Welcome to Paranormality Magazine! Each week, Paranormality Magazine explores all 40 subjects, from phantoms to UFOs, and every cryptid creature in between. Each week you are treated to a collection of well-researched and investigated stories, interviews and reports on cutting-edge paranormal projects and topics they know you crave. And here in the podcast, I share stories from the magazine to give you just a taste of what you receive in every issue. I'm Darren Marlar and this is Paranormality Magazine. Victor Fevolov was one of the lead investigators of the FOTIME case. In fact, he was the subject of a few of FOTIME's threatening notes. Fourteen years after researching that case, a family reached out to him from a small city on the coast of the Azov Sea by the name of Tagunrog. Chas of the Dead from Paranormality Magazine brings us the story. The family described a slew of activities that stood out immediately to Fevolov. The family said that no one had believed in their plight, but Fevolov did, as it sounded all so familiar to the case that occurred a decade and a half prior. He boarded a train to the town and visited the family's small apartment. When he arrived, he was struck with a sense of déjà vu. The apartment was on the eighth floor of a nine-story building. Once inside, he instantly noticed that the three-bedroom apartment shared roughly the same floor plan as the one that hosted the FOTIME entity. The family greeted him and invited him to join them for dinner. The family was also the same size as that in the FOTIME case, except they had a daughter instead of a son. Fevolov sat at the table and listened to the family's story. For a few years at this point, they had been subjected to harassment from an unseen force. While they were describing their account, the table began to move. It started shaking violently, tilting back and forth on its legs. Strangely, all the food and dishes aboard the table remained still and did not move at all. Fevolov reached for the camera that he always carries, and just as it powered up and he prepared to take the photo, the table suddenly stopped moving. He found the family had been experiencing this type of harassment for a few years at this point, and that the poltergeist had already entered what Fevolov called the writing phase. However, unlike FOTIME, these messages did not appear on strange notes or written on windows. The communication was taking place exclusively over text messages. The father and mother of the house would constantly receive messages from each other's phones that contained threatening words and insults. Neither parent had sent these messages, and neither phone contained records of them being sent. Oftentimes, the messages would disappear after a while on the receiving phone as well. The messages often told them to f off in a variety of fashions. It would egg them on, challenging them and asking them to respond. It also seemed obsessed with getting the two to consume alcohol, commanding them to buy several liters of beer a week and insisting that they drink them. There had not been signs of alcoholism in the family prior to these interactions. The entity even sent a message instructing the couple to kill Fevolov. The message was sent while he was on the train heading into the city. Oftentimes, the entity signed these messages with ZATAN written in Latin letters as opposed to Russian acrylics. Fevolov even witnessed the spontaneous appearance of these messages while both phones were in his field of view and were unmanipulated. After dinner, the family and Fevolov moved into the living room. They continued to explain the variety of phenomena they experienced. Another similar attribute was ZATAN's habit of turning on faucets and water in attempts to flood apartments. Once again, the focal point was their apartment, but their neighbors seemed to be plagued by these flooding attempts as well. ZATAN also seemed easily upset. If the family refused to drink as he commanded, he would hurt them physically. In one instance, a bag of hard candies vanished. Over the subsequent weekend, the small candies were thrown with force at the apartment occupants, leaving small bruises. It would also turn over furniture and break dishes if its orders were disobeyed. Money would often disappear as well from wallets and on rare occasions directly from bank accounts. ZATAN's influence over technology was also a point worth noting. Not only did it seem to communicate digitally, but it seems to show influence over these mediums. One instance occurred to the daughter of the family. She was withdrawing money from an ATM when a text box appeared in the corner. The text book had a single word, a Russian insult that most closely translates to the slang of a woman's body part which we will not say here, which happened to be ZATAN's nickname for her. The text box moved slowly from the top right corner to the bottom left. The girl was so frightened she took her card from the machine and ran. The spirit also showed a talent for teleporting objects. One of the more bizarre instances was when the father was driving with a friend and co-worker down a road outside of town. Suddenly both men felt the weight of their car shift and the steering reacted as well, causing them to swerve. They pulled over and opened the trunk to find a massive metal object in the trunk, an object that had not been there before. It looked like some kind of factory equipment, but was not one that was used at their place of employment. This incident actually resulted in a police report as the