon in Seattle a couple months back. And then we're also working on sort of push model where we push the event stream into AMQ or into Kafka, which some of our enterprise customers want. So this is exciting. You can sort of glue Rados gateway to serverless. So when you do a put of an object, it'll trigger a function as a service event that'll go do something to that image. It's pretty neat. There's also an archive zone addition. So you can define a zone within your RGW Federation that just gets basically a complete copy of everything in the other zones. And it turns on object versioning. So you'll have all versions of all objects. It's a relatively simple thing, but something that some people ask for just for compliance or backup or whatever else. There is an S3 API that implements life cycle policy, I believe is the correct name for it. Essentially saying that when you put an object, it initially is put in one tier and one set of Rados pools or whatever, over time it'll get migrated automatically to another tier and then at some other point in time it might get expired. There's a whole specification around what policies you can find based on S3. So we're implementing that now and it can control the tiering within a particular stuff cluster among Rados pools. So you've always been able to specify different tiers for RGW buckets or individual objects. Maybe a Risher coded Rados pool or replicated or whatever and this lets you automate that life cycle management across those tiers. And then on the performance side, a long time ago we used usually Apache and FastCGI to talk to RGW, then we used Sivit Web which is sort of an embedded simple web server. That's what we currently use by default now. In Nautilus we've switched to a new web front end called Beast which is part of the Boost project. It uses a Boost Azure, a more synchronous programming model. It scales better, it's faster. So that's new in Nautilus. And then there's also some new features around STS which is sort of the security authentication framework integration. I'll be honest, it's all a blur to me because there's so many standards and I can never keep track of which ones they've implemented but there's something new in STS in Nautilus that you can go ask the RGW folks about and they'll be happy to tell you. All right, on RBD, block device. The first big thing on RBD is live image migration. So you've always been able to have different rados pools with different performance characteristics or placement or whatever and have images mapped to those pools. With live migration you can have an in use RBD image that's mapped by a current, in use by a VM, actively reading and writing data and you can move it between performance tiers, between rados pools while it's being used and everything just works. So that's new, that's good. Excuse me. Another new feature that we're pretty excited about is RBD Top. This has sort of been an oft asked for feature. So there's a bunch of rados infrastructure now where the manager demon will essentially tell all the OSDs to start sampling their request streams. You know, either all of them or restricted by a pool or by object prefix and report that information back to the manager. So we have sort of a cluster wide view of what IO is happening.  Excuse me. I'll be honest, I haven't actually used this feature yet so I don't know exactly what it looks like. But I keep asking about it and they keep telling me it's there so I'm really excited. Mostly I'm excited actually about the rados infrastructure so we have a cluster wide view not just for RBD of everything. So you can tell what the top clients are and who's using up all your bandwidth. A few other things on RBD. RBD mirror is the demon that does the asynchronous replication feature across clusters. For RBD, it's been there since luminous but it's always been kind of tedious to set up and configure. Excuse me. So a lot of work in just simplifying RGW management so that you can have any of them and they'll scale out. And also the configuration for connecting to remote clusters is now stored in rados so it's just simpler to use. Name space support is new. So rados has long supported name spaces. This idea that within a pool you can sort of carve it up into different security domains and you can restrict clients access to a particular sub namespace of that pool and then have that security enforced. RBD now supports that so you can have RBD users that are locked into a namespace. They only see their images and they can only and they're sort of walked in that way with Cephex. So that's all supported through the RBD CLI complete user experience that's been asked for for a while. Some things with the config overrides in RBD. So you've always been able to specify overrides on the configuration for the client on a per image basis. So for example, whether the caching is enabled for this particular RBD image without having to go configured on the client. You can now do that on RBD pools and the overall experience is simpler. It's the same CLI interface to control it all. Just cleaning it all up to make it simpler. And apparently now we're maintaining time stamps on images so when you do an RBD LS detail you can see information about what images are being used by when and when. All right, Cephex. So Cephex is awesome. The first big thing that happened is that the multiFS volume support is gonna be stable now and not less, it's actually been there since luminous but it was marked as experimental just because we didn't have a lot of testing around it. But Patrick's been cleaning up a lot of the code here and documentation and edge cases or whatever. And so it's gonna be pretty sure it's gonna be stable and not less. This means that you can create multiple Cephex file systems within the same Cephe cluster and each of those file system will have an independent set of MDS servers. So they're totally independent but sharing the same radius. We also have now a first class concept of sub volumes. So previously with Manila, we wrote this library called Ceph volume client, confusingly named, that basically just creates subdirectories within CephFS and sets a quota on them. It sets up Cephex capability so you can only access that sub directory and then it passed those to Manila as a share. So it's sort of a lightweight volume concept with quota. That sort of concept has been brought directly into the manager now. So you have a full CLI management experience for creating volumes, which are complete CephFS file systems and these sub volumes which are just lightweight directories within that file system. And the goal now is that everything is going to be consuming the same abstraction. So Manila will use it now. Kubernetes, RWX volumes with the new Cephseoside driver are going to use the same sub volume concept and you'll be able to, it'll be the same one that you access via the CLI and view on the dashboard. So we're happy about just sort of simplifying and unifying the experience across the board. On top of that, one of the big new things for Cephseoside is managed NFS gateways. So this is clustered NFS-Kanesha. You've been able to run NFS-Kanesha on top of Cephseoside forever and lots of people do it. What's really new is that Jeff Layton spent a ton of time making the scale out aspect of that and the NFS grace periods, making those work correctly so that if you had a single MDS fail, the grace period would be enforced across all NFS servers in a coherent way so all the delegations in lock state could be reclaimed. All the corner cases around the recovery that people can easily ignore or not even realize are problems are all sort of managed correctly. And so the NFS-Kanesha demons are now storing their configuration in RATOS. They have an object in RATOS that manages the grace. They're sort of doing this in a coherent way. And now those Ganesha demons are also managed by Rook at least when you're using Kubernetes. So Cephse manager using that new orchestrator API will call out to Rook to create the NFS demons or however many you want to do. And then they'll all be working together to do the grace period. So it's sort of a complete coherent experience and without a lot of tedious manual configuration needed. So we're excited about that. I'm a couple of other things on Cephse. There is an outreach intern project that created a Cephse shell. This is just a sort of a wrapper around Libcephse, a CLI that you can run and do like Maked or LS, things like that. And you can write scripting around. This is really mostly convenient for scripting around Cephse. So for example, if you wanted to set a quota on a directory, previously you would have to go mount Cephse and do a set adder and then unmount it. Now you can just do a CLI command to the shell to sort of do it all for you in a quick lightweight sort of way. And then there's just been a lot of work around bug fixes and performance fixes. Most of this is around situations where you have nodes with lots and lots of memory and really big Ceph metadata servers that with huge caches. There were a lot of sort of