Breakfast. Oh good. You got an everything bagel with garlic on it. So I'm sure it'll be amazing during this entire watch-along Hey, welcome back to our Steve Bragg sub Corbin. I'm Rick. Also Instagram Twitter for more juicy content Thank you to everybody who's indeed a trend follows. Thank you. Twitter account subscribe and hit that like button And welcome back today. We're doing a little watch-along and It is of the new film that just released Amir Singh Chum Kila Which is the new in MTC Ali ah awesome with he wrote it and produced it composed by our non bar a man Mahesh cabra Chabra was the cast and director starring Diljit Diljit and Paranidhi Chopra In let me see if there's anybody else that we really know I don't think so But Diljit is one of Diljit's films and I think it's based off of the true-life pop duo Amir Singh, I remember the trail and Armaged cur who sung commercials, right between the 80s. Yeah, and it's empty as the Ali So I'm assuming those could be some like love element because that's kind of yep. He's shtick is Making good kind of love stories. Yep. Anyway, I've been hearing really good reviews about it And so a lot of people requested we do a watch along of it especially apparently the music is really really really good I would hope so since it's about musicians and no surprise. It's not AR. Yeah, Raman or as He was so affectionately referred to back in the slumdog millionaire domination at the Oscars day as AR Anyways, obviously, this is gonna be a watch along It's gonna be very cut up because of copyright reasons if you'd like to see the full uncut version now You can have a patron Check that out and let's just get into this huh. Oh, yeah I'm almost done with this by the way. I'm so sorry But then I am having popcorn What Who's waiting? Oh, it's the special thanks. Oh, come on. Looks like they're singing a bunch of boon Javi's Every film should thank Amitabh Bachchan How did I know it was gonna start with that? Wow, I really did I felt it I felt it was gonna start with that with the killing of them. Yeah. Wow I start The mom's clap yeah before you mentioned boner you get a slap now. It's in a song is okay We can apply that's actually very telling about why we're being shown them People are obsessed with the buffers I'm assuming it's friends and family that took the bucket doesn't look I think is there are people hiding in the People that killed them were the ones spying on these women That's great start to this film man Paji I Whose song is this? It's written by me. You wrote it? Yes. He's a servant in the office of life. Did anyone tell you about him? He was nice to me, he's yours. Make skin sense, give me his hairstyle. I'm guessing that's not Diljit's hair. I'm guessing he has a wig on, probably. Put him on. He's standing right there. The first time I've ever seen Diljit without a turban. Yeah, but I think it's a wig. Don't make fun of me, play with me. I have a plan. I don't want to lose anything. Tomorrow, you'll be alone. You'll be alone in the shop. You'll be a woman. Or what? Tell me. What's your name? Amar Singh. What's your name? Say something else. You don't have a good name. What's your name? What's your name? Fine. Punjab's famous star. Amar Singh. Chamkeela. Did you say my name wrong? I was waiting for you, Jatinder. Jinder. Do you know that people are suspecting us too? That we didn't get Chamkeela. How can we go there? If we don't go there, people's suspicion won't change. Show me your life. Did you go to Canada without telling me? No. I have to go to Canada too. Jindapaji has told me. Rassan card. I don't have a passport. But Jindapaji said there's no problem. We'll take you to Rassan card.  You'll become a new pair. Sonia and Chamkeela. Yes. Did you see what happened in Chandigarh? I'm standing here because of this man. I consider him as my teacher. I went to the teacher. And after Chandigarh, your teacher made you come here once. She kept you behind. I'll raise the money too. Father, I'll give you a guarantee from this side. Now get the car. He's a good man. He's a good man.   You're making me a fool of myself. Tell me. I've sinned even more. I've stopped eating. I've stopped working. You've stopped working? You've lost your job with the thieves. With the singers. You'll get a job. I'll give you that day. Keep it in your pocket, uncle. That was nice. Did you make a mistake? Tell me. But it has a taste.  I've been eating bread since my father left. What was the menu? I was eating a lot of Ghee. I don't know where you are. Oh! A little this way. Look natural. You smiled. That's great. And you came to Luzhya from Delhi. Those are the actual pictures. Yeah. Someone's singing a song. Hey, this is his song, you're going away. Chomkila. Come on, move away. If you want to take anything, then talk to me. Makhra Bhai? He called a cow over there. He said, Tiki Bazaar. This album is called Chomkila's E2. So, I'm sharing it with you. Is this true? We have brought Mr. Star's body.  Do you know how much people love Chomkila? Why would they kill him? Why are you so angry? Go and check it out. It's the police. It's the police. If Tiki didn't leave Mr. Star, he would have saved the child. Who's Tiki? Mr. Star, the old man from Dholakwala. He had a fight with Sonia. What kind of fight? Don't you think that he had a hand in this? Do you know what Mr. DSP wants to think? Don't even touch me. Don't touch me. Don't even touch me. Do you think that he has a hand in this? No, no. Because Chomkila has written a story. Chomkila, you made it. You told me what to do. And when it's time to take money, all of them go inside your stomach. Why aren't you doing anything? Mr. Star.   I'm not a part of this. No, Mr. Star. I'm not here to fight. You? You're going to fight? With me? I made it, Chomkila. I made it. And when I want, I can finish it. That's why I'm giving it to you. Keep picking it up quietly. Oh, no, no. If you don't want it, I won't be hungry. Yeah, leave. I know one thing, Tiki brother. What do people want to hear? What do they enjoy? And I can do that. Oh, no. Chomkila. Hey, Chomkila, what are you doing? Hey, Chomkila. Come here. Maybe a venue that wants him to perform? Yeah. Okay. Did they do anything wrong? What? When Kashmirilal and Sonia came back from Rajasthan, I saw all their luggage was loaded. And Asta is sitting at her place. Asta? Come in. Those girls are my problem. They wanted a girl. It's a song about the wages for the poor. How would I know? Is he a truck driver? No, sir. I'm Pendu. I'm Dhyati. Do you think sir is Chamkeela? He's just a truck driver. I'm trying to find a girl. Open your eyes every day. What should I do? I'll come with you. I told you I'll come tomorrow. Are you sure? Yes, I'm sure. Are you sure? Okay. Then what did Manak say? Let's see. If he's fine, we'll move on. Listen to me first. Isn't this Chamkeela's new artist?  No, I'm fine. Okay, I'll get the tea. Wait. I'll check the money. I'll do it. Which book is it? Chitalo. What? Chitalo. Chitalo. Chitalo. Chitalo. Is it good? Sit down. Boss, what are you doing? Why are you shouting? Tell me. Somebody shoot this guy. Who are they? Come here. Come here. I don't know your name. Come here. They'll take good care of you. Don't worry. Shall we start again? That is super cute. Did you hear my song? Yes, I did. What's your memory? That was really sweet and 100% believable. This is really well done. This is really well done.  Yeah. If I just listen to it. But I like it. Do we know this song? I don't know. I love that. Chamkeela? Yes, sir. Chamkeela. And that would be part one reaction to Amir Singh Chamkeela. He's taking so long to finish the sandwich. We're already a fourth through the movie. Yeah. It's helped digestion. If you're seeing this on YouTube, you saw a very cut up version. If you see the full and cut version, you can get it to Patreon. I'll put the link in the description below and comment so you can go check that out. I'll show you my uncut version. On to part two.