two men were reported for illegal dumping when they removed the strange object from their car. Interestingly enough, the father had no memory of this incident when he was asked about it a year later by Fevolov who was following up. The police report did exist and the co-worker remembered, but the father couldn't recall it until they took him to retrace the steps of that day. This turned out to be a pretty common effect for the father as he was the victim of a more intense side effect than the others. Oftentimes he would drop into a catatonic state, completely still and unable to move as if in a coma. They told Fevolov that this would occur often when his brother-in-law would visit. The brother-in-law lived in a nearby apartment and Fevolov asked if the brother-in-law could come over and answer some questions as well. He obliged and a few moments before he knocked on the door, the father fell to the floor. Fevolov watched as they tried all manner of methods to try and wake him up. They used ammonium dabbed onto a cotton ball, smelling salts, slaps and water. Nothing would stir the man. He would always awake from these episodes missing memories. He could always remember his wife, but had to be reminded of the name of his daughter on five separate occasions as well as other general information about his life. During one instance of this trance, about a year after this one, the family decided to take pictures and video of the father as they attempted to revive him. He had fallen into one of these episodes late one evening and then proceeded to try again to awaken him, to no avail. But when they replayed the footage, they noticed that a bright light source was glaring through the window in the background. None of them noticed this light at the time of filming, but when compared to photos taken at the same angle at different times of day, it is clear that a bright light must have been from some unnatural source, especially given the time of night the footage was captured. Eventually, the father regained consciousness but was in a dazed and confused state. Vevalov, having seen plenty of this on his first night, bid the family farewell so that they could rest from the night's bizarre activities. The mother put the father to bed and began to clean up. Vevalov had left and the daughter had headed out to meet some friends. There was a knock at the door. She assumed it was the daughter who had returned to pick up something she had forgotten, but when she answered the door she found it was her husband. He was standing there again extremely confused. From where she was it would have been impossible for the husband to have left the room and gone outside without her noticing. The husband himself was also confused, not understanding how he got there. Vevalov tried setting up cameras and investigating the phenomenon but it proved elusive. The camera would move on its own until the shot was ruined or sometimes the battery would drain entirely. In one instance, the memory card was removed and left on a couch cushion while no one was in the apartment. These types of instances continued on for more than a year while Vevalov investigated the case. The case itself seemed to occur over a span of six years. Vevalov believes this might be a record when it comes to poltergeist cases. It seems in more recent years the phenomenon has died off to a degree, but oddly enough instances of spontaneous human teleportation have continued in the town of Taggenrog. One man was waiting for his elevator and found himself several kilometers away in an instant. The confused man had been talking to his wife before the incident and called her immediately after. Data from the witness's cell phones and security cam footage have been used to corroborate his claim. For many investigators, this was taken as a sign that Zatan is still active to this day. Brandon Grimes brings us a story about flowers mysteriously appearing on a gravestone every year since 1796. In a picturesque Cornwall village near Truro, a haunting tale of a young woman named Betsy Dragascus has captured the imaginations of locals and visitors alike. The village nestled within the Cornwall area of outstanding natural beauty is said to be haunted by the ghost of Betsy, who died tragically at the tender age of 19 in 1795. Each year, on the anniversary of her death, flowers mysteriously appear on her slate gravestone, located just by the entrance to the church's gate at the Church of St. Clement. Historian Barry West has delved in to the fascinating case of Betsy's spectral presence, seeking to uncover the truth behind this enduring phenomenon. Betsy's parents were known to round the old inn at St. Clement, also known as the ship inn in more recent times. According to local lore, Betsy's life ended in sorrow as she took her own life, driven to such a desperate act after becoming pregnant with someone from a different social class. In the societal norms of that era, such a situation would have brought immense shame upon her family. Interestingly, Betsy's headstone rests in the Lich Gate rather than within the consecrated ground of the churchyard. Some believe that this placement might be a result of the church's refusal to bury those who committed suicide in its hallowed grounds, considering it a grave sin, according to Church doctrine. However, conflicting stories have emerged about Betsy's cause of death. Barry West's latest visit to the village led him to the doorstep of author Helena Patterson, who has extensively researched the history of St. Clement. Helena shares an