robustness and stability issues that we fixed with those types of environments. Or not less. Okay, container ecosystem. So lots of stuff with containers, especially around Kubernetes. When we, in the Ceph project, when we think about Kubernetes, it's really in two sorts of ways. The first way is that we want to provide storage to Kubernetes. We want to be the storage underneath all your containers because any scale out infrastructure is going to need scale out storage to go with it. And then the other is running Ceph clusters inside of Kubernetes, which might seem weird, but actually has some advantages because it simplifies and hides the OS dependencies. You have finer controller or upgrades, and you can automate and schedule a lot of the annoying tedious parts of managing a Ceph cluster with Kubernetes that you couldn't do before. So we have OSDs and monitors that have state. They tend to be tied to storage devices, but then you have all these other demons, the managers, the MDS servers, the rate of skateways, and so on, that can run kind of anywhere. And not having to think about it and just letting the container platform decide where to run them based on how much memory and network and CPU and so on is available, simplifies things. And so in this view, you're really thinking of Kubernetes as sort of a distributed operating system. Instead of thinking about individual nodes and managing them, you just say, I have a whole cluster, go run this stuff, and it'll figure out where to put them. So that's sort of where we think of things. Rook is a newish project in Kubernetes. It's a storage orchestrator, and that's sort of our, as a community, we're essentially all in on Rook as being the preferred or primary focus of how we run Ceph and Kubernetes. You can sort of do it manually with home charts and so on, but Rook automates a lot of the process, and it's great. And so we're focusing all our efforts on just making Rook work really well to run Ceph. And it does intelligent management of the Ceph demons. So it'll make sure that if you're adding monitors or removing monitors, it doesn't break quorum, it knows how to place them, it knows how to map OSDs to devices, it knows and understands Ceph well enough to sort of do all the right things when you're automatically managing it. I mean, it also gives you a Kubernetes style of specifying what your cluster is and how it should be deployed. So there's a CRD where you just tell Kubernetes, you should have a Ceph cluster that looks like this, and the Rook operator will go and do it, and you interact with it in sort of the Kubernetes way using KubeCuttle and YAML or all that stuff. And there's a talk later about Rook, yes. So make sure you don't miss that. But yeah, we're very excited about Rook, that's great. But not everyone wants Kubernetes, not everyone wants Rook necessarily. And so we're also thinking about sort of the old school style of deploying things. So with the new container orchestrator, we have all these plugins, right? We have the Rook one, the Deep-C, Salt one, Ansible, and there's also an SSH implementation that's just sort of like a minimal bare-bones implementation. The idea there is that you just give the Ceph manager essentially a root SSH key that knows how to talk to your nodes, and it can do all the basics. And that'll sort of capture the rest of us and drag us into the world where Ceph can manage itself. Similarly, Ceph Ansible recently learned how to run all the Ceph demons in containers instead of just running them the normal way with SystemD. And it turns out all it really does is create a SystemD unit file for each demon that does a Docker run and runs a container, right? So there's no real magic there, but you have the advantage that your demon is in a container, it can be upgraded independently and so on. And so the plan is to teach the SSH orchestrator how to do that too. And so that the sort of the default bare-bones implementation of the orchestrator API that Ceph will include, will be able to run Ceph in containers. And the advantages here are installation is easier, right, all this logic around, how do we install on Debian versus CentOS? What Apple repos do we need? All this stuff that was just super gross and annoying before is simplified because all you have to do is say, use this container repo and use this particular container version. And you can now upgrade demons independently one at a time. It's actually pretty nice. So I was pretty skeptical about containers a couple of years ago, like what's the value of containers to something that's low level like Ceph? But it really does simplify some of these operations once you sort of do it right and you figure out how to not lose your logs and so on. So anyway, that's coming. Just a couple of things on the community side. There's a new Ceph Foundation that we launched back in November through the Linux Foundation. We're very excited about it. Essentially it's a way to get all these corporate participants to pool money together that we can spend on the community. So don't tell anyone, but it's really just a way to get money to spend. But we have 31 founding member organizations, which is pretty exciting. Three more members have joined since launch. We have a couple other conversations going too. So we're excited about that. We also had our first Cephalocon conference in Beijing in last March, which was awesome. It was two days, four tracks over two days, like a thousand people showed up. It was bigger than I thought. It was really fun. So that happened and we're doing a new Cephalocon in Barcelona in a couple of months. So marker calendars, this is going to be the two days right before KubeCon. It's in Barcelona, which is great. The CFP just closed, so you missed the boat on submitting a talk if you haven't already. But early bird registration is open.  And there's also a reduced hobbyist rate too. So if you don't have an employer and you're just self-funding or whatever, you can apply for the reduced rate to attend. That's it. I'm happy to take any questions about Ceph Nautilus or anything else. Thanks. How far is the reuse cycle of post-movement began? And I was wondering if you were thinking about reconsidering it and I think what we want to mean is that we can move from this area. Yeah. Stretch us through and just turn the way it was reduced because we're not. Yeah, so the question is around a nine-month cycle and not being aligned with distribution cycles. Yes. The timing. Yeah, so the question is can we do three instead of two? The challenge is just that there's a lot of investment and overhead into testing and maintaining the ability to do those upgrades. It means that we have to keep around old behavior for that much longer and it gets harder to maintain and so on. And so two is sort of a compromise that we settled at. And so I'm not super excited about expending it to three, especially if two is enough to get you from point A to point B even if it's not as convenient. That said, people are always complaining about their release cycle. There's talk of expanding it to a year. There's talk of shortening it again. And so it's not that it's going to be that way forever. So if you have a specific request or whatever on that, I would e-mail the list and we'll bring it up. Thanks. Yes, the benefit is. So the question is around the NUMA configuration stuff and can I quantify how much it improves? It totally depends on your hardware. So there have been cases where we've had people doing high-performance reference architectures and they fix the NUMA stuff and they've gotten I think like 30%, 40% or more. But in other systems, it probably will make no difference. It totally depends on what the balance of the device attachments are across the two sockets on your system. It turns out there are actually very few machines that are actually balanced. Most of them just hang everything off one or they hang all the storage off one node and all the network off the other or something. That's what I have at home. So your mileage will vary. But Quanta apparently has a balanced NUMA node that has half the SSDs and network on both. It's one of the few that you can get. That we all have what? The question is how realistic is it that we'll have Rook and Kubernetes for Nautilus? So the Rook stuff is sort of a little bit decoupled from the Nautilus release. So Rook is in the 0.9 release. Lots of people use Rook today and have it in production even. We're working towards a 1.0 release. I'm holding out for the 1.0 release before I sort of pull on grab the megaphone because there are a couple of things with the way that OSU deploys that I want to clean up a bit. But that's independent of Nautilus. So 1.0 will use the Nautilus release but Nautilus supports Rook today. The only real tie-in on the step side is the orchestrator plug-in and it sort of calling back out to Rook to tell it to do stuff. And that's only if you're using the new CLI or eventually the dashboard to do it, which is sort of brand new anyway so you don't really need it. Hopefully that answers the question.