I'm Chuck Crumpton, with me today is one of our leading lights, both in litigation in First Amendment issues. And one of the most respected attorneys, and that's not necessarily a really large category these days, Jeff Portnoy, one of the senior partners in the Cades shutty firm, and Jeff, welcome. That was a damning with same praise there. Thank you. Well, there were no Mark Twain quotes, so I think we got away light. All right, I appreciate the introduction. Okay, and Jeff's agreed to talk with us about what's going on with the courts, why that's important now in the middle of near the end of election season. And Jeff, what thoughts are on your mind that are concerned right now? Well, I mean, I think we just today finished the session of the Supreme Court. There was some fairly momentous decisions ending up today with the Trump tax decisions. We just saw a few days ago the religious school cases. It's just been a very, very fascinating term for the Supreme Court. And it's been, I think, surprising to some people. I mean, we've seen the emergence or the continued emergence of John Roberts as kind of the voice of reason between the left and the right. He's still probably, you know, more conservative than otherwise, but I think he's concerned about the legacy of his court and not willing to overturn cases that have been on the books for decades, trying to kind of bridge the gap between the four so-called liberals and the four conservatives. I think we see today that the two most recent Trump appointees may not be as conservative or right wing as people thought they actually voted 7 to 2 with the majority today. And I think we saw yesterday in the religious cases that two of the so-called liberal judges may not be as left as some people claim they are because they went 7 to 2 the other way with the conservative judges. So I think it's pretty clear now that clearly way to the left are, you know, Sotomayor and Ginsburg and then way to the right are Thomas and Alito, but the surprises to me are the other four, you know, Kavanaugh, as we talked about earlier, before we went on the air, and Gorsuch may not be what Trump thought he was getting. And on the other hand, I think Breyer and Kagan are showing that they're not going to vote every time with the liberals, but we still basically have a 5-4 court. Now, you know, interestingly, Chuck, a lot of speculation as to one of the two most conservative justices may step down in the next few days to allow Trump and McConnell and his gang of Republicans to nominate a 35 or 40-year-old federalist hard right justice will be on the court for 40 years. That's what I'm looking to look for in the next week as to whether that happens. So starts with the Supreme Court and then it goes all the way down to the district courts. And in terms of talking about the other courts, one of the things that's come out recently is that McConnell has now filled all of the U.S. Circuit Court vacancies, the level below the U.S. Supreme Court, and is well on his way to loading up the district court level so that almost one-third of the U.S. Circuit Court judges are now Trump appointees. By the end of the year, maybe a quarter of all federal judges. Is that going to make a long-term difference in how our legal system evolves, how rights get seen and protected? Well, it depends how you view whose rights you're interested in, right? I mean, the answer is clearly yes, but depending on your political persuasion, I think it's pretty clear that for the next two decades, more conservative views are going to be reinforced by the court than more liberal views. We see one absolutely increasing trend and that's in the religious rights cases. I mean, the so-called separation of state and religion is hardly existing anymore. The establishment clause has been ignored increasingly. And I think that you're going to see starting at the district courts and going all the way up to the Supreme Court. So if you're someone who believes that religion trumps other civil liberties like gay rights or other kinds of discrimination, I think you're going to find yourself on the losing side more and more at the district courts. And I think that'll transcend other things. I think abortion is going to find itself in trouble. I don't think Roe versus Wade's going to get reversed. But as you see, the Texas law, the Louisiana law, those are going to start popping up in 30, 35 states. So there's no question, I think, that there's been a dramatic shift in the federal court from left of center to right of center. And I think we're going to see that for decades because a lot of these judges are in their 40s. I remember that being in my 40s. It was a very long time ago. Yeah. And, you know, speaking of judges that may not have been as politically predictable as the people who appointed them had expected. Any comments on Judge Otaki's decision here, rejecting the Trump administration challenge to Governor Ege's COVID restrictions? Well, I've been on a few shows and I think it might have been with you actually two weeks ago where I told people if they had any additional money in their pocket, they didn't need for food or lodging. They ought to put it all on that case being thrown out. I mean, that case had no chance from the beginning for the reasons we talked about and, you know, why people file them, maybe for political reasons, maybe for publicity reasons. It really had virtually no chance. And I think Judge Otaki's decision is absolutely right on. Now, things may be evolving in a way that maybe it won't be that easy for the state of Hawaii to enforce some of the things that are being discussed. I mean, yesterday I understand the city council is urging the governor to force visitors to put an app on their phone that will allow the government to know where you are every minute you're here. And I think we're getting very close to Orwellian situation. So the quarantine I knew would not be overturned, the temperature testing, the questionnaires, but you start getting to facial recognition and you start getting to apps, it's going to be a much closer situation. Okay. Another issue that's becoming increasingly hot button as we approach school openings next month, especially for parents with young school age children, is that whole issue of returning to reopening schools has become extremely heavily politicized. Trump and the administration are not only pushing hard for school reopenings no matter what, regardless of new case statistics or anything like that, but he's threatening to withhold funds from areas that don't force the kids back to school next month. Is that likely to wind up in the courts? Yes. I mean, I don't know a lot about this other than what's been in the public media about what the federal government and, you know, the secretary of education is a ludicrous individual anyway. Betsy Davos. I mean, that whole story of who she is and her background and her views on education are certainly in the minority. Let me just say that. Can the federal government, I think they fund about 10%, I read, don't hold me to that, of public school funding, most of its local property taxes, et cetera. But, you know, Trump will do anything and then let the courts decide. That's what he's done for 70 years. Read his niece's book or some reads of his niece's book.  He's, I told somebody yesterday and, you know, I'm sorry if people disagree. He's a 70 year old man in a 10 year old brain.  So the threat to take funding away. Yeah, it'll wind up in court. I think the interesting thing is Trump can say all he wants. He has no control over whether public schools open or don't. And he's going to have to deal with teachers. He may get the schools open, but I don't know who's going to teach. I mean, you know, it's going to be a very interesting situation and it's a tough call. You know, I don't have a nine or 10 year old anymore. But I've talked to people who had to deal with it since March and they're ready to send their kids back to school with appropriate safeguards, but a classroom of 30 or 35. I don't think that's going to happen, Chuck, but we're looking at the law here and not, you know, and not the science and whatever. And it's evolving every day, right? So some schools will open and some won't. I guarantee you the private schools will find a way to open. There's some revenue there. Okay. And maybe that's a really important part of the point, which is that the conflict between the science and the politics is maybe as overt and as heightened as we've seen it. Oh, there's no question. I mean, I'm sorry, but we shouldn't be where we are. The United States, the richest, smartest, this is what at least we tell the world, country in the world has the overwhelming worse statistics dealing with COVID. Just look at Canada. Just look at Canada. You don't have to go to Sweden, although their experiment fails. You know, the two most, the two countries, us and Great Britain, and we're way beyond them. Yeah, sure. Italy in the beginning. But who else is seeing the unbelievable rise in cases? Maybe some countries in Africa. This should have been stopped back in March. And who do I blame? Who does everybody blame? You blame the president and then you blame governors in southern states who are the ventriloquist dummies for the president. Give Governor Abbott in Texas at least some credit. He has, you know, recently seen the errors of his ways, but look at the Santos in Florida. That's just outrageous. I mean, you know, he could probably be accused of manslaughter. I mean, the way that he has handled the outbreak. Now, you know, other people believe civil liberties have been violated in Hawaii has gone too far. You went crazy when we had 41 cases two days ago. My brother lives in Arizona. When I talked to him on the phone that night and said, you're not going to believe it, we had 41 cases, he said, we got 41 every 10 minutes. We got an interesting question from a viewer said, is there any possibility that Trump's proposal to withdraw from the World Health Organization withdrawal support from that during a time of pandemic? Anyway, that could wind up in the courts. Could the courts have any influence on that? You know, I don't know the answer, but you know, it has no practical effect, because if Biden is elected in November and takes office in January, there's no court case that's going to get resolved between July and January. So even if there was some legal basis and I'm just not educated enough, I don't think so. I think it's purely an executive decision, a presidential decision. Maybe Congress could override it, but of course that's not going to happen with the Senate still being in the hands of the Republicans. But the bottom line is, if Biden is elected, we'll be right back in the World Health Organization, particularly by the way, if the Democrats win the Senate, which James Carville last night said was guaranteed they'd have at least 53. He's hoping to get close to 60. I don't know about that, but I don't know whether legally there could be a challenge to it, but it wouldn't have any effect because it would never go into place before the election is over. And if he wins again, you know, the president, if Trump wins, there's going to be no impetus to put us back in the World Health Organization. We've already humiliated ourselves with that organization and with the Paris Climate Change Treaty as well. And who knows what other treaties Trump will try to undo if he's reelected. Maybe some treaties with the Indians apparently. Are there any left that we haven't broken? I don't know. There are studies and she said we've broken every single one. You know, it was an interesting story that I didn't see the other day. I was fortunate enough to go to Mount Rushmore.  