alternative version of the tale, stating that Betsy succumbed to tuberculosis. This version of events was recounted to her by descendants of the Dragascus family whom she had met over the past five decades. Regardless of the cause of Betsy's untimely demise, her ghost is said to roam the vicinity, forever tied to the location of her resting place. Sightings of a young girl donning a mop cap and an old-fashioned dress have been reported, intriguing both locals and curious visitors. The mystery surrounding Betsy's haunting doesn't end there. The area seems to hold an aura of otherworldly energy, with reports of poltergeist-like activities. Some residents have attested to experiencing strange occurrences in certain cottages nearby suggesting the presence of lingering spirits. Barry West's investigation has also led him to connect with Gale Phillips, a descendant of the Dragascus family. While there's uncertainty about the exact lineage, Gale's great-grandmother Margaret Dragascus shares ties to the parish of St. Clement, stretching back several centuries. The enigma surrounding Betsy's grave, the apparitions and the lingering energies continue to captivate the community, as flowers appear annually on her gravestone, her presence remains a poignant reminder of a young life cut short and the enduring mysteries that envelop this charming Cornwall village. Whether you believe in ghosts or not, the story of Betsy Dragascus is undeniably one that has stood the test of time, inviting further exploration into the realms of the unknown. Want more Paranormality? Subscribe to Paranormality magazine, and each month, get it delivered digitally or via mail in our print version. Paranormality magazine is a collaborative endeavor featuring works from people like you who have a passion for all things mysterious and unexplained. Our goal is the pursuit of knowledge, gathering captivating stories from our own team of writers, researchers and investigators, as well as from writers such as yourself. Each monthly issue also includes a list of paranormal, horror, UFO and cryptozoology events around the country, incredible paranormal-themed artwork, articles and writing sent in from our readers, suggested books and podcasts to consume and more. Visit ParanormalityMag.com and subscribe today for as little as $3.99 a month. That's ParanormalityMag.com The word Pukwaji stems from the Native American tongue. This cryptid's lore is associated with the Algonquin, Ojibwe and Wapenog tribes, among others. The root Bagwaj, or Bagwaji, means in the wilderness or wild, respectively. The Native word Bagwajanini means person or little person of the wilderness or in the wild. It's from this word that the modern term Pukwaji stems from. Just sound it out, Bagwajanini and Pukwaji. Here's the similarity. If you've never heard of a Pukwaji before, well, you're about to, thanks to Deborah D. Roke, a contributor for Paranormality Magazine. Pukwaji's are described as small creatures who dwell in the forest. They're about knee high to three feet tall. Their faces are somewhat human-like, with front-facing eyes, but they tend to have large noses and at times long, pointy ears. Think troll or goblin. Their skin is usually gray and smooth. Sometimes they have fur or even porcupine quills, and they walk on two legs. According to Native American tales, these creatures have long existed within the North American forests way before settlers came. For a while, the Bagwajanini lived in harmony with humans. However, that changed. One legend from the Wampanoag says that everything between the Bagwajawanini and humans was great until humans got distracted with their relationship with Moshop. Moshop was a giant, kind creation deity who created the area of Cape Cod, Massachusetts. Moshop was beloved by humans, and the Pukwajis became very jealous. Their jealousy made them mischievous, and they began bothering and aggravating the Wampanoag people. The natives asked for help from Granny Squonet, Moshop's wife. Moshop heard about the complaints and got involved. Moshop collected as many as the Bagwajanini as he could and scattered them across New England, but after some time, while Moshop and Granny Squonet were away, the Bagwajanini returned, this time with a vengeance.  When Moshop and Granny got word of this, Moshop sent his sons to take care of the problem, but the Pukwajis lured his sons to the woods and shot them dead with magical arrows. This enraged Moshop and Granny Squonet, who then began crushing Pukwajis. However, the Bagwajanini, tricksters as they are, tricked Moshop into the water where they shot him with the same magical arrows. Some legends say Moshop was shot dead, others say he became so disheartened that he disappeared from the land and even the mythology. Today, Pukwajis are still known to be tricksters. They are also known to be killers. Luring people to a cliff where they are pushed off. There are also stories of them shooting people with arrows and kidnapping children. Pukwajis are also shapeshifters and can transform into different animals. Some believe that Pukwajis still have the power over the spirits they kill. It's said if you see one, you leave it alone. Ignore it. Pukwajis can only hurt you if they lure you or trick you. Disturbing, no? Many of the sightings have occurred in the Freetown Fall River State Forest located in the famous Bridgewater Triangle in Massachusetts. Fun fact, in Freetown sightings are so common that the authorities have placed yellow Pukwaji crossing signs to warn motorists of the unexpected dangers