Don't turn that dial. This is the right station if you want to hear about Jonathan Thomas and his Christmas on the moon Well Christmas night will soon be here I know you children will want to hear of Jonathan Thomas and the man in the moon and the talking horse will find Santa soon Of course you remember what happened no doubt, but if you don't well It's all about the wicked sweet boblems who stole Santa Claus They're going to be punished for breaking the laws and poor old Santa is sad as can be But he's got to get home right away Don't you see to fill up his pack and start on his way to reach all good children before Christmas Day But don't you worry? I'm sure he'll be found so sit very still and don't make a sound the man in the moon and Gorgonzola the horse and Jonathan Thomas, too Of course have traveled far on a dangerous road past the dragon's cave and the home of the toad And oh my goodness that wicked old witch who rules for the land of Rumpelstich has cast her spells and Brood her magic and I'm sure the story would be quite tragic if it wasn't because of the good fairy queen Who always spoils the old witch's scheme? But once in the nightmare for us deep Jonathan Thomas fell sound to sleep Was the old witch's fault for she worked a spell and you may be sure that it would have worked well But the good fairy queen knew a wonderful charm It woke the little boy up and saved him from harm Then they saved the life of a little elf king who claimed to be king of any old thing So he gave them a key to the doors and the wall and said choose the right door to enter That's all they tried to be careful But the wall was so long that the door that they entered was the door that was wrong and Wherever they looked they saw mirrors so grand and it turned out to be it was looking glass land Then a very fine guard took them straight to the palace where they soon met the ruler whose name was Queen Alice And they soon discovered that she was their friend or she gave them a whistle that would help them no end When the little boy blew it it so changed his size He grew tall as a giant before all their eyes and now let us see what has happened since then For years where the story begins again Her goodness gracious sakes to Jiminy crickets and screw which you grow in higher and higher and higher Jonathan Thomas whatever shall you do? There's no need for alarm for you have the charm and you'll stop growing in a trice For I said to you all you need to do is to blow the whistle twice Then you'll grow small and you'll continue to fall till you can't be seen at all at all Goodness gracious What a wonderful thing to do Even bigger than my daddy Now that I know I can grow smaller who never I wish I'm not afraid anymore Yeah, yeah, how's the weather up there Jonathan Thomas. It's cold And I can see Are you step on us just as sure as sure can be and all that would be left would be just a Grisper of my plan Christmas ever be without all Santa and a Christmas tree And think how sad all the girls and boys if you didn't come around with his bag of toys We are mighty grateful to you your Majesty Queen Alice and we're mighty glad that we came to your palace Stop Jonathan Thomas now that you know how the trick is done Promise not to tell even a single one if you please I won't tell of course not And now if you don't mind and I know it's not kind But but the hands of the clock do show that you mustn't wait for it's growing late It's time that you both should go. Yes. It isn't it. We've got to hurry, too We're going to rescue Santa Claus in time for a Christmas. You've been very kind your Majesty And who can be yeah, and if there's ever a way that we can repay Just let us know and you thank you, sir It's very sweet, and I hope that again. We'll very soon meet now I'll wish you luck on your way and hope for a visit some other nice day Goodbye, Master Jonathan Thomas. Don't forget about your promise. I won't care mad. Just say good. Bye. Good. Bye A minute or two. Yes, siri Bob. Yeah. Yeah, that's what we'll do There's nothing better than I can see Than to rest in the shade of that old tree. Come on Jonathan Thomas My goodness there they go and that's just what the wicked old witch wanted them to do Oh dear oh dear once they get into the shade of that old tree, which is really the witch in disguise They'll lose their memory and forget where they're going and all about poor old Santa Claus. Oh My gracious what will happen next I can hardly wait for the next story about Jonathan Thomas to find out Oh, I won't forget to listen and you won't either will you I should say none


Dude hasn't even announced that he's running for president yet, but I am already sick and tired of Joe Biden I'm sick and tired of him Because not only is he politically Not the best bet in fact He's one of the worst bets because he's essentially a moderate Republican his support of the Iraq war his support of the 1994 crime bill his vote for the Patriot Act. These are all Disqualifying factors. He doesn't support Medicare for all He presumably does not support the Green New Deal. I don't think he'd support a federal jobs guarantee So I am sick of him because politically speaking He is the worst possible choice to go up against Donald Trump in my opinion in an anti-establishment era But with that being said we're all now talking about what was obvious to pretty much everyone with the brain Who saw through whatever cognitive dissonance was stopping them from seeing him as the creep that he is and we're talking about The way he's just overly handsy to put it lightly with women Including young women now there were two women that decided to come out and share their stories about how Joe Biden touched them in an Inappropriate way and he gave them an unwanted kiss Lucy Flores says that he kissed the top of her head And this made them feel uncomfortable. Now since I talked about their stories. I think it's only fair that I give you Joe Biden's Kind of apology video. There was no explicit apology, but he shares his side of the story and so far I've been completely disgusted with the response people close to him suspect that Bernie Sanders was involved in Basically planting this story and I just think that that's a really grotesque accusation but nonetheless this is what he had to say for himself and I'll tell you my thoughts on that and then we'll talk about what transpired after he released this video I expect to be talking about a whole lot of issues and I'll always be direct with you but today I want to talk about Just as a support and encouragement that I've made to women and some men and made them uncomfortable And I always tried to be in my career. I've always tried to make a human connection. That's my responsibility I think I shake hands. I hug people I I grab men and women by the shoulders and say you can do this and Whether they're women men young old it's the way I've always been it's the way I've tried to show I care about them And I'm listening and over the years knowing what I've been through the things that I've faced I found that scores if not hundreds of people have come up to me and reached out for solace and comfort something something anything that may help them get through the tragedy they're going through and and and so It's just just who I am and I've never thought of politics as cold and antiseptic I've always thought it about connecting with people as I said shaking hands hands on the shoulder a hug encouragement and now and now it's all about taking selfies together You know social norms that began to change they've shifted and the boundaries of protecting personal space have been reset And I get it I get it I hear what they're saying. I understand it and I'll be much more mindful. That's my responsibility My responsibility and I'll meet it, but I'll always believe governing quite frankly life for that matter It's about connecting about connecting the people that won't change But I will be more mindful and respectful of people's personal space and that's a good thing That's a good thing. I've worked my whole life to empower women I've worked my whole life to have run abuse I've written up and so the idea that I can adjust to the fact that Personal space is important more important than it's ever been is it is it's just not thinkable. I will Now almost immediately after he released this video Three more women came forward and then shortly after that two more women came forward bringing the total number of women speaking out To seven at the time I record this video because it may actually increase So this is certainly troubling. Is it disqualifying? I don't know. I don't even think it's important to Discuss that question because even if this may be an unrealistic expectation I think that we can examine or at least try to examine these allegations in a vacuum because I think that this conversation Ultimately is important. It's something that we need to talk about we need to talk about How it's vital that we respect personal boundaries We respect personal space and we acknowledge that our actions even if our intent is pure may come off in a way that makes people feel Uncomfortable so I think it's an important discussion to have and when I listen to the video. I Don't like what he says. I don't like what he says. I don't like that. He didn't issue an apology I don't like that. He essentially says that social norms are changing because for you