It's not yet completed. You know, there's a lot of money that's still needed. I'm surprised that none of the media took an opportunity that I saw to go, it's just a little bit of ways away to show the half-carved visage of Crazy Horse. It's going to be fabulous. That's fantastic. One of the things that's interesting, a story that I did see is that the lead sculptor behind the Mount Rushmore carvings. He was a Nazi. He was a right-wing wingnut. There's a legitimate reason to believe he was a Ku Klux Klan member. He was very racist. He didn't pick the poor, but...  And maybe even people consider me a little bit extreme on free speech. I am really deeply concerned, and this goes the other way, frankly, as to what's going on in this country to limit free speech. And I'm not talking about Confederate statutes, but I'm talking about Woodrow Wilson and George Washington and professors being fired for, you know, making a statement that some person finds offensive. This country, I just be honest, is going in the absolute wrong direction with the speech patrols that have come out. And I know people will say, hey, you know, you don't know you're not this, you're not that, you're not been subject to this. I really think what's going on here with people scared to speak their opinions is a horrible trend, and it's getting worse. And the courts, and you know, this is the thing about the courts, those cases are going to start to flood the courts before you know it. Some professor who gets fired from making a statement which some student thinks is offensive and then gets terminated, that's winding up in the courts. And I'm telling you, we're going to have a battle on how far free speech can be limited. And maybe, maybe we should. If the abuses are getting that bad. But the question is going to wind up being, are the courts a reliably impartial and independent forum in which to adjudicate those. That's always been the position, whether it's been a considered a liberal court or conservative court, the courts in general. I mean, as an attorney, you and I get to know lots of people. Well, they're not a lot in Hawaii because we're not that many judges, but we know them before they become judges. And then we get to know them when they become judges and after their judges.  So anybody who suggests that any judge is pure, you know, that doesn't have any feelings or beliefs is crazy and just not being honest. And that doesn't mean, and I do believe this, that most judges, whether it's in Hawaii or other places, and of course I don't practice in a lot of other places, but I've been before judges from other jurisdictions. And I was actually in a position of meeting and talking to at least four Supreme Court justices over the years. I don't think they all mean well, but I don't think you can divorce yourself from your heritage and how you've been brought up whatever. So it is going to leak in, no matter what. But I do think most of them really try to evaluate the law and the law is not that clear, or else there'd be no litigation. You know, somebody wins somebody loses in every case. Maybe that's a subject for one of these sessions up at the law school, Josh Levinson is one of the country's leading experts writers and speakers on implicit bias. He's truly a master of that subject and maybe we could get him to come down and talk with us about that and in the courts and what role it might play what influence, how to look for it how to look out for it.  I don't think he's alone. And you know what, other than Clarence Thomas who I frankly think is a clown. I don't, you know, I know there were issues about Kavanaugh and, you know, whether he had made statements or engaged in some conduct that was maybe inappropriate when he was 20 or 21 and, you know, there was some questions about Gorsuch. I just think, you know, I don't agree with their philosophy of the law. That's really where it comes down to right the philosophy. What did the Constitution mean when it was written. Is it a static document, you know, or does it change with the times and that's the philosophical battle right. I mean, you could say what you want about Scalia, who I actually debated one time, and we had dramatically opposite views. At least he made it clear how he was ruling and why he was ruling the way he was. And, you know, you have to admire him for that. I don't like the progeny, necessarily, but, but he was pure and that's why he and Ginsburg were, were best friends. And I think that's, that's another point that maybe may turn out to be important with this Supreme Court is as the justices build relationships with each other. We may start to see things like exactly what you just talked about. The justices who were stereotyped as far right, sometimes voting with those who were more liberal, and the opposite, those stereotyped as more liberal voting with those seen as more conservative and we certainly seen that this week. I mean, let's, you know, unless the Supreme Court is dealing with some esoteric issue that only the parties care about. Whenever they get into these social issues, you know, half the country is going to applaud what they do. And, and half the country is going to boo what they do you only hope that you're in the half that just did applaud what they do. And, you know, this isn't the Warren court anymore. And, you know, it's evolved to a more conservative court. And what I said, you know, a couple of weeks ago, that's a little bit disturbing. It's not that, you know, all of these conservative judges are being confirmed. I just think that's the way it goes. The president makes the nomination and, you know, vote for a president who you think is going to make the nominations that you hope and at the Senate is going to be at the same party. It's that more and more and it's still a small number are being nominated who are incompetent, you know, that the ABA finds to be incompetent, not qualified. That's almost unheard of up until three years ago. Now there's been less than 10, but that's still 10 too many. The ABA finds not competent. McConnell gets some nominated. I'm sorry. The president nominates them and the Republican Senate approves them because politically, they want to put these not competent people on the bench. That's the disturbing trend. It is so many commentators feel that the court composition was a big issue in the 2016 election. What do you see for 2020 is in a major issue. Are there other things that dwarf it. I think I think Trump will make it a major issue is run out of anything else. You know, what has he got his tax returns are now going to get produced somewhere along the way COVID is out of control. Race relations are the worst they've ever been the economies in the tank. What's he got left. Well he's got Confederate statutes and tradition right. I'll use that word tradition. Right. You can use it any way you want what tradition. But and he's got the court, which is what he ran on four years ago and was effective. There's no question that from the polls that I saw. Many people who voted for Trump that was the single most important issue. And I think although today he ripped the Supreme Court apart, because they didn't like what they said about having to produce his tax returns and that the Supreme Court is not immune from being prosecuted, which is fascinating and and really a great part of what happened today. Maybe not while he's president, but he's got the court. I don't think on the other side, I'm not sure how much Biden is going to focus on the court, because I think it's a divisive issue. You know, I'm not I'm not running his campaign obviously, but I'd run on COVID and and things like that where 7075% unanimity, how it's been handled incorrectly. The court I think is divisive but abortion is going to become an issue. You know that particularly in the southern states and the border states. And I think what's happened today now yesterday he loved the court. Right. Today didn't like it so much so we'll see. So between now in November. What do you see happening that may influence the direction for the electorate. Got a couple of minutes left. I can't answer that you know things change every single day. You know, depending upon the disease and the ramifications of the disease. I think I really do I think we have one of the most critical elections in my lifetime and now that's 70 plus years. I know people say that every four years but it's a lot of garbage I think this time it absolutely is. And and I think that's what's going to ultimately happen. I mean, you know, something something completely unanticipated could happen tomorrow that could change things dramatically. I just hope that in the next four months. McConnell after they come back from their break doesn't put another 50 judges on the bench. And I think you articulated earlier that that's their goal is to try to get from one quarter to one third before maybe they're out of office. Okay, winding up down to our last minute or so. Any last thoughts. I've probably had too many already. I appreciate being on and it's been a fascinating year for the Supreme Court I think all in all it's been a fair year. I think that you know the court has tried to weave its way through the middle I know there's been some cases that people, particularly religious liberty and, but you know you look at the gay rights decision and the tax decision so, you know, I don't think there's a way to pull your hair out. I just hope he doesn't get to nominate a young conservative Supreme Court justice from the Federalist Society, that'll be on the court for 40 years, and we'll see what happens in November. Jeff, thanks so much for your time for your thoughts for your insights. We'll be back in two weeks, and hopefully we can get Josh Levinson to join us and talk about implicit bias and its role. Where do you send the check? Where do you send the check? See you Chuck. Thank you. Be good. Be safe.


We're a pow-train company, we make pow-trains. We do it very well. They perform well, they're very reliable. Something that's a little different about ride speed is that we're not just setting out to make electric vehicles because they'll save the planet or something. Everything we do is done against a payback calculation. It's got to be an economic win for the customers. They've got to be able to save enough money in a short enough time to pay the capital cost. Because if you can do that, then you get across the chasm, then you get into mass deployment. The route pow-train is a range-extended electric vehicle pow-train. It's intended for use in medium and heavy-duty trucks and buses. The system offers vastly reduced fuel costs. You can save 60% of the fuel. Almost all the maintenance, the brake maintenance goes away or the engine maintenance goes away. It saves enough in fuel and maintenance that generally you can get the capital cost back in three or four years. It's a range-extended EV, not a straight-battery EV, so there's not a range limitation. And the emissions are very much lower, up to 90% less criteria pollutants. As an organisation, we're curious and not afraid, and we like to get to the bottom of things. We like to understand all the way down to the physics. That's a very, very strong part of the company culture and mission is to be ruthlessly clear about what problem we're solving. We do breakthrough things because we ask the right questions. What problem are we solving? Why? How does this work? Do we actually understand how this works? Do we really understand how this works? I believe what we're doing is going to have a positive impact on the world. We're reducing fuel consumption, we're reducing emissions, and we're making it a lot quieter. Cities are very noisy places and it's stressful. People that stand to benefit are the people that live in those spaces and have to listen to and smell these things all the time. And there's subtle things that people don't think about, and they don't think about them because there's not much you can do about it until now. All the particulates that come off the brakes and these things are friction material. That winds up in the air, that winds up in the stormwater drains, it winds up on your lawn. You can make that go away. We do.