that lurk on the roads at night. There are also accounts that come from the Midwest, especially from the Mounds State Park in Indiana. The first time I heard about Pukwajis was on the Lore podcast back in 2017. The episode talked about Bill Russo's experience in Massachusetts. Russo had a home in Rainham, located in the middle of the Bridgewater Triangle. The Bridgewater Triangle, for those who are unaware, is an area of roughly 200 square miles that's known for its paranormal activity. It's considered the Bermuda Triangle of the States. It's believed that the area may be a paranormal vortex. All kinds of paranormal phenomena have been cited in the Triangle from aliens, Bigfoot, Pukwajis, Poltergeists, and Thunderbirds. Its three points are marked by the towns of Rehoboth, Abington, and Freetown. However, I won't be talking about Russo's encounter because it's very well known. It's been featured on various podcasts, documentaries, and on the Discovery Channel. Instead, let's focus on a more obscure story. I found this story by chance, and I think it's just as creepy as Bill Russo's story, maybe even a little creepier. This story comes from a Facebook user who commented her experience on a paranormal podcast's page. This woman, I'll name Ann, lived near the Mounds State Park in Indiana. Ann is a mom of two kids, with the oldest being two years old at the time. The youngest was about six to eight months old. The story takes place one night around two or three a.m. Her baby was crying, so Ann went to the room to console her infant. Ann paced around the room to soothe her baby in her arms. However, she noticed that as she would approach the window, her baby would scream. Ann found this odd. It seemed that being close to the window would bother her baby, so she decided to look outside. That is when she saw something. It was about two to three feet tall, standing outside across the street. Ann looked at it and noticed it had a rounded nose and glowing red eyes. She even noticed it was wearing clothes. It seemed to be wearing a purple gown. Ann was shocked and terrified. She immediately called her younger brother and began describing what she was looking at, but her brother was dismissive. He told her it was late, her eyes were probably playing tricks on her. He told her to go outside and make some noise to shoe it away. They hung up and then opened the window and yelled at it in hopes of shoeing it away. It didn't move. It continued to stand across the street from her home still as a rock, staring at her. Ann decided to be brave. She put her baby down and went to the front door. She opened the door and from the door she tried to scare it away. Suddenly the creature bolted toward her house. Ann instantly slammed the door shut and moved her TV stand in front of it. She panicked for a bit, but as soon as her nerves settled, she called 911. She did not know what to say. How do you describe a creature to the police? So she told the police that she was home alone and that someone was outside her house. She asked if an officer could come and check out the property. The cops came and looked around, but saw nothing but a balloon in her yard, a remnant of one of the children's birthday parties. The officers said that she may have mistaken the balloon for a person. Ann was upset.  The officers left. Ann was not comforted by the police visit. She still felt unsafe. That same night Ann got her children ready and went to stay at her sister's house. A few weeks later she returned to her house during the day to gather her things. She was moving. Ann never stayed another night in that house. Her family still teases her about it, but it doesn't end there. One day, as Ann was looking at some pictures, she noticed a picture of her daughter that was taken a day before the sighting. As she examined the photo, she took notice of the tailgate of the truck. On it she saw a familiar face, the same face that had been staring at her from across the street that night. It seemed that whatever she saw that night had been with them the day before. As we are still in the Yule Tide season, I thought I'd share this story from the December 2023 edition of Piranormality magazine. It's entitled The Haunted Ornament. It was two weeks before Christmas and Karen was decorating her tree while listening to holiday music. As she opened each ornament box, memories came flooding back. There was the sled ornament her daughter Madeleine made in second grade, the vintage glass bulbs Karen collected over the years, and the personalized Mr. and Mrs. Claus figurines she got as a wedding gift from her great aunt. Karen's husband Jack walked into the living room carrying a small box. Hey, hon, look what I found in the basement when I was looking for the stockings. It's one of my mom's old ornaments from when I was a kid.  