to put your hands on someone play with their hair Give them kisses on the head. I don't think that's ever been appropriate now to be clear None of these women are alleging that he sexually assaulted them I don't think it rises to that level, but what they are saying is essentially along the same lines He kind of made them feel uncomfortable by hugging them and holding on too long He put his forehead against theirs and it was awkward and made them feel uncomfortable So I mean they're all kind of saying the same thing this behavior that he's exhibited throughout the years on camera for Everyone to see has been super creepy and it's about time that we talk about it. So the good thing is that his Accusation that Bernie Sanders was all behind this kind of fell apart After more women came forward, but it's it's a little depressing to me that this is only viewed through the lens of politics And I get it. He's gonna announce that he's running for president soon So, you know, you can't really extract the politics from the conversation but I think we should at least try because During the Me Too era we need to make sure that women feel comfortable sharing their stories And no, these are not stories that are on par with what Harvey Weinstein did I don't think I've seen anyone allege that but it is important that we all become more aware of our actions and become aware of How we can respectfully engage with people in a way that communicates love that he tries to convey to people But without doing so creepily, but unfortunately This really is kind of becoming politicized because now Donald Trump decided to weaponize this issue and pounce on it And he posted this video about Joe Biden, but basically of all people Donald Trump is the last who should be talking about this 23 women accused him of doing worse He endorsed Roy Moore a pedophile.  He bragged about sexually assaulting women on tape He says that he grabs women by the genitals. He doesn't even wait So of all people Donald Trump is the least person that I want to hear from but it's why it's very difficult to Disaggregate the politics from the conversation that we all need to be having that I think would otherwise be constructive Which is why it's unfortunate that you know, this really is Devolving into a conversation about whether or not this is a political hit against Joe Biden now this Michael Tracy tweet Kind of also alludes to that. He says if the goal is to defeat Joe Biden it should be done politically with substantive arguments about policy and logic and reason and stuff not me too medium Posts and making a big scandal out of his hugging practices just my two cents now. I'm not picking on Michael Tracy But I think that what he shared here and why I'm talking about his tweet is because it's one example of Many bad takes that I've seen to describe what Joe Biden has been doing for many years as Hugging practices is an over simplification to put it lightly But I don't think Michael Tracy is the best judge since he literally thought that an old lady pushed him and furthermore We don't need to meet to him out of the race We can beat Joe Biden on the policy substance because he's a conservative He's a Republican running in a Democratic Party primary. So him versus Bernie I think we can easily make the case and yes He may be polling ahead of Bernie right now, but I think that's gonna change when he announces because just by and large He's a really unlikeable guy But with that being said should we still be talking about Joe Biden? Absolutely, this is an important conversation That has to be taking place and I just I don't understand why so many people are Rushing to get us to all shut up about this. I don't know how this is going to affect Joe Biden's political chances Does this disqualify him? I haven't really touched on that yet. I don't know I don't really agree that this is disqualifying But at the same time I do think that it's extremely disturbing like it. It's it's really downright Disgusting and we need to be talking about this because people in power they've got to be held accountable for their actions if Joe Biden was just a Walmart employee and He didn't have any power and he walked up to a female co-worker and started playing with her hair and grabbing her face and kissing her on the head if she complained to HR at A minimum that Walmart employee would be written up possibly terminated So the fact that everyone is rushing to defend someone with power It really speaks to a broader issue in American discourse that people in power are held to a completely different standard than people with no power We shouldn't allow Joe Biden To skirt any culpability or not take responsibility or not have to take responsibility Just because he's Joe Biden just because he's a former vice president I think we need to hold him as a human being and a man to the same exact standard that we would hold anyone else to So the fact that so many supposedly left-leaning individuals mainly people in mainstream media like Anna Navarro are Rushing to defend him and shut down this really important conversation that we're having I find it incredibly Disgusting this is something we need to talk about this is something as a country we need to talk about and grapple with and Yes, this doesn't rise to the level of sexual assault But nonetheless it still is something that is related to the Me Too movement Even if you think it's only tangentially related, but I think that we're in this era where we need to talk about How women have been silenced have been told to shut up Whenever they express, you know, their discomfort with the actions of men and I think that that's not acceptable So we need to on the left Facilitate an environment where women don't feel like they're going to be attacked like Lucy Flores was attacked for speaking out we need to make sure that people can express their concerns without assuming that there's some type of political agenda that is Causing them to want to speak out we can't do what Republicans do and Not hold people on the left or in this case the center right to the same standard that we hold Republicans to and I think that a lot Of people on the left in mainstream media namely are Proving that they are not just hypocrites But political hacks because if your team does it it's okay But if the other team does it you're gonna pounce on them. That is a horrible way To win over anybody on the right or in the center It's an easy way to discredit yourself and make it seem like you don't care about the actual issues You just care about the personalities. So No, I say fuck that let's talk about this and let's grapple with this really important Conversation that we should be having related to this type of behavior not just Joe Biden But this type of behavior in general


All right, thanks, everyone, for waiting. Next up, we have Lauren on regulating AI and algorithms. Everybody, please give him a warm round of applause. Thank you, everybody. OK, this is all working now. That's excellent. So I'll quickly talk about myself before going into the talk. This is not just to tell you what I do, but to also kind of give a bit of context to what I'll be talking about. So I'm the cybersecurity fellow at the Center for Global Legal Challenges at Yale Law School. Things I do, not law. I do research to trust assurance evaluation. I deal with a lot of network analysis stuff. I did research into standard and regulation when it comes to IT security. And before I even finished high school, I worked as a system administrator and architect. So that's where I come from right now. I also do a lot of stuff with the DNS and ICANN. And at law school, I co-teach a course that helps lawyers understand technology by literally teaching them technical stuff. We pick them up at kind of a terminal interface and kind of lead them through a lot of security relevant topics. For this talk, this is why I kind of put this in here. I come from the perspective I just told you about. So I'm not an AI machine learning person in that I really work on developing algorithms or something like that. So my perspective is more that of someone who has built systems in the past and has done research into how we try to regulate security, standardize security, and mostly failing at doing so. Quick introduction. I don't think much is needed in this room. There's a lot of hype around machine learning, AI, et cetera. But something I'll just call automated decision making to get around the what is AI, what is not AI problem, is gaining importance. So there's a ton of stuff that's happening in the world where we use systems to help us. Identify, say, people walking in a certain direction, finding lumps when we do CT scans. And some of these systems are better at that than human professionals. So clearly, these systems can be extremely useful. On the other hand, we lack accountability. So a lot of stuff is run. There is very little oversight, very little insight into what's going on. It's for society, for regulators, et cetera, et cetera. It's a black box, as a lot of other things are too. But essentially, input, magic, output. No idea what happened in the middle. So we see calls for comprehensive regulation. So this has to be reined in. We need to make sure this is all dealt with appropriately. But from what I've done in the past research-wise, just regulating is not a solution and might lead to really bad outcomes. So