Hello friends in this session. We are going to discuss something about submission notation. You would have seen this notation used extensively in statistics and functions and matrices and other places So let us, you know, give you give you a little Overview of what exactly this notation is and how it properties how its properties are like So What is summation location notation you have come across this sign sigma So it is a Greek Greek letter. It's it's called Sigma. It's capital Sigma in Greek and You know, it is shorthand for addition of a sequence of any kind of numbers Okay, so let us say if if you pay attention to this particular sequence, you know, these are x1 x2 x3 x4 Let us say there are these many xn numbers. So there are let's say n numbers and numbers and you want to Use them in your literature or let's say well while communicating So it will be very cumbersome to write x1 x2 x3 x4 and so on. Let's say n is thousand So to write thousand variables like this will become very cumbersome So hence we use a shorthand and this is a notation for that. So I'll also explain sideways. So if you see in this Example one where x1 x2 x3 to xn are numbers in a sequence and then that is No, that is, you know notified as Sigma sign like this Sigma and There is this letter I which is the counter or we call it as index as well. So I goes from one and Ends up at n What is it mean? What is it? What does it mean when I say I goes from one to one? So I the value of I will change Incrementally, so I will be first one Then to add one to one then add one to two you'll get three then for then five likewise till I value becomes n Right and then this is X I so what would it mean? It means that you have to start from X and instead of I first I you write one which is this one Okay, then add a plus sign then write X and then the second Subscript this part is called sub subscript. This is subscript Okay, so the second subscript will be two right and then again add write Three and keep on doing this till you add all the X's X is till Xn, right? An Example will make it more clear. So let us say in this second example Before that few definitions. So I is index of summation. You can see that I is equal to one is the lower limit X I is the variable and I is equal to n is the upper limit, okay? So let us see this in example two. So if you see I is varying from seven to ten Now why I that means first value of I will be seven then add to it why eight that means I value has become eight Then it is why nine and then finally why ten because you will not write why eleven because I maximum upper limit is ten Okay, so this is what example two says example three if you see I is equal to one to I is equal to n summation I Okay, summation I means the value of I will keep on changing like first I value is one So I have written one then the second term will be to the next I third the third value of I is three then four then five Likewise till n minus one and finally n. So this is some of first n natural numbers Now come to example four here. It is I equals to three to I equals to six So you might be thinking why is I not starting from one? So I can have any value starting value till it is lesser than the upper limit, right? But upper limit has to be more than lower limit now if you this is a summation I square that means First value of I is three. So three squared and next value of I is four Squared five squared and finally six squared you'll not be writing seven squared because the upper limit of I is six Now, let us understand some properties of summation operator So here I have mentioned I is equal to one to n summation C X I where C is a constant C is a constant and X I is a variable, right? So the idea or the left-hand side of this particular the equation says that it is C X 1 plus C X 2 plus C X 3 So on and so forth till C X n So what can you do? You can take C common and you can write X 1 plus X 2 plus so on and so forth till X and Now this is C times nothing, but what is X 1 X 2 X 3 X n? We just saw above so this is nothing but X I where I is varying from 1 to n Okay, I is equal to n Example for this would be let us say you have 2 X I and I is equal to let's say 1 to 10 So it will be nothing but two times summation X I I is equal to 1 to 10 Okay, first one. Now, let us understand this particular thing Example so here are two variables X and Y's and they are varying. So hence LHS of that will give you what? So one I first value is one so X 1 Y 1 Then it goes to X 2 plus Y 2 then X 3 plus Y 3 and so on so forth till X n plus Y n Now you can rearrange them to write as X 1 plus X 2 all X together X n plus Y 1 plus Y 2 plus All Y's together right now the first this term this term is nothing but Summation X I and I is varying from where to where 1 to I is equal to n and The second term is nothing but summation Y I and I is varying from 1 to that Now third one also follows. So instead of plus there is minus. So here it will become minus simply Right, so second and third are quite similar. So what do we learn? So if there is Summation on two variables together so we can split it into two summations first on the first variable and Second on the second variable Similarly, if there is difference with the summation on difference of two variables, then that is equal to Summation of first one minus summation of the second variable Yeah, there are a few more properties of summation operator But that those will be more relevant in that's a topic under functions and matrices and other things So we'll stop here. These three properties are good enough for you to Understand the concepts of statistics basic statistics of elementary level. Thank you You


Okay, we're back here live in Las Vegas for SiliconANGLE's exclusive coverage of Amazon Web Services re-invent conference. Amazon is continuing to roll down the path of dominance in the public cloud and just absolutely extending their lead light years ahead of the competition in our opinion based on what we're seeing here today and it's just continuing innovation. And now moving into the enterprise. But they've had a lock on the startup market going back to when I originally was with those guys launching it back in the early 2000s. But the developer community loves Amazon because it's fast, it's low cost, and we're here to feature a startup here. We've got Jonathan Chu, Collaldes, co-founder and CEO, and Jordan Potter, co-founder and chief operating officer. Guys, welcome to the cube, SiliconANGLE's cube. It's good to be here. So startups are great. I mean startups are bootstrapping. You guys won an award at the TechCrunch conference. Disrupt. Are you mad? Did you win an award? You launched there. We launched there. You launched there.  So let's just go into it. Talk about first to company you guys do. You guys target engineers, test and dev, QA. Talk about the solution. Then let's talk about how you guys are wired into the cloud and how that worked for your customers. Yeah, so quality is a cloud automation testing solution that helps companies run their automation tests extraordinarily quickly. And the goal here is to maximize engineering efficiency especially in the valley, right? Engineers are very expensive and also they are the core of your company and they get work done really quickly. So the faster they get out code. It's the core labor. I mean, with clouds basically almost free at this point. I mean, Amazon is going to drop prices. That's the core asset. Exactly. It's people, open source is free. You know, software is free so the cloud is a little bit expensive. But yeah, continue ahead. So if you can make your engineers much more effective that's actual dollars in the bank, right? Yeah. So talk about what the product is just give a quick overview of what the product is the value proposition and why someone would contact you guys. Sure. So there's a few things that we focus on at quality. One is increasing your test suite time by 10, 20, 100 times depending on the parallelization level you're comfortable with. And this actually wasn't possible until services like Amazon EC2 where now computation is so ubiquitous and so cheap you can actually just throw computation in the problem and take, you know with one of our customers 80 minutes worth of tests down to six minutes which is extraordinary. And the big thing that we want was we can actually verify code before it goes into the code base. So no bad code can go in. So for another customer we took their 40 build breaks a month down to zero, which is huge. So you guys basically accelerate the identification of bugs basically and can get code tested. How do you do it? What's the secret sauce? What's the secret sauce for yours? Everyone's got the secret sauce. Is it machine learning? Is it math? Is it algorithms? Is it just process? What's the, you know to tell the exact thing or something. It gives a taste of it. Very, very great distributed systems and also operating systems knowledge that makes things shard really well and run really quickly and also utilizing AWS and EC2 very effectively and helping manage that particular cloud. Okay, so name some of the customers you guys work on.  Yeah, so the largest name we can actually say is one Kings Lane. We do have a very large file sharing customer as well as a, I guess you would say a sharing economy customer that we also support and some of the big wins we've had for them, one of them had their testing times taken from 80 minutes to six, which for them translates into roughly a 10 or 15% productivity increase which is like 20 engineers, right? So the old days, I'm all, you guys are young guns. I'm like the old guy close to 50 in the late 40s but back in my day, you'd have to lay out some serious gear to do test dev, right? So now with virtualization in cloud, a lot of coolness can happen there. So describe some of the coolness that you guys do. Is it parallel machines you guys using virtualization? What are some of the coolness that allows you guys to do this at scale? Because remember, people want to stale possibly for use cases that might be at certain scales and you can't get gear for that. So talk about how you guys boot that up. John, you want to handle this? You want to try that? I would say all of the above. For one company in particular, the biggest customer of ours, the file sharing one that we shouldn't actually name but I think you know who it is. For them, we're actually managing 200 large EC2 instances on Amazon simultaneously, which is just a lot of computation, which I think there's a lot of secret sauces involving quality, but in all honesty, 80% of the solution is just throwing computation hardware at the problem. So I think of all things, that's something very exciting that we're doing. So you're managing the, say that number again, how many instances? 200 right now and it will be going up very, very quickly. So do you guys run spot instances to spin up compute for them? You guys, these are actually reserved instances, but that actually allows us to dynamically scale. So at the max, it goes up to 200 instances and when they're not using them, it automatically scales back down. Yes, definitely catering to the Amazon philosophy of you have competition when you need it and you pay for it by the hour. You guys taking advantage of auto scaling on that? So quality actually manages the scaling for you, depending on what you need from your test runs. So as of right now, we're doing it manually, but now we're becoming more and more comfortable with Amidon AWS software. And so with that, we're exploring other services as well. Yeah, we actually don't have a need for auto scaling because we know exactly when you need a certain number of machines and exactly when you don't need them anymore. So we have it as perfect as it can get. So it's not a big feature for you guys, you guys can do that manually. Okay, so talk about some of the use cases where you've been successful and some of the ones you think are going to be the bread and butter for your business. Because obviously I can envision the scale of being pretty significant for you guys. But right now, where are people using you? Why would someone come to you? What's the use cases of the engineering teams? And what are they doing? Engineering teams that really care about their efficiency have some kind of agile process, but also have large testing times, tend to find lots and lots of value from us. And we've also noticed that teams that have grown very quickly, a lot of times have the test suites that are large, but could find tons of value from quality since they haven't actually done much work around them themselves. Give me a number of like, size of the teams you guys work with. Engineering teams. Yeah, so most of our customers are between 30 and 200 engineers. That's not including like QA or other roles, just plain engineers. And most of them have actually been around, they're most relatively recent companies. So most of them have been around since at least 2007 or 2006. What are they saying about the service? They're like, they love you guys. They say, hey, we can't live without you. Asking for the norm or an Amazon like products. It just works. Most of them are saying, finally, I think developers have gotten a lot of attention and a lot of spotlights. We're getting new frameworks, new libraries. We're building this phenomenal community. But I think tools have not kept up with the fast pace of developer community. And so a lot of people are saying, finally, something actually exists that works for me that's pleasant to use and simple to maintain. It's actually a joy, right? We got a standing ovation when we actually, so one of the companies switched their entire engineering of a hundred people over onto the service and we got a standing ovation when they