It looked old and worn with faded glitter that barely clung to its surface. She didn't recognize it. Are you sure it was your mom's? I don't remember seeing it before. Yeah, I'm positive. I remember her putting it up every year on the tree, bringing back memories of Christmas at home as a kid. Jack smiled nostalgically. Karen shrugged and hung the bell toward the back of the tree. As much as she loved vintage Christmas decor, this one seemed kind of junky next to her collection of pristine glass bulbs, but it clearly held sentimental value for Jack. Over the next week, Karen couldn't shake the feeling that there was something off about the old bell ornament. When she wasn't looking directly at that part of the tree, she felt like she could see the ornament swaying out of the corner of her eye, but when she turned to look directly at it, it was stationary. How odd. She must be mistaken. The next Sunday evening when Karen and Jack were relaxing on the couch watching a movie, they heard a loud crash from the living room. They jumped up to investigate and were shocked to find the Christmas tree face down on the floor, water, and pine needles everywhere. As Jack rided the tree and Karen started sopping up the mess with towels, she noticed the bell ornament laying alone several feet away from the rest of the fallen ornaments. That's weird, she thought. Over the next week, more unexplained crashing sounds came from the living room overnight. Each time Karen and Jack would rush in to find the tree had inexplicably fallen over again, and the bell ornament was once again sitting apart from the others. Karen was mystified, but Jack seemed unconcerned. We probably just didn't get the tree stand stable enough. I'll brace it better tonight. But Karen couldn't help but feel like something strange was happening. A few nights later, Karen awoke suddenly to the sound of jingling bells. She shook Jack awake and asked, Do you hear that? It sounds like sleigh bells or something. Jack listened for a minute, then shrugged sleepily. I don't hear anything. You were probably dreaming, hon. But Karen knew she wasn't dreaming. She heard the bells again twice more that night before drifting off into restless sleep. The next morning, Karen nearly slipped on something small and metallic while walking into the kitchen for coffee. She picked up the object. It was the bell ornament. What was it doing here on the kitchen floor? She examined it closely and noticed a small clump of pine needles and dirt stuck in its hook. Just then, Jack walked into the kitchen, holding the morning paper. Honey, that weird old ornament was on the floor. It looks like it somehow came off the tree again, and I swear I heard sleigh bells ringing last night. Jack raised his eyebrows. Are you feeling okay, Karen? I think all the holiday stress is getting to you.  Karen sighed. She was starting to feel like she was losing her mind, but she knew in her gut there was something not normal happening with that ornament. That night, after Jack went to bed, Karen crept downstairs to the living room. She had to get to the bottom of this. The tree stood tall and pristine as if it had never tipped over. In fact, it looked fuller than usual. Karen examined the tree closely and realized there were now two bell ornaments hanging on it, the original and a nearly identical looking duplicate. What on earth? She carefully removed both ornaments and placed them on the fireplace mantel, then went to bed puzzled and unsettled. The next morning when Karen came down for breakfast, she peeked into the living room apprehensively. The bells were still on the mantel where she left them. Relieved, she went to join Jack in the kitchen and she poured herself some coffee. Jack remarked, Looks like you took the bell ornament off the tree. Any particular reason? Karen was stunned. You mean you didn't notice anything strange about there being two identical ornaments? Jack looked at her blankly. What are you talking about? There's just the one ornament right there on the mantel, the one that was always my mom's. Now Karen was really losing it. She could clearly see two ornaments on the mantel. She took a deep breath. Jack, I know this is going to sound crazy, but I think that ornament is haunted or possessed somehow. It kept mysteriously falling off the tree at night and making strange sounds, and now it seems to have magically duplicated itself, but only I can see the second one. Concern washed over Jack's face. Sweetheart, I think you need to lie down. You're clearly exhausted and getting a bit confused. There's only one ornament on the mantel. I know it's an old family heirloom, but it's just a decoration. Frustrated and second guessing her own eyes, Karen finally said, Okay, you must be right. I think all the holiday errands have me tired out and caused me to imagine things. I'll go rest. That night, after Jack went to sleep, Karen gathered the courage to go back downstairs. She had to know if she was imagining things or if the ornament was somehow supernatural. Bracing herself, she turned on the lights in the living room. On the mantel sat a single bell ornament, just as Jack had insisted.  It had all been in her head. She walked over to inspect the ornament, and that's when the room erupted in a flurry of jingling bells and whooshing cold air. Karen screamed as the ornament flew off the mantel and started darting rapidly around the room. It ricocheted off the walls and whizzed past her head. The jingling grew definitely loud, like a thousand tiny bells were trapped in the room. Karen dropped to the floor, yelling for Jack at the top of her lungs. Within seconds, he was by her side, just as the ornament came zooming toward his head. He ducked just in time, and it crashed into the wall, falling to the floor with a ding. Karen and Jack looked at each other in shock. What was that? Jack panted.  