just think about the lovely term compliance culture where you set up certain baselines, let's say, emissions, where it's like, oh, yeah, you have to go around that track and then be below that output. Well, the problem is, manufacturers will find a way to go around that track and stay under that CO2 output. For example, because the car notices, it is being tested. So yeah, that is a problem. So more generally, kind of going back to my research rate, why do we have this governance problem? So standard safety regulation in particular in the past has always been about reduced complexity, increased predictability. So this is how we dealt with deaths on the railways. We just make sure everything is very uniform. We define how interactions between people and systems work. And so you can make sure that the universe of cases you need to consider is being reduced considerably. And number one is if you think about air travel, we kind of do the same thing. We define rules on how pilots and ATC communicate with each other, how they read things back to each other, et cetera, et cetera. Now, both trains and air traffic are extremely complicated projects. So locomotive, I don't want to fix one. I don't think you want to either. However, what we were good at doing was to reduce the networked complexity of these systems. So if I control a train, I only look at a few key elements of that system. If I'm an ATC controller, same thing. If it's a Boeing 737 or an Airbus A320, if I tell them where to go, it doesn't really matter to me that much. So it is more predictable. I have reduced the issues I have. We do similar stuff when it comes to IT. We define protocols, TCP, IP, stuff like that. Try to reduce what's going on. However, if we go into IT and also AI solutions, this doesn't work as well anymore because we just take a complex thing and then plug it into a lot of other complex things to achieve very, very different goals. So that means AI uniformity goes away. And this also means our objectives change. So if I code something up for my own research to do some graph data analysis, I have very different objectives and also other risks than when I kind of do what I do in my other life, which is to build systems that actually deal with things like PII and PHI. Even though I might use the exact same building blocks to do that. So this kind of goes back to what I was saying about the complexity of the entity versus the complexity of the interaction. So we can have a very complex entity, but we can make sure that it's only used in a very specific way. And that means in IT security, our requirements and objectives become contingent. Depends on what we're doing. And as I already alluded to, this could have to do with our use. This could have to do with how we implement, with where we integrate it into a larger system, what our architecture is. So to give some examples here, talking about technical systems, this includes AI, machine learning, et cetera, is it assisted or unassisted for example? Is this something I just use in addition to a human professional? Or does this have an input into, for example, which human professional is called to help you in a hospital setting? So essentially, is there someone in the loop or not? Is this to support decisions or making quasi-final decisions? When it comes to that, we also have to consider that research already shows that if you have an expert system of some sort, we are extremely likely to take that for granted, maybe adjusting things a little bit, but we usually go with what comes out and what is displayed on our screen. So how do we try to deal with our security objectives in IT security? So predominantly we have two things, right? High level rather general, or we go extremely specific. So I have some examples here, right? So we have the ISO 2700X family, we have something like common criteria, which is here for a reason I'll talk about in the next slide. We have vendor certification, so it's very specific. What can you do, right? You can set up this firewall, you can do X, you can do Y, or we have something like the CISSP, which is like ocean wide and roughly that deep. So they tell you about everything, but about nothing in depth. And what's the problem with this? Right now when we look at security, the high level stuff is flexible. So with ISO you start with the risk analysis of your whole organization. That's really complex and really involves a lot of thinking, involves a lot of expertise, that's necessary to actually do that. And then say you have your AI or machine learning system somewhere in that structure, that's pretty tough to figure things out. We have specific approaches for certain things, formal verification comes to mind, and they can be extremely helpful, but you have the inverse problem. As we all know, it's usually the implementation that's the problem, not the standard per se, right? So it's just, oh, you have an HSM, that's great, but then you do a few things that are not exactly ideal and then, well, it doesn't actually help you that this thing really has been designed well. And what's kind of missing is the major level goals and standards. So kind of something in the middle that supports professionals, at least according to my research. So with that background, right? So as I kind of described, I feel that AI and machine learning are pretty similar to security in a lot of ways, right? So they're objectives, they're use, how they're put into an architecture or a larger system, it's always contingent, there are a lot of complexities involved, and a little change can lead to, an extreme difference in how something would be seen. So I guess the first issue is how do we define objectives? So if we go back to, let's say, an airplane, and if there are any aerospace enthusiasts, please excuse my simplification of the complex matter of air travel. But if you look at a plane, we essentially say, well, okay, it should take off, it should stay in the air, even if there's a storm, and most of all, come back down in one piece. And if possible, with everyone alive. So, you know, hard to achieve, maybe, but simple objective. When it comes to like AI and machine learning, it becomes a bit more difficult. What do we wanna get out of a system? How, what are our risks? And which are the risks that we really need to mitigate? But I think generally we see the issue that we first have to think about, okay, what do we actually wanna define as objectives? What's our starting point here? And we might end up with this similar thing where we have like the high level goals resting on top, okay? We don't want discrimination, but then obviously the question becomes, what is discrimination? What does it mean? How do I, as someone who's trying to build a system, deal with such, you know, high level concepts? We might, again, have in-depth technical requirements, right? Where we just know, okay, doing X is a really bad idea as we have demonstrated, so that's why we do Y instead. And the question is, will we also arrive at a point where we can actually support practitioners who kind of work in the middle, who kind of have to integrate this stuff into a larger system? So as you've seen, this talk was asking a lot of questions. I am an empirical person usually, so I usually communicate findings. And this one was much more about, okay, these are some questions that come up. I'm obviously not sure how to solve them. So this final slide, I'll talk a bit about what might happen, what might not happen, and what I think the issue space is here. So essentially the question is, is this network complexity, as I call it, too high in the space of AI and machine learning so that we will never arrive at a point where we can define clearly sets of requirements or objectives? And the next question really comes down to, is there a will to do it? In the aerospace industry, planes crashing and people dying is something you want to avoid for a variety of reasons. Not least the fact that you will get in a lot of trouble financially if you're unlucky and we have seen recently that the regulation system we have in that area is not particularly great with multiple hundred people having died. The 737 max still being grounded and the co-regulation regime that has long dominated this space not having worked out properly. So it doesn't mean that just because I'm saying these objectives are more simple to define that the problem goes away completely. So, and so my last point here is essentially, is this just economics, right? Do the players, and by that I don't mean people like I'm sure somebody in the room who work on this at an academic or developer level and think about how to do great things with different types of learning but more so the organizations that control it. Do they have the will and the wish to actually tie themselves down to actually make sure that people are not hurt? And the thing here is in a lot of cases when it comes to machine learning, AI, and the same as security, people do not usually die. There are, you might lose a lot of data, a lot of people might be economically hurt, et cetera, et cetera, but it's not the same as a flaming plane crash. And we also see in IT security that you can have terrible security, you are getting breached and you will walk away. It's not a problem. So with a lot of systems that go into direction of machine learning and AI, we might see similar things