actually presented it. It's like, you guys are using this now. First of all, we love to hear stories of that. We work with companies like ServiceNow and Splunk and their customer bases are so loyal to them like when they launch a new product because when you think about Splunk and State ServiceNow, Splunk in particular is much more notable in the big data world. They took essentially data waste log files and basically took that pain away from slogging through log files. I mean, it doesn't look good on paper. Oh yeah, yeah. But what it does for the customer. So you guys seem a little bit like that where you're solving some pain today for customers at the same time, possibly enabling. So I want to ask you, what is that enablement for the engineering teams? Okay, you take the pain away through the automation like Splunk, they're in customers because they were free to do other stuff. It ended up becoming a huge platform. They ended up going public. So what is your next step? When you take that pain away, you start automating, you start automating some of the test. What's that next enablement? What do you guys, what's your vision? The ultimate vision for us is to make engineers as effective as possible. So I always like to say when I was in college, right, at Carnegie Mellon, I wrote an operating system in a matter of weeks and you can't do that in industry. You just can't because there's so much process in place. There's deployment. You have to go check for bugs. If you can make engineers as effective as that, then you can make the entire world could move forward. Maybe two times, three times faster than it currently is. Technology could advance that much faster. Now, I don't really think it's possible to ever get to how it was in college, but you can definitely make tremendous gains. And for us, our vision is just to make engineers so much more effective that all they have to think about is coding and that's it. All right, so that's good. So I'll ask about the operating system after the interview because I wrote one in the 80s, but that was different. It was on a Vax, but that's a whole other story. I want to ask you though specifically, what vision around the code? Because that vision is definitely awesome, right? But let's talk about what tech will you add next? I mean, in your mind, if you knock this down right now and you get that automation going, you save a lot of time for the engineers, obviously there's going to be creativity. So there's got clearly a more of a feel good benefit, but specifically, what tech are you eyeing? Like, okay, when we're done with this, we're going to bolt on some other tech on top of it. You have any thoughts on that? What do you see? There's no really right answer on this one, but it's more of the vision. That's fair. What's next? I think we should be careful about leaking too much secret sauce, obviously. But I think the next, we'll be open about the next big step for us. We're very excited about continuous deployments. Since we have so much technology for like managing these virtual machines, provisioning them to be like your production environment, so on and so forth. You can read a lot more about on qualitycode.com. But beside all that, with all the technology, it's not too far-fetched to think the next thing for quality is actually managing your continuous deployment. So talk about the size of the company.  So we're currently seven people and we've been funded, VC funded, since day one. From who? Which VCs? So FF Angel, it was the first ones in. Index, Felices, the web investment network, and Ray Tonsing. Awesome. Well guys, congratulations. I think you're on something really cool. Like I said, I totally agree that, I've always said the silicon angle and the stuff we're doing with the Q, it's all about the people. And we had the chief security officer on from Amazon and he talked about security paradigms. We're coming back down, everything's about the people. And in these days, with the connected web, making value for people, freeing them up, automating away the hassles, that's the future. So congratulations, big, big fan of your work. We're here live at Amazon. We'll be right back with our next guest after this short break. Hot start up here inside the Q, venture backed, funded, seven people, what's the growth rate? What do you guys want to get to next year? Any hiring engineers? We are definitely hiring engineers. Where's your headquarters? San Francisco? San Francisco, right next to the Caltrin station in Selma.  Stanford. Stanford, okay, not bad schools. They have decent computer science programs there. I've heard of that one before. Okay, we'll be right back after this short break. Got some alums from Carnegie Mellon, Stanford, great programs. This is the new generation right here. This is what it's all about at Amazon. This is a generational philosophy, DevOps, Amazon, innovation. We'll be right back at this short break.


Hi, this is Stu Miniman with Wikibon. Happy to be joined today by Chad Sackich, who is the president of the EMC Converged Platform Division. Chad, great to catch up with you. It's great to see you again, Stu. All right. So Chad, last time we talked, VMware had announced the VSAN 6.2, now EMC's got the announcement. You know, give us the thumbnail on it. Well, so for those of the folks that tuned into that, it was great announcement. You know, you and I have been traveling a lot since then, living out of suitcases, apparently. Yeah, same shirt, same jacket all the time. It's unbelievable. So, listen, it was great to talk to you about it, you know, in advance of the launch. I'm glad now that we can have a discussion where I cannot tease, but actually directly say what we're doing. Open the kimono, share it all. So at VCER point of view, customers want to buy, not build. Our point of view, not all customers are the same, not all workloads are the same. We need to have a portfolio of blocks, racks, and appliances. In the appliance category, we learned a lot in 2015 with VSPEX Blue. You know, we learned what customers wanted, which is that they want an offer from EMC and from VMware. We learned that they like the idea of hyper-converged appliances at low entry points, but we learned that they needed some things that we didn't do in the first release. The VxRail is not a rev of VSPEX Blue, it is a NetU product based off of those learnings. The first thing is that they needed certain core data services that were really important.  They wanted all flash configurations, and that's something that, you know, we really needed VSAN 6.2 to be able to deliver. So check done. The second thing that we discovered they wanted was originally we had one appliance and form factor. You could buy it in any size you want, so long as it was, well, we had two, but the variation was only the memory footprint, right? With VxRail, we've got four offerings in the portfolio, ranging from really small to larger configurations, lots of configurability in each one of them. So the customers have got a broader range of options that they can pick from to fit exactly what they need. The third thing that we discovered is that, and this is partially tied to the fixed configurability, you know, initially, we said, hey, let's focus on simplicity maniacally, and that idea was right, we just, you know, dialed it up to 11 as opposed to like a more reasonable setting. So for example, right out of the gate originally we said, you can have it in any sort of maintenance and support as you want. So long as it's three years, maintenance and support. Some customers said, I want one year. Some of them said, I want two years. Some of them said, I want five years. And all of that stuff, packaging and everything, ultimately meant that, you know, we realized price elasticity is really important in this market. So VxRail is available at price points that start as low in that, as the 80 to 50k price bands, right? So, you know, going in with a very, very economical starting point, but maintaining the brand promise of simplicity and being able to scale. So that is awesome. There's two other things in VxRail that I think are just completely unique. So a couple of quick questions though. If I looked at the EvaRail program, you know, a couple of concerns customers had. Number one is from when VMware announced the version of software to when it got fully baked in, it was taken too long. You know, is this being sped up now? Yeah. So we realized there's several lessons learned and, you know, again, I don't know whether it's useful, but I actually think if I'm a customer watching or a partner watching, you'd actually want to see your partners kind of go learn, listen, adapt. A very interesting thing occurred here, which is that we realized that hyperconverged appliances is not an ecosystem play. Okay. So what's that mean? What that means is that basically the way that the EvaRail program was designed basically said, hey, we need to have a broad ecosystem of partners and that meant that we have to define the lowest modular base version of the software. That means that the hardware has to be extremely prescriptive and cannot vary from one to the other. That means that there was always a lag inside the system of an EvaRail release and the hardware vendor support and all the hardware vendors had to be the same and ultimately that was not the right winning strategy. What we learned was customers want open ecosystems when they do it themselves. When they buy VSAN, when they want to assemble it, they buy VSAN ready nodes. Great. But when a customer says I want to turn key appliance, they choose the appliance and therefore VxRail is a unique and exclusive partnership between VMware and EMC. That means that we can iterate around this so quickly because there's not a broad variation of ingredients inside the ecosystem. In some ways it reminds me a little bit of the early days of what was Acadia and then VCE is that the lag between getting that interlocked between EMC, VMware, and Cisco in the early days and you got to pull that together and make sure that it's in sync. And so what we've announced today has got a small amount of lag relative to the VSAN release but in Q2 there's a software update and from that point onwards every VMware and every VxRail release is in synchronicity which is huge. What it means for customers is if you've picked vSphere, if you've picked VMware as your standard at the enterprise or at the edge, this is a way to just simplify consumption and deployment of your standard because by definition it is the standard packaging of the latest version of VMware's software but industrialized into appliance with a single support model. Huge. The second thing that I think that we learned is that customers want to be able to consume and buy this technology from a broad variety of routes to market and so VxRail is available from EMC, it's available from EMC's partner ecosystem and it's also available from VMware's partner ecosystem. So I'm sorry, channel and direct then. Channel and direct. However a customer wants to go, great. Okay, so what do you say to channel partners that say I'm a little worried that EMC and boy, Dell's buying EMC, maybe they're going to take the business direct? You know what I would say is that ultimately the thing that's always guided us is the customer, that's always the case. Not every customer is going to want to go with one route to market, another route to market, we want to open that up as much as possible and that's always going to be the case no matter what the circumstance. And I'll just tell you, just netting it out, VxRail basically is an unbelievably compelling hyper-converged appliance. It's got incredible data services, unbelievable performance, particularly in the off-lash configurations, rich data de-dub, compression, erasure coding, so on and so on and so on. It is available in very, very small entry price points. It's available to customers in any channel they want and through that tight partnership between VMware and EMC. It means that for customers that have picked VMware as their standard, easiest way to simplify deployment and consumption.  Yeah, so at the VCE Converge Platform Division of EMC, we have blocks, racks, appliances, very simple. Blocks, large enterprise data center, traditional workloads that need traditional infrastructure. Racks, enterprise data centers that are designed to scale big. When I say scale big, I mean really big. Think hundreds of nodes, thousands of nodes, both for some traditional workloads as well as this weird new world of cloud-native workloads that are less dependent on infrastructure resilience. And VxRail is basically our answer for SMB and SME, as well as Enterprise Robo. Now just to be clear, when I say SME, VxRail can scale from very small number of nodes, three nodes, all the way up to 64 nodes. At 64 nodes, you could run most enterprises on it, right? So just to be clear, if you've got 1,000, 2,000 VMs, VDI instances, VxRail is a great answer for you. If you need more, we're the only Converge Platform solution in the market that has that breadth. And one thing that I think is just an example of where we're going that's really cool is VxRail is already integrated with VCE vision for support, for RCM for updates. So customers who are building a real Converge Platform for everything, all their workloads, not just one or the other, can have a similar experience and a similar partner to consume it from. Great, so choice and flexibility, and you're not stuck on one of those platforms when you go from one to the next. All right, thanks so much, Chad. I really appreciate the updates here. And thank you so much for watching. We'll be coming to lots of events where you can see Chad, and find out what is happening in the Converge hyperconverge market.