I don't know, but it's been terrorizing me for days. Your mom's old ornament is haunted or possessed. I told you. At that moment, Karen noticed movement coming from the fallen ornament. Its metal surfaces started rippling and stretching until the ornament took on a new shape, the ghostly form of an old woman in a dress. The ghost looked kindly at Karen and Jack and spoke in a calm, gentle voice. I'm sorry for frightening you these past days. You see, I am Charlotte, Jack's great aunt. When I was alive, I possessed a gift, the sight, as my family called it. I could see and communicate with spirits. Just before I passed, I transferred my gift to this ornament so that I could continue using it for good. My Christmas wish is to pass the gift along to someone in the family who was open to it. I hoped young Jack here would be the one, but alas, he did not believe. But you, Karen, you were open to possibilities beyond the mundane. You believed in the magic and spirit of Christmas, and so it is you I have chosen to inherit my gift, if you'll accept it. Karen was stunned, but to her own surprise not frightened. This all suddenly made sense. She turned to Jack and said, All those times I said I saw or heard strange things, you couldn't. It was real. This is truly happening. Then she turned back to the specter. Yes, I accept this gift and promise to use it only to help others as you did. Charlotte's ghost smiled and nodded. Use it well, my dear, and merry Christmas to you both. Her form slowly dissolved back into a plain silver bell ornament, which fell with a soft jingle onto the carpet. The next year, Christmas, Karen pulled out the ornament and stared thoughtfully at it before hanging it in front and center on the tree. She may not fully understand her newly discovered abilities yet, but she knew this would be a very special Christmas and the start of many paranormal adventures to come. Happy Holidays from Paranormality Magazine. Thanks for listening to Paranormality Magazine. Get more information about the magazine and subscribe to our monthly publication at ParanormalityMag.com or click the link in the show description.  We might feature you in our next issue. If you have a paranormal podcast, you can add it to our website so our readers can find your show. And artists, if you'd like your work to be featured in our magazine or on our back cover, contact us. Again, our website is ParanormalityMag.com. I'm Darren Marlar and I'll have more paranormal for you next time from Paranormality Magazine.


So, on the P1000, this is what 800 microliters look like. So, on the P200, if we want to do 80 microliters, this is what 80 microliters look like. But if you, on the P200, you can also do like an 80.5, 80.3, 80.2, and that's this bottom, so this may look like 800, but in fact it's actually 80.0, and that line right there in the middle is indicating the decimal point. So, this is 80, and now this is 80.4 on here. I guess this goes up by increments of 2, but some of them do go by increments of 1, so that's why I couldn't show 80.5. And then on here, on the P10, this is what 8 microliters looks like. So, yes, again, it looks like it's 800, but here the decimal point goes up to 2. So, this is 8.00. Again, that line is indicating the decimal point. So, this is 8 microliters, and this is 8.05 microliters, or 8.1 microliters. So, not 810, but 8.1.


Hi, everyone. Thank you for joining us this open access week. I'm Dr. Gayatri Parke, managing editor at Ananko Academy. With me today is Dr. Brian Nosek. He is the founder and executive director of Center for Open Science, a non-profit organization that actually focuses on increasing transparency in the academic research sector. They develop a variety of tools to share data and conduct research as well as report it. But aside from this, he's also a professor of psychology at the University of Virginia, where his research interests focus on people and system behavior, solutions to align behaviors with values and how to improve and accelerate progress in science. So Brian, thank you so much for joining us today. I know it's the 10th year anniversary of Center for Open Science. So I'm really glad that we could have you this year, particularly given the theme for the open access week this year, which is all about community over commercialization. So I think I would actually like to use that to jump right into my first question for you. Center for Open Science is somewhat of an odd organization to start, you know, most people when they start with innovation in the research space, very often it's geared towards a product that is for profit. But I think your vision was a lot broader and perhaps a little ahead of the time when you began. So maybe if you could tell us a little bit about what your motivation was in starting Center for Open Science. Yes, and thank you for having me. I'm delighted to have a chance to chat. The motivation underlying the founding of the Center for Open Science was recognition that the values that we have and aspire for for how science should operate. Transparency, reproducibility, high integrity are not the same thing as what the daily practice of science is and especially not things that are necessarily rewarded in the social system of science. I am rewarded for getting things published and to get things published, I need to produce exciting novel interesting findings. And of course I want them to be correct and I want them to be as accurate as possible and I want to be as rigorous as possible, but I'm not actually rewarded for being accurate or rigorous or reproducible. I'm rewarded for exciting results. And so that creates a dysfunctional reward system that we think ends up inhibiting progress in science. So the goal for founding the Center was really to tackle that systems problem. How can we shift the reward system and provide solutions so that the values that we have for doing science openly, transparently, reproducibly are things that were