where if we don't think about the smaller issues per individual that have a huge societal impact, we might just not bother, right? So that means we might think a lot about the car recognizing people on the road, so you don't run anyone over because that's really bad press, but if you badly score people when they apply for a rental and they don't get an apartment, maybe because of some data pointers in their profiles that are being kind of used wrongly in your model or being used in a way that kind of puts too much weight on it for whatever reason that may happen, that might just get ignored, but still this might affect thousands, 10,000, 100,000 of people. So as I said, this is a kind of think about this talk, so I'm happy to take questions because I think I still have about five minutes left. Thank you very much. 40,000 people on Americans are killed by cars every year, like we don't take all the cars off the road, so what's kind of the difference in terms of the scale or are we gonna have to wait for AI to unfortunately kill some people before we see any action and what might that look like? So I'm not sure if everyone could hear the question, so I'll just repeat it. I would say, correct me if I'm wrong, it can be boiled down to what has to happen for a real conversation about regulation to start, is that? Yeah, okay, so you mentioned the airplanes, right? Things like the 737 MAX crashes, it's in everyone's head still, I believe, there's tons of reporting, right? They show you pictures of burning debris and the families rushing in, et cetera, et cetera. When there's a car accident that you also mentioned, that's a statistic, right? That affects a few people, so that kind of comes back to my kind of last point, right? Is this just economics? So right now, if a Tesla runs over someone, that's a news story. If we have a million, it will happen from time to time, it will become a statistic. So I think that's the key issue, essentially, that probably there have to be a few events that make people wake up about what is going on, and because of the types of system we're looking at, it is far more unlikely that we see an event like a plane crash that will be featured in the news everywhere and that will kind of garner that level of attention. So the question was essentially about, if we look at things like the YouTube algorithm that points people into somewhat questionable directions at times and also other projects that just have outcomes that seem very uncomfortable. And what I think about that, so I think that could be well described as the kind of outcome of the things I'm talking about, because we're not thinking about, what are we actually doing, right? We're developing something, it works somehow, but there is very little testing often going on in terms of what it does. So to give you a security example, is the typical, oh, we're getting a new system by a vendor, which is super fancy and super cool, but no one goes back to the drawing board and thinks about, okay, how does this actually work in context of our existing IT systems and in context of what we actually do as a company or organization and what for us at that kind of very high level actually matters. And this happens a lot, right? You don't rethink these kind of things and I think that's what is happening here, right? It's not that these things are inherently bad, it is more that they're being developed and then this link between this kind of meso level of, oh, how am I doing the system? How can I do, say, very cool predictions into, okay, what are we actually looking at and in what kind of larger system are we integrating this technology? Yeah, any more? So essentially the question was about, would open source essentially help? Yeah, as an analogy, okay. So what the analogy of open source help in a machine learning and AI? So I assume what you mean there is, what if we published the way we make decisions? What's our algorithm? That is roughly the idea? Okay, so I think that could be extremely helpful because it kind of deals with the accountability and insight problem I was kind of mentioning in my introduction. But it will only help to a certain degree if my other assumptions were to be correct because it's only one building block in the system. So I'm not saying it wouldn't help and I would be all for it. I just think that again, I use the same thing which is usually great in two different contexts with extremely different outcomes, but still I would be totally in support of doing that. And now I'm getting told no more questions. Thank you very much.


Welcome to Unit 2 of Sailor.org's Job Search Skills course, and thanks for being here. In Unit 1 of this course, you completed personality self-assessments to learn how to begin to make career decisions based on your unique styles, strengths, and abilities. Moreover, you've discovered how to research types of jobs and careers that are compatible with your interests and values. The next step in your job search journey is to use the insight you have obtained through self-assessment to focus your efforts on effective research and activities. For example, in this unit, you'll find resources that will help you explore the job search support that is available to you. In addition, you will learn how to research current information regarding today's job market and how to identify appropriate employers in your local labor market. While you've probably heard of the Department of Labor, you may not know that this government department has partnered with local agencies to provide an array of job-seeker services. These sites are called one-stop career centers and offer zero-cost services related to virtually all aspects of job search. You can access the link provided in subunit 2.2 to learn more about a one-stop career center that is near you. One of the most comprehensive resources available to job seekers is the U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook. This site provides in-depth information about occupations, including the range of pay for a particular job, the level of training and experience required to enter that field, whether or not there is on-the-job training, and the projected median pay for that type of job throughout the decade. This unit also includes learning resources that will help you create your own personal job search plan. For example, Career One-Stop offers information on how to research potential employers of interest to you, including key questions to ask these employers and where to obtain answers to your questions. This unit will assist you in formulating an organized plan of action so that you aren't embarking on this job search journey without a roadmap. While there are many online resources available to you that can guide you throughout your job search, we have selected several value-packed sites to ensure that your finite budget of time, money and energy are optimized and result in a successful endeavor. Keep up the good work and I'll see you back here at the beginning of Unit 3.


They're everywhere, and you can't avoid them. I've actually never tried hard seltzer. I've heard there's no laws when you drink it. For those looking to have a hot girl summer, yes. If you don't want a hot girl summer, then no. I don't even know if I've had seltzer before. I'm glad we're talking about another beverage that's not rose wine for the first summer in four years, though. It is clear? I'm smelling this like it's wine. I don't know why. Okay. It has alcohol? It kind of reminds me of those white airheads that came out, like in the 90s, I think. Not a fan of that aftertaste. I'm curious to know how much alcohol is in this. I feel like it was a Kiwi strawberry flavor or something. I expected more flavor. I don't know. Yeah, I like this one. It's pretty good. But not bad. I got some fruits, some bubbles, but it did hit you in the back of the taste buds back there. Maybe it's all those years of drinking Capri Sun in middle school, but it's fine. Oh God, this smells terrible. I know, this one smells like chemicals. This one smells like Flintstones vitamins, but it tastes good. I think the fizz makes up for the lack of flavor in this one. It tastes better than it smells. Yep, nope. Ooh, this one's nice and fizzy. Kind of like an overly sugary taste to it at the end. Oh God, it tastes like someone put Prosecco and vodka together. Smells terrible, tastes great. Cute little pink guy. This one's the only one that has any color. I was actually surprised that they don't have any color. There's no nasty aftertaste. No terrible raspberries happening here. This one smells like strawberry lame. I don't know if my taste buds are just getting dead end, but I can't taste this very much. I just feel like it's a nice, happy medium. And it's pink. I don't like that one. It tastes like nothing. Unfortunately, it's also the only one you definitely don't want to drink. I mean, the flavor itself isn't horrible, but it's more like the carbonation and it tastes weird for some reason. No rubbing alcohol. And yet, this is the only one that you'd actually want to photograph. All right, last one. Oh my God. Is this supposed to smell green? It smells like cucumbers. It smells like that part of Jamba juice where they have that grass. I don't mind this one. I could see it like, I could see in the right context being refreshing, maybe. I was never into health spas. So what is this? You gave me