if you're someone that doesn't want to stay in or go into the kind of like the maths, the science, the hard skills angle, then there's still loads of opportunity and still loads of potential that can help, you know, have a really fulfilling career in data and data management.


So, it is my great pleasure now to call Mr. Kevin Rudd, whom I think many of you know. There are many reasons for him to be known because he is a very famous man. He is, Kevin, I am telling good things about you. So you should listen to them. So, he is a former prime minister of Australia and he has become, he is now recognized as one of the best experts on China worldwide. Mr. Kevin Rudd speaks Mandarin fluently with a slight Australian accent. But this we can check, you know, during the Q&A session. And I have asked him to give us his assessment on the Chinese situation today, both from an internal viewpoint, that is economic, social, political situation, and external, that is foreign policy in a large sense, the grand strategy if there is any and so forth and so on. So, Kevin, please come. More importantly, we've been following the rugby score. So, if you follow rugby, the cherry blossoms of Japan are now 28 against Scotland 21. And so, for those of you who follow this cane sport, as I do, and some around the table do, this is what we call a global upset. Well done, Japan. But the Scottish are still coming back, so we'll see. Thank you, Thierry, for having me back at the World Policy Conference. Can you hear me at the back up there? Good, this is a big room. So, and I've got to keep you awake now that you've just eaten, and it's a warm afternoon. And you can already hear the calls of prayer outside. So, it should be a challenge. I'm going to spend 10 minutes talking to you about what I think Xi Jinping's worldview is. And then I'm going to spend the following 10 minutes talking about what I think the American strategy is in response to that. Including thought on where that leaves the rest of us, in Europe and the rest of Asia, in Africa, as well as in Latin America. So, the first one is Xi Jinping's worldview. I always think the beginning of wisdom in international relations is to understand how the other side thinks and why they think that way. And so, we should adopt, for the next 10 minutes at least, a view that we are sitting around a large table of the Standing Committee of the Politburo. There's only seven of them. They're all men. And they meet every week, like a cabinet in a democratic state. They have formal cabinet documents and papers. And it's important to probe how they see the world under Xi Jinping's leadership. So, in 10 minutes, here are what I see as their 10 core priorities, if it was to be described as Masloff's hierarchy of needs. Starting from the biggest priority down to number 10, which is still important, but not as important as number one. Priority number one in Xi Jinping's mind and the Standing Committee is keeping the Party in power long-term. Not short-term, not as a transition to democracy, but long-term as the permanent government of China. And within that, Xi Jinping's priority is for himself to be a long-term leader. As you know, he has changed the Chinese constitution to allow for there to be unlimited terms for the Chinese presidency. That will come up for final vote in 2022. And some of us think that if he gets his political way, we could see Xi Jinping in power until the mid-2030s, by which stage he would be in his early 80s, almost young enough to become a candidate for the presidency of the United States. Priority number one, therefore, is keep the Party in power. And within that, Xi Jinping staying in power. Priority number two, again, in this series of concentric circles I'll try and construct here, is national unity. Sounds easy, but when you look at the practicalities, the razor-sharp focus of the leadership is always on Tibet, Xinjiang, and Taiwan. And now more recently, events in Hong Kong. Taiwan represents unfinished business for the Chinese Revolution. And whereas we would think it is irrational for China to throw so much of its strategic and political assets about regaining what it sees to be the renegade province from 1949, for this Chinese Party leadership and for Xi Jinping in particular, it is core business. And if anything is likely to trigger a conflict in the wider region, that looms still as a big candidate. Number three, sustaining economic growth, hard in the current circumstances. The magical number in the Chinese leadership is 6%. Why? Because the Party calculates internally they need that level of growth to sustain social and economic stability and to provide enough jobs for university graduates each year. Of course, Xi Jinping, since he's taken over six years or so ago, has applied a different political economy model to his predecessors. And it's one of the reasons that we're beginning to see a slowing in that growth. In part, what Xi Jinping has tried to do is reinsert the Party as a central factor in China's day-to-day market governance. And Chinese entrepreneurs, the Jack Ma's of this world have looked at this and said, I don't like that. And as a result, what we've seen in the last several years is the beginnings of a private fixed capital investment strike within the country, uncertain about the future of its own private sector. Related to that task, however, of sustaining growth at 6%, is not just keeping people happy with rising living standards, manageable unemployment and poverty elimination to keep the Party in power, but the second element of it is to grow the capacity of the Chinese state globally. And that is where discussions earlier today, particularly from John Soar and others, about the centrality of the tech revolution in the economic strategy and grand strategy of the Chinese leadership. It is front and center, so that China wins the future global economic competition. Priority number four, and it comes in part as a reflection of the excellent discussion we had earlier today between Laurent and Patrick about global climate policy. In China's domestic governance, that means sustainability. And their reason for concern about it is because Chinese people want clean air, they want clean water, and they want food that won't poison them. And if ever there is a lightning rod, which takes those concerns back to the question of the Communist Party's legitimacy, it's a failure to deliver clean air. And when you see spontaneous protests across the whole country, because the air isn't clean anymore, they're not protesting per se about climate change, they're protesting about particular matter concentrations in the air, which has and is having a massive impact on public health. So this has gone in the last 10 years from being a concern out there for the Chinese Communist Party leadership to a central concern. It's the mirror image to priority number three, which is of course sustained economic growth. Number five in Maslow's hierarchy of needs is this, modernize the People's Liberation Army. And this means turning it into not an agent for domestic political control, because the technologies of the surveillance state now mean that the Chinese police and intelligence services are confident they can maintain domestic control, historically part of the mission of the army. Xi Jinping's mission is to turn the PLA into a body which can fight and win wars, quote unquote. That's his doctrine. And so you see this huge investment in the PLA in capital, huge investment in the transformation of personnel and the removal of most of the previous leadership of the PLA, and their replacement with a new rising professional leadership. And on top of that, a reorganization of China's military districts with principal focus being Taiwan and the United States. Priority number six in Maslow's hierarchy is as follows, China's neighboring states. This is where we flip, if you like, from the domestic priorities to those which we would classify as foreign priorities. The neighboring states for China are 14 in number, the largest number in the world for any country apart from Russia, which also has 14. And in Chinese historical strategy, it has been always a deep learning principle over many centuries that China's security domestically is threatened by one or other of its neighboring states. And in fact, in China's history, a number of foreign invasions have resulted in those foreigners becoming the reigning dynasty for some several hundred years. Therefore, the priority in turning China's neighboring states into benign neighbors and if possible, compliant neighbors, all 14 of them, is a central organizing principle in the way in which this leadership looks at the world. The principal objective there has been Russia. Russia shares a very long border with China. And if you look at the transformation of the Russia relationship in Xi Jinping's period, it has gone from what I would describe as strategic ambiguity five or six years ago to strategic condominium, which is about where it is today. Obviously, there are still resident reservations in Moscow about Beijing and the reverse applies as well. But I personally am surprised by the rapid nature of the convergence, not just of economic interest between the two, but also a strategic view of the world. Priority number six. Seven, China looks at its continental periphery to its west as one huge zone of long-term market opportunity for itself. It's called Eurasia. And therefore, when you hear the Belt and Road Initiative, that's part of a much wider Eurasian initiative. Partly China's attraction to this wider region is the Americans are not there. And with the Russians now part of a wider strategic condominium, there is no fundamental strategic objection to China developing this vast land mass comprising so many states extending all the way to Western Europe and the Gulf as being a future massive market for China's domestic surplus capacity. On top of that also finding the opportunity through economic cooperation to turn this into a wider region of let's call it broader political compliance with China's own world view. Seven, eight I should say, and we're just about finished this list, is turning to the east, China's maritime periphery where number one problem is of course the United States from Beijing's perspective. And when China looks east it sees threat, threat and threat. It sees an array of American military alliances from Tokyo through Seoul. The de facto arrangements with Taiwan down to the Philippines despite recent changes in the Philippines presidency. Traditional line structures also with Thailand and with Australia. And as a consequence, China's strategy is over time to push the United States back. First to the first island chain, but then to what's called the second island chain. If in your mind you think of the Japanese archipelago, draw a line through the American territory of Guam, down to the Philippines archipelago and then south. And the reason for that is essentially Taiwan related. But China to ultimately execute its military strategy in relation to Taiwan, if it ever needed to, it must have the Americans behind the second island chain. China's military modernization is designed around that organizing principle as well. Second last, China's strategy for the rest of the world, Latin America, Africa, the rest of Asia, and of course Europe, which I partly touched on before. It is again to extend China's massive market opportunities to find places where China's excess domestic capacity can be sold to the world at large, but also through that in Africa and Latin America to make as many political friends and foreign policy friends as possible. And you don't have to be a keen PhD in international relations to studying voting behaviors in the United Nations to know that China has succeeded in creating a massive voting constituency for itself out of Africa alone before you add a large slice of the rest of Asia and Latin America before you get to Europe or anywhere else. And finally, the tenth, and what I describe as Xi Jinping's Maslovian hierarchy of