rewarded for as scientists doing our work. So it didn't make any sense to us that were involved in the early years of of COS to form it as a for-profit because the mission is really a public goods mission. How do we help science as a social system become better aligned with the aspirations? So we didn't want to be having that internal conflict for the organization between a profit and what our mission is about. So we're mission focused. Absolutely. That makes so much sense. So I believe you started with OSF first, which is sort of a pre-print server that it has grown to be with across multiple domains now. However, I just wanted to get a little bit of insight on what is guiding the rest of the products that COS has released. Is there sort of a roadmap that you're following on what parts of research activities you're focusing on? Yeah, great question. And we are trying with our approach to tackle the challenge of the reward system by leaning into the fact that it's a system and you can't inject just a single solution to shift an entire system. So the base of our strategy is infrastructure, the open science for any worker OSF and its goal as you indicated is to try to support the entire life cycle of research. So it helps researchers do better planning to document their work as they're doing it to share data and materials and code underlying their papers and then make their papers openly accessible as well pre-prints or otherwise. So that whole life cycle is intended to increase overall transparency, but just providing the tool doesn't change anything about the reward system. Why would researchers use it? How would they integrate it to their daily work? So the next set of activities we have is really focused on training and how is it that we integrate these tools into the daily workflow that researchers have. So how can we make it easy for researchers to be more transparent, to be more reproducible? The next layer of our work is about how do we create new social norms about why it is we would be more open and transparent. And this is a really important part in science because most of how you and I decide how should we do research is by looking at our peers. How do people in my field do research? How do people in my program do research? And that informs, well, that's I guess how I should do research. And so a lot of the change movement is about community building. How do we identify what our values are collectively and how do we start to demonstrate that these are new things that we can do that are actually aligned with what we're trying to do in science? There's two more layers and they are focused on the reward system. So all of that is sort of the bottom up change. Infrastructure, training, norms, but we really, if we're going to fix the system, we have to change how funders decide who gets the money. We have to change how publishers decide who gets published and we have to change how institutions decide who gets a job and who gets to keep their job doing research. And so that part is providing a policy framework to those different stakeholders so that they can make the actual doing of open rigorous research incentivized and even required for people to succeed in the system. Very interesting. So definitely I see the impact of something like a pre-registered report, right? So transparency or openness can begin from the time you actually think of a research project. That absolutely makes sense. My question here is, you know, I feel it could perhaps fit the clinical field very well because we are typically planning out protocols much in advance of patient recruitment and whatever other experiments you might be doing, but perhaps walk us through how that could work in research fields where protocol publishing is perhaps not the norm or you know, research perhaps evolves as you go ahead in doing the experiments. The excellent point, the concept of pre-registration or committing in advance what the plans are to help distinguish between the things that were discovered after the fact is a very natural fit to some kinds of research. Like, oh, it's obvious. I'm going to test the hypothesis. I should write down beforehand what my hypothesis is so that when I get the data, I have some accountability to say, well, I said I was going to test this. I said I was going to analyze it this way. Do I see evidence consistent with that? Various areas that have very strong theory. That's also what's happening, right? The theoretical expectations are that when we do this, this is what happens. So that constrains us from over interpreting noise as signal. But the concept of pre-registration does have broader application because its goal is to do two different things. One goal of pre-registration is to make very clear the distinction between what was planned before and what was what was discovered after the fact and in confirmatory domains, very clear, but even in exploratory, more exploratory domains, if we have plans, for example, for how we're going to analyze our data, providing those plans in advance can increase the strength of our statistical inferences that we make after the fact compared to, for example, while I'm exploring, so I'm just going to analyze it 5,000 different ways and show you the 10 interesting ways that came out of that. You would feel less confident knowing that I did 5,000 without being able to see them than if I had laid out those 10 ways and said, I have no idea what's going to happen. I'm just exploring, but here are the 10 ways I'm going to analyze it and show you all 10. And then the