grass seltzer. I feel like I only want to drink this on like a really hot day outside. Otherwise, it just kind of, I don't know, just kind of falls flat. I think I like to number one the best. The pink one. There was like no gross aftertaste and it was like just sweet enough and they did not put rubbing alcohol in it. I like the flavor, but I can't get past the smell. So I'm going to go with one. But yeah, the second one was the easiest to drink. It tasted the least fake. And you know what? I'm just going to have some more right now because I really did enjoy it. Did I choose the PBR one? Nady Light. Oh, Smirnoff, wow. Who would have thought? I actually thought this one was, the, I haven't had this one yet, but it did have like a beer taste. So I thought maybe this would be it. So a little surprising. Can I taste it? How much should I drink? I can already smell it. It smells, also very sudsy. Is there alcohol in it? They're all spiked. Okay, okay. And is that like raspberry? Tastes like berries. I mean, it just, it kind of tastes like, it tastes like regular seltzer to me. Very seltzer-y. I guess I can kind of tell it's alcoholic. That actually tastes kind of like nothing. Like, no, there's the aspartame-y taste in the back. It's like if you put a sweet tart in a seltzer. There's not a lot of flavor to it though. Not too much fruitiness. So I don't know if I would really like to drink that all day. Kind of smells like a nice candle, which I wasn't expecting. Oh, that smells much worse. They all look the same. Ooh, this one's more fruity. Has a stronger smell, stronger taste. I'm getting more berries. Kind of tastes like beer, which is unusual. This one I can kind of see who we're saying that it's more like juice. Like, this one was very candy flavor. The second one is more, I'm like getting raspberries or blackberries. This one smells like beer. It almost has the same like tinny metal taste as like crappy beer. I like the first one better. This was like. And it's kind of refreshing. I can get behind it whatever this one is. This one is like more citrusy, more lemony. I'm getting like lemon and orange. Okay. That tastes like the strongest one. But it's kind of got a rough aftertaste, I would say. Oh my God, no, ugh. It's also not bad. It's not as flavorful as the first one. The first one I feel like definitely has more of a flavor. I'm still like, none of them feel very alcoholic to me so far. I don't like this one. I don't know what that one is. That might be my number one choice right now. This one might be the best one, but it also has a bad aftertaste. I think that's familiar. It reminds me of Zima. It's like clear and refreshing, but sweeter than the others. That's good. But when you're drinking it, it's really good. Oh my God. That's nice. This actually kind of reminds me of the Zima days. I like this. Is this just seltzer? Feel it.  I'm still not really feeling the alcohol. I don't know. Maybe I had too big of a lunch today, but. This is not hard seltzer. Is that the con here? I think number two. If I had to choose one, I would probably go with this one. I think this one is still my favorite. It's like the most balanced, the easiest to go down. The last one. I am a bit of a sweet tooth, so I think this is my second favorite, number four. The first one and the last one, they taste like ones that I would just drink just on their own. The other two, I would need to mix it with something else. Maybe the other options, if I was trying to rage on a late night. Sorry, Mom.


All right, so All right, I'm gonna talk today about the path to climate victory because You know we live in a world right now where people hear about climate every day. There's this growing movement called climate doomers people who accept that The best we're gonna do is lose pretty badly, you know We're we talk about goals like 1.5 degrees C and 2 degrees C well 2 degrees C kills every coral reef on earth and It's just not that fun to think about to be honest, so Yeah, I'm gonna talk today about how do we flip that narrative and how do we find a path to where we have a world that we want to live in so whom I am the CEO and founder of running tide running tide is a Ocean-based carbon removal company really focused on measuring and understanding ocean health and what things we can do to intervene in the ocean to protect the ocean against the worst ravages of You know the poly crisis so biodiversity and carbon removal Also a founding signatory of something called the recuVic protocol, which I'll explain what that is today But that's a foundational protocol to help the world generate Generate credits for positive action in nature so if anybody hasn't seen this these are the Planetary boundaries outlined by the Stockholm Institute and what you're looking at right now is Us losing badly So you can see as we're progressing through time we're exceeding planetary boundaries not just carbon But you know ocean acidification biogeochemical flows of phosphorus and nitrogen Biodiversity loss etc. It's just the one metric that we can use to describe like how badly we're losing this fight and There's a human cost to losing I'm from a Community a waterfront community heavily involved in commercial fishing spending my life outdoors in Maine and What you remain all right Okay, so you know really engaged in nature my whole life and you know It's a parent that we're losing and it's causing I think it's a big cause of anxiety and depression among a lot of people The fact that we're watching our environment degrade around us, and I don't think it's You know, I think it's something that isn't talked enough about and and I also think that like that anxiety needs somewhere to go and So, you know what I'm supposed to say here is we need to stop emitting carbon and Decarbonization before we do anything like carbon removal. That's like the party line. We're all supposed to say that You know, I'm supposed to say carbon removal is for the last 10% of emissions You know, it's something that we do after we fully decarbonize the economy I'm supposed to oops. I'm supposed to say net zero by 2050 is our goal That's too late 2050 is 26 years away Do we want to watch it just get hotter and hotter and hotter and for the next 26 years like I don't I've seen enough So I think we're getting it wrong I think we're getting the story wrong, and I think we're engaging people wrong on this And Getting it wrong is killing the ocean. It's killing rivers Getting it wrong is leading us to ruin. We're watching the Amazon rainforest dry out. We're watching coral reefs die And if we want to win we need to get this right the framing correctly and you know, well, I think that we should all Try to be less bad and have less damage on the environment and everything we do There's a little bit of a constraint on the human spirit there I love I'm looking at the recycling and how it's instead of saying like You know sort your recycling it's calling it raw materials Here at slush. I think that's brilliant because that's not about being less bad. That's about being more good It's like feeding into growth So, you know, you look around here and you see all this entrepreneur entrepreneurial spirit It's like how do we unleash this creative spirit to do more good in the world? How do we unleash this exponential mindset all these people at slush have on? positive action in the world and that's what I think what we need to do is start thinking about the victory condition Defining a victory condition. What's the vision for a future? Not plus two degrees C. That's not awesome. That's terrible what How about we define the victory condition is pulling everything back in Inside the planetary boundaries. How about we imagine a world for our kids where their biodiversity is increasing? Above this baseline that we have today not like hey, let's see how let's try to imagine a world where it's like pretty terrible But like we can all still survive.  So how do we get to victory? We have to incentivize the world. We want to live in So we have to pay people for positive action If you if you want to incentivize a world you want to live in like I like bees like who doesn't like bees These are really cool. They make honey. They're wonderful. Like we have to incentivize that we have to get people out there protecting bees spreading beehives around We want to if you like wildlife you need wildlife corridors you need to incentivize people to do that So we need payment for positive action And that's how we get to victory. So there's some bad things that we know what we're doing They create liabilities. So we talk a lot about carbon emissions and taxing carbon, etc There's other bad things biodiversity degradation methane release albedo reduction Mine nightmare ocean acidification kills all the fish You know reducing wildlife water quality, etc, and then you know sprawl and then Okay, so we all know about that and we're like, let's not do that. We can tax that we can make make people buy offsets, etc But then let's talk about the good work Removing carbon massive amounts of carbon gigatons hundreds of gigatons You know, there's biodiversity enhancement albedo enhancement reducing ocean acidification Rewilding, how do we pay people for that? And this is something that's been there's a you know a lot of people in the world that are working on this really hard And they're imagining all these different cool projects