needs, is the future of the global rules-based order itself. China at this stage has this as a work in progress within its own think tanks. It's not fully or finally conceptualized. But if there are elements to it, I would describe it as this. One, with the existing institutions of global governance, which we've all described today in various presentations as being in decline, China is actively investing finance and personnel as well as beginning to influence the regulatory and operational behavior of those institutions over time. But secondly, the parallel track is to build the institutions of its own outside of the UN framework and the Bretton Woods framework. I've mentioned the Belt and Road Initiative, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a security organization called SICA, and others in various parts of the world as well. China's strategy for the future of the rules-based system therefore is a bigger voice and more persuasive voice in institutions that exist while simultaneously developing institutions which are more sino-centric, which is the way which China views the existing institutions as being America-centric. But over time, the think tanks are working around the Xi Jinping notion of what he describes as a global community of common destiny for all mankind. There are a thousand think tanks at work on this at the moment. They would see it as the antecedents of the next Atlantic Charter. Let's wait and see. So I conclude, Thierry, with that, and because I've now spoken for just under 20 minutes, I'll conclude on the question of the United States and then let's take up the rest in Q&A. The United States in observing all of this has had a number of different reactions. For the last 30 years, really since the fall of the Berlin Wall, through and until the Trump administration, if I could characterize U.S. strategy, it's with three words. Engage, shape, and hedge. Engage China, hence what you've seen bilaterally and multilaterally through the WTO and other institutions. Shape, that is, by that engagement, try and shape China into becoming, to use Bob Zellick's term of 15 years ago, from the American perspective, a responsible global stakeholder, that is, a country which would accept the existing liberal international rules-based system and that China would simply slide into it. And hedge, which has continued to, however, have a military capability about yourself if A and B above fail. That was the hedge bit. Now we've moved to a different zone. As of December 2017, President Trump and his national security team announced the formal end of strategic engagement. Read the U.S. National Security Strategy of November, December, 2017. That's the formal turning point. And what we see emerging, again, to quote John Soares this morning, is the new bipolar world that we are now facing. This administration calls it strategic competition. But it's not just the trade war. It is also the unfolding tech war, not just in terms of technologies in themselves, but the regulation of technology as well, and tech standards as well. And beyond that, open questions now about not just decoupling in technology, but decoupling in finance and debates now in Washington about the future of the existing New York Stock Exchange listing of Chinese listed firms, and open debates in Washington now about whether future U.S. administrations will allow U.S. pension funds to invest in Chinese corporations which are deemed to be of a strategic threat to the United States. And then you end up to the final stage of decoupling. If this was to unfold in this direction with the future of the currency war itself, China fears that continued dollarization of the entire global financial and economic system through its trading system and now seats to avoid as much as possible the intermediation of the dollar and to do it through bilateral currency exchanges. But China has looked long and hard at where all this might go, which is the use of financial sanctions by the United States, with Venezuela, with Iran and with other countries, and therefore concerned that where this decoupling will end up is one form or another of U.S. financial sanctions with its allies of China itself. And what then does China do? China, on the other hand, does not wish to take the bold step of floating its own currency, the Renminbi, for reasons of lack of loss of political control. But it also faces the unfolding reality in the economy that it will soon face a current account deficit as well. This looms, therefore, as a major strategic challenge for our Chinese friends. I'll leave my comments there. We'll talk about Europe and the rest of the world. I hope in the discussion we'll now have with Captain Moderator. Thank you, Thierry. Okay, so now we are going to have Q&A's session. And I will ask you two or three questions to start, and then we will take questions and comments from the audience. My first question is about could we go a little deeper in the internal domestic economic situation, because there is a debate. You say yourself that 6% growth rate is what would be necessary to keep the good social conditions without unrest and turmoil. But yesterday, I think it was, now Kitanaka told us that the real growth rate might be closer to 2%. And you told me half an hour ago that the reality is probably 3%. But 3% is half of the 6% which are needed. So is this a serious issue that could threaten the legitimacy of the party? Well, thank you, Thierry. I mentioned that 3% figure to you on a Chatham House basis, but now the room knows that's good. But the bottom line is this, that if you speak to enough Chinese corporates who measure things like their export sales, imports as well as electricity demand, these become different measures of where growth actually stands in an economy. And therefore, if you aggregate those unofficial, as it were, calculations of where substantive growth actually stands, it is some ways, a long ways less than six, as the current Chinese government indicates. The second point, I think, is what's causing that. I mentioned part of it before. Xi Jinping, because he is at heart a Leninist, does not inherently trust markets. And therefore, if there's a defining characteristic of the last several years of Xi Jinping's economic reign, it has been the deleveraging campaign, which has been designed for good macroeconomic reasons to reduce the overall level of corporate debt in the economy. But in the implementation of it, the deleveraging campaign has preference to state-owned enterprises and been, as it were, discriminatory against private firms. Secondly, you also see some language from the Chinese Communist Party leadership not wanting private companies in China to get too big so that they actually dominate the party. And there's something of that story, I think, alive in the Alibaba tale. And then finally, you have smaller things, but still significant, the enhanced role of the Communist Party secretaries within the individual firm hierarchy of a private firm. Put those together, and you see, really through 17 and 18, a radical decline in private business confidence in China, and that's what's translated its way through to the overall Chinese growth numbers. Remember, the private sector now represents 60% of China's GDP, 6-0. So therefore, it's been the engine room for the growth of jobs, of technology, of exports, of the rest. And so when that sector is unhappy, it translates through into real numbers. The final point is what's the system done about it? From November last year, you begin to see Xi Jinping realising he has a problem. There have been a rapid series of measures involving levels of fiscal stimulus, level of monetary policy relaxation, a change in the administrative use of credit to put more of it in the direction of small and medium private enterprises. But so far, the data is fairly thin about these private sector players bouncing back as quickly as China wanted. And the final piece in this jigsaw is the US-China trade war. It hasn't been the cause of China's slowing growth, but it is added to it both objectively because the traders sector of the Chinese economy is about 36% of GDP. And if you look at the sheer volume of the US-China trade, it flows through to the real economy. But also it dovetails with the problem with declining business confidence caused by other factors which have been more domestic. Does it represent a legitimacy threat to the party? Xi Jinping would not have acted unless it represented a problem to him. And so it is the one issue domestically on which I think Xi Jinping remains politically vulnerable. Thank you very much. The second question is about Hong Kong. You said elegantly that it was the unfinished business for the revolution. So how can this business be finished? What is the worst case hypothesis? My reference before was to Taiwan being unfinished business for the Chinese Revolution. I think it's important for us to understand how Beijing looks at developments in Hong Kong now. And when they look at Hong Kong, they see something which is troublesome, difficult, but of a vastly smaller order of magnitude compared with the US-China trade war. That is up here for China to resolve as a top priority. Managing Hong Kong is in the middle of the field. It doesn't mean it's unimportant. I just wanted to give folks here a sense of proportional reality to it. I think we're on the question which we see often debated about whether our Chinese friends will resort to military force in Hong Kong. I do not believe that is probable at all. And the reason I say that is, one, logistically it is a massive task. Think about the military paramilitary occupation of Hong Kong. Seven million people over a vast number of islands. This would make Tiananmen in 1989 look like a cakewalk. This is a very difficult logistical exercise. Number two, it would inevitably involve a lot of bloodshed. And because of that, because of the bloodshed, you're going to have therefore a huge international reaction, not just to the physicality of the occupation, but what will be very violent. You've seen the number of hardcore protesters now in Hong Kong who are now quite well-trained on how to deal with things. And then finally, with Carrie Lam still in control, if you're Xi Jinping, as soon as you militarily intervene, Hong Kong becomes 100% Xi Jinping's problem. Right now, it's 90% Carrie Lam's problem. So for those basic political realities I regard as improbable. There's a separate question about how this thing can be managed appropriately over the next several months. We can go to that later if you'd like. But on the headline question of would they do that, I think on balance, no. Unless the protest movement became mega-violent, which I mean blowing up public infrastructure, killing lots of people, all those sorts of things, that would cross some threshold. But under present circumstances and known behaviors, I do not see that happening. And just to end on this Hong Kong question, you know, we are 22 years after the retrocession and 28 years before the final integration with mainland China. How do you see the possibility of Hong Kong becoming a Chinese province like the others even in 28 years because it is one generation? Do you think the mentalities in Hong Kong will change so much in 28 years that it is possible to get to that point without major upheavals? I've lived in China quite a lot over the years, but I've also lived in Hong Kong. My kids were born in Hong Kong, have any friends there, and I know the place reasonably well. Although I don't speak a word of Cantonese, I only speak Mandarin. But it has about it a quite a different political and social consciousness to anything you find on the mainland, even in the rest of Guangdong in the south of the country. There's quite a different psychology. And so if the Brits were there for 150 years, they actually left or had an impact on the place of psychology in quite a profound way. So I am not sure how this will evolve, but in my own engagements with my friends in China, I've left a few radical ideas, which is if you wanted to calm things down with Hong Kong and whoever the future chief executive of Hong Kong might be, once Carrie Lam does go, and I think she will sooner or later, because the Chinese and the Hong Kong administration will need a circuit breaker in this current cycle. But if a new chief executive, whoever she or he might be, was to throw out some conciliatory lines to the protest movement, conduct one or two of the public inquiries which the protest movement want, for example, into the proper deployment of the police, undertake a radical investment in social housing and the underlying difficulties in Hong Kong for poorer lower middle class people to live comfortably in Hong Kong. Then there's an argument you can begin to present to our Chinese friends along these lines, which is unlike Taiwan, the PRC has already won in Hong Kong. You got sovereignty in 1997. That's what that agreement was all about. And guess what? On the economic measures of things, if you go to the future, if we look at Shenzhen's economy just across the border now, as of two years ago, Shenzhen as a municipal area had a bigger GDP than Hong Kong. Play that out to 2049. That is a very, very big gap which is going to open up. And that's before you look at this mega-development in the Greater Bay Area, which is linking Shenzhen with the rest of the Pearl River Delta in a massive project of development. As I say to our Chinese friends, by the time we get to mid-century, Hong Kong will be as important to China domestically in its size as Macau is today. So why worry about it in the scheme of things? And this is a radical thought for our Chinese friends. Once we get to the 25-year point of the 50 years of one-country-two systems, why not roll it over again for another 50? When I've written this to my Chinese friends, there was as much silence in that room as there has been here. In other words, zero response. Thank you very much. So now we can take two or three questions from the IC handlers, Enrico Letta. Thank you. Thank you, Kevin. It was terrific. I would like to ask you to elaborate a little bit more about the divisions of European countries in the relationship with China. How do you see these divisions? What is the future on that point? Well, what I didn't get around to saying before, Enrico, was that if China's strategy is, as I described it before, if I'm accurate on that, and if the U.S.-China divide is, as I described as well, into an increasingly bipolar world, for Europe, Europe becomes increasingly the swing state for the future. That is, which way does it go? The Chinese, when they look at Europe, they see this very large integrated economic entity. They know that in political and foreign policy and security policy terms, it's relatively weak in terms of a single voice in Brussels. But China, given the reality of, let's call it, unfolding, decoupling with the United States, however far it goes in trade and technology and in finance, let alone currency questions, the Chinese thinking is that in Europe, if we are cut off from American technology, if we are cut off from American finance, even if we are cut off from a goods and services market, there's only one other entity in the world currently big enough to actually fill up that gap. And that's Europe. Now, I'm describing, I think, very early stages of China's thinking because this decoupling process really has only unfolded in the last 12 months in one form or another. Therefore, that is going to present Europeans with certain binary decisions for the future. Whereas all of us as American allies love a world where we can be friends of both, China and the United States. This will prospectively become harder and harder for which the 5G demand by the current US administration is just the first example of many others still to come. Chinese perceptions of Europe itself, I think, as you can see what they've done in Eastern Europe, or the former Eastern Europe with 16 plus one or is it 17 plus one now, I always lose count. They are reasonably happy with success there. They're delighted that Italy joined as the first G7 state to Belt and Road Initiative. They've always, they've had for 10 years now, big investments in Greece and seeing Greece as a country which will reflect Chinese realities and internal European deliberations. I think the Chinese are following carefully their analysis of the reformation line, which is, they will be targeting a whole bunch of countries in Southern Europe but elsewhere as well, Eastern Europe, parts of Northern Europe. But the binary nature of our future which is uncomfortable for all of us, including US allies in Asia, including Australia, is going to be one of the characteristics of this difficult period we're about to enter. So I am asked to take only one question, so I will take two. And because it is easy for me, I will take, well, I see so many. Well, Brian Callagher and yes, because we need a British citizen. Okay, so please, let us start with America and Britain. After all, this was, Hong Kong was British not so long ago. So thank you, I'm Brian Gallagher, the CEO of United Way Worldwide, two of the most confused countries in the world, apparently. Prime Minister, so I presume you believe the decoupling in the strategic competitive path now that US and China are on is not a good thing, is a negative thing. Besides Europe, who are the other mitigating players to avoid what would be catastrophic decoupling? So other state actors, multilateral players, even civil society players, what will keep China and the US from coming, when we do come back together again, to come back in a military conflict or an all-out cyber conflict or something that would be destructive globally? Thank you. On the trade war, let's be clear about our American friends, this is not just a Trump initiative, it has widespread Democrats support in the United States. There's a change administration today. The Democrats would be pursuing a strategy towards China about as hard-line as the current one, but more systematic than we have seen under President Trump. So the second point is that, remember the trade war exists for a purpose, and that is China has been dragging its feet on trade liberalization, market access, forced technology transfer, IP protection, state subsidy for its firms. And these are alive in WTO disputes with China over a long period of time. So these are necessary frictions to resolve. Thirdly, however, it is a vast ocean between that, on the one hand, and a decoupling of tech and finance, little and the currency on the other. That's where you're into economic war. Or let me call it economic cold war. And there is a view within the White House, sorry, within parts of the White House, that that in fact is the direction in which we should go, that to decouple is necessary to contain, and that is in fact part of an integrated strategy to do that. For me, it is unclear how much the United States will actually proceed down the decoupling road. What I fear is that China is concluded internally that there's a big enough risk for it that China must take its own preparatory actions, which then, once they're prepared, tend to be implemented rather than simply remain on the shelf. We have mutually reinforcing, as it were, concerns, which therefore produce a more adverse reality. On the final point about off-ramps for this, how do you exit it? I think countries which have an ability to talk to the United States about where to go in the future on this, who would be listened to in Washington, would be Japan, Germany, which the United States identify as the new core of Europe, given Britain's decision, and less so India, possibly countries like Australia. In other words, close allies, but those who are able to say to Uncle Sam, be careful what you wish for. Lord Lutian. And that's the last question. Thank you very much. I might make it the last two questions, very brief. The first is really seeking your advice, Kevin. As you know, Britain still has guarantor status in relation to Hong Kong. We've been fairly cautious in the light of what's been happening in Hong Kong. What would your advice to us be as to what we should be doing at this moment? And secondly, you referred to the Belt and Road as advancing trading opportunities for China. It has been described by certain military figures in Europe as neocolonialism, building a colonial empire on behalf of China. Would you agree with that? Let me take the second question first, and then let me allow me to duck and weave and try and avoid a direct answer on the first question that you asked. And then I'll speak to you privately about it later on, which is on Hong Kong. On Belt and Road, what is the big distinguishing feature about China's global strategy? Is it against what, frankly, for 500 years was a relatively appalling Western colonial history in the rest of the world, whether it's Asia, Africa or Latin America, China has no interest in occupying anybody else's territory. It's just not there. China's territorial boundaries were largely settled in the Qing dynasty, between, let's call it 1600 and 1900, and achieved their maximum shape, but that's kind of where they are today. And there will be debates with the Russians, primarily about the long-term durability of that border. So therefore, an interest in foreign acquisition of territory is just not on the agenda. That's not the way in which China views the world. China's ultimate view, though, of, let's call it, Eurasia, is that they would want it to be as strategically benign and ultimately as compliant as possible to China's core strategic interests. And finally, on the question of markets, China is in the hunt for global markets. In Africa, as all of our American friends and colleagues at this important conference will know, but also in Latin America and the rest of Asia, look at the recent changes in Chinese economic diplomacy and political diplomacy towards India, because of its anticipation of where decoupling might go. So I do not see Belt and Road as such as a military strategy. There is a separate Chinese reach through the Indian Ocean, evidenced most recently by the acquisition of a 99-year lease in Djibouti for a Chinese effectively naval base there. China will have a range of justifications for that, including protecting its own sea lines of communications out of the Gulf if they can't in the future rely upon the United States. But that will also generate its own other strategic consequences as well. But when I've spoken to people at the core of the Belt and Road Initiative business in Beijing and queried those who are frank enough to explain what they're on about, I think that's a misread of what it is. And that is not me saying that China has no interest in extending its military presence in various parts of the world for other reasons, it does. And watch closely what China is doing in terms of the increased pace and locality of its joint exercising with the Russians in the Baltic, in the Mediterranean, and certainly in the Pacific. On Hong Kong, it's a highly sensitive matter that you raise, which is what should Britain's diplomacy be towards Hong Kong right now. Let me just say this, and I've just come from London, so I've been chatting to a few of our friends there about these questions. Is uniquely, as you say, under international law, the UK has a responsibility. None of the rest of us do, other than international human rights law and the UN Charter and the provisions there. But the UN Charter is about states, and Hong Kong is not a state. International human rights law is valid for all peoples, but as we know, it's a soft international instrument. So you uniquely have the treaty power. But to be frank, if I was Whitehall and Westminster, I would be rarely, but clearly articulating where in the United Kingdom's view the Joint Declaration and the Basic Law contained in the 97 Treaty arrangement were being violated at a particular time. These are not occasions to use lightly. Thank you very much. We could spend hours with you talking about China. Thank you very much.