they can do and they're working on them But one of the problems is, you know, there's not a ton of trust in people building these these as assets or credits so a Few months ago we pulled together some of the leading companies in the space some of the leading scientists in the space and Got together and said okay, like let's set let's let's form up a protocol Let's figure out what are the things we have to do to generate good credits in the world Applicable to all of these different things and let's just all see what we can agree to let's just decide like one Get everyone in a room forget what we disagree on. What do we all agree on makes sense? It was just really cool experience and What we pulled together was called we called it the recuvik protocol and it's an environmental credit generating protocol and What it does is give a set of best practices for companies like running tide that are doing carbon removal out in the world or doing ocean acidification Or biodiversity enhancement. What are the practices you need to do? And I encourage everyone, you know, we have a website It's a really cool thing. I think that this is something that could help people do more positive action and get paid for it in the world and there's You know 13 principles that make it up everyone could agree to it from scientists to operators and Entrepreneurs and it was just like what are the set of principles a set of steps? You have to do when you go out to do good action in the world such that you can generate a credit and then sell that to somebody and Get paid for doing that good work We formed it, you know a lot of it's just formed around carbon removal because carbon removal is the project, you know You know 250 trillion dollar problem that we have to take on over the next generation But you know, it's applicable to all this good work that we could do in the world And you know, it's built on best available science. It outlines which counterparties who checks your work through the process It's just a really powerful tool people talk about proof of work and crypto and things like that You know, what's the proof of work? What's well? This is the proof of work for doing good work in the world and you know We formed this up 12 people in a room just could we agree to it? And then we just set it loose in the world at New York climate week and by the end of the week We had 50 plus signatories all the best companies in the space or not all of them But most of the best companies in the space I think and it just kind of took off and it's starting to get adopted And people are starting to look at their their work in a really structured way on how do you go do good work in the World make sure you're respecting communities make sure you're respecting regulations make sure that you're building on the best available science You can and working your way and making sure there's people there to check your work such that you can generate these credits Sell them in the market and then go do more work What this is this is the dawn of a largest mobilization and value creation event in human history $250 trillion in a generation and it's the stuff It's it's and it would it what is really exciting about all this is it's Giving us a vision of the future that's bountiful and it's a way like think about all this creative creative energy Just applied, you know all the same anxiety that we have all these people out in the world Who are running out of economic opportunities? How do we unleash them in the environment around them to do good things and get paid for it? You know That's a really exciting victory condition for me, and I think that you know so now you're like, okay Well, this all sounds good.  So I'll walk you through what we did this year at running tide we created We called it substrate, but it's basically Tums for the ocean or an antacid for the ocean that we we got some Wildfire clear out material from Canada brought it up to Iceland we coated it in 4,000 tons of alkaline materials and built up a bunch of Amazing sensors with some of the best engineers in the world to set them loose and to measure all of this and we put them out in the ocean and You know quite you know 22,000 tons of it and then measured what happened and we worked with you know dozens of Researchers we worked with Auditors we kind of went through this whole Reykjavik protocol to see what we could come up with is a giant experiment and you know working with some brilliant people up in Iceland and What we came out to is 60 and thousand tons of carbon removal and ocean acidification abatement And this is what it looked like through the year. We had this amazing cloud Amazing data-gathering system where we could put out these sensors and watch exactly what would happen We had machine-vision cameras measuring how quickly the materials were dissolving And you know what was sinking? Where was it sinking? Where was it positioned in the world? And you can imagine this scaling up so imagine this times hundreds thousands boats like think of like Dunkirk when they went and rescued when the British went to rescue their Their soldiers in World War two they just took every boat they could and just sent it out into the world And imagine we did that for ocean acidification. We just went out there and we just put tons of materials out in the world and Everyone every coastal community in the world was involved in this effort and we could abate ocean acidification We could halt it in its tracks, and that's what's possible here So this you know we generated you know single-digit millions of revenue off this is Didn't quite pay for itself, but close and But how do we get to 250 trillion dollars of this you know eight nine orders of magnitude more work We need wider adoption and participation in the recuVic protocol running tide is kind of the first to get it going But there's like a bunch of other companies now coming behind us. There's a bunch of entrepreneurial sport spirit getting unleashed on this project You know that's That's the first thing and we need more than just a few car, you know 50 carbon removal companies involved in this we need Biodiversity enhancement we need auditors we need You know buyers in the space we need corporations that are trying to offset their Offset there the negative effects they're having in the world buy into this and we need more people participating in it We need you know it can't just be you know Super tech venture-backed companies that are involved in this it means you know super tech enhanced venture-backed companies It needs to be you know people who have a truck People who live out in on a farm people who see degraded land and like an old industrial site that are able to engage with this and We need to trust in Gauls law Gauls law is a software Well, I think it comes from software But basically it's an idea that any complex system that works We're going to engage in the world with all this biodiversity and complexity You know all complex systems that work are built from simple systems that work what running tide did this year was like Big hard complex effort, but it was a simple system You know we're just just mixing alkaline materials and floating them on the surface of the water How do we get that to the level of complexity of the ocean? How do we get that to the level of complexity of the rain forest into coral reefs, etc? Well, we start with simple systems that work and Then we evolve and we learn and we continue on and the and then we also have to trust in the capacity of innovators to learn Exponentially we have all these amazing tools now. We can measure and watch in real time What's happening out in the middle of the ocean now 15 years ago? You couldn't do that You know now with like the level of compute that we can put on a tiny little buoy out in the middle of the Ocean with all these machine learning systems that we can apply to this we can learn Exponentially so we need to trust in that and just get people going the first projects are going to be simple The next projects will be a little more complex and sophisticated and honor more of nature But over we have to be able to trust people in the process and let these things go You know so my kind of Last message to everybody here is that there is a structure We called it the Reykjavik protocol and maybe this maybe the Reykjavik protocol grows You know it's an open source protocol. We'll see where it ends up But if we can get the structure right around these in these markets and these industries and then we go out and we engage with nature And we act and do things and just be bold and go do positive action out in the world And we learn from that We have a chance to win and we have a chance to leave our kids a better world than we have right now not a Significantly worse world, but like somewhat still survivable like not inspiring so I My final message is like for anyone here. Please. I can gauge with us on the Reykjavik protocol We have a we'll leave the website up here at the end and I hope that we see more participation Like I said, it's an open source protocol. We're open to people engaging You know, we're at the slush audience where there's all these brilliant people working on open source software projects I would love people to build on top of what we're working on so join us Thank you so much for your time and Yeah, we'll see you in a better world. I hope All right, okay