second purpose of pre-registration is to make sure that all the research that I do is ultimately discoverable. So I might be in a very, most of my lab work is exploratory, but we do lots of things and not all of them end up in the papers. So if I did a hundred projects and only reported two in papers after the fact, if you don't know about those other 98, you would say, well, great, that's an amazing finding, but if you learn about those other 98, you'd say, well, wait a second, like y'all tested kind of the same hypothesis or you were sure you were exploring, but you were investigating similar questions. Maybe these two kind of popped out by chance. So in that context, just knowing that those other studies exist is very useful to address publication bias or the overvaluing of positive exciting results and ignoring all those things that just didn't work out. Right. Okay. That makes sense. I guess my follow-up question is do you see value in utilizing these pre-registered reports to establish research collaborations for that, keeping in clean with community over commercialization for this year? Yeah. The act of pre-registration is an opportunity to announce early. Here's something I'm thinking about doing. And that could spawn exactly as they're suggesting opportunities for others to say, oh, I've been thinking about that too. The best example of what you're describing that I know of is the journal amps, advances in methods and practices in psychological science. What they have done with the pre-registration or registered report model is a small team says, we're really interested in replicating this particular earlier finding. It's really important, but we don't know how it operates or if there's variation in when it's observed and when it's not observed. So we want to pre-register a design and commit to reporting based on that design. And what amps does as a journal is set. Once the protocol is accepted, they put out a call for anybody to join on a collaboration. We want this to be run in every nation in the world. We want this to be collected in variety of different social contexts. As long as you can follow the protocol, you are invited to participate in this project and we will publish all the results from all of the different sources. I love this model because it really provides opportunity, especially in domains where there's going to be high variability like psychology or ecology or other places where this context really, really matters. It provides an opportunity for many different communities to say, I don't know, but let's see how our community ends up showing that evidence compared to yours. Yeah, that sounds wonderful. I guess my question is does do you think it's a model that could fit well with a peer review of protocols as well? Yeah. Yeah, and if so, I mean, we all know about problems with peer review, right? Just the length of time availability of peer reviewers. Do you think there's perhaps a lesser burden or why do you think, you know, this format, this model could work for peer review then, that publication would not? Right. So pre-registration is a general concept that you can do independent of a journal or peer review. So if you go to OSF and you pre-register your studies, you can do it just on your own at any time, no restrictions. The registered report model is a subset of pre-registration that engages peer review exactly like you're describing. So the idea of the registered report model is that the authors develop their concept, the question they're going to investigate their methodology, their analysis plan, and then they send it to the journal for peer review before conducting the research. And then the journal commits to publish it or not based on is it an important question and is it a good methodology to test that question? And then you go get the data and then you just add the data and then submit the final report. This is what we found. So what's great about that in addition to changing the incentives for publication to be about the outcomes. It's now it's about the methodology and the question. The outcomes are just the outcomes. It also brings in expert reviewers at a point in time where they can actually help improve the research. When it's reviewed all afterwards and I send my here's all my studies and I send it to you for review.  Like what were you thinking? And and then I get all those reviews and I say, oh, God, I should have thought of that. But it's too late in registered reports.  Here's an alternative way you could do that. Here is a potential alternative explanation and here's a fix for addressing that. So our dialogue between author and reviewer becomes more collaborative and your expertise then makes my work better. And I just I just in theory love this and then in practice, I think it is actually working out that way and in many of the cases of registered reports that it's actually helping the research get better and reviewers feel like they're more valuable in the process. They're actually contributing. It's actually quite coincidental that we're talking about this. There was a recently released article about how peer review actually doesn't lead to any significant changes in the final outcome in, I believe, ecology. So clearly a big positive to step in when the research is still raw. Yeah, great efforts there. I think I wonder though, I mean, I do see that there are about 300 journals that have signed up for this model. Where do you think it's heading into the future? And how important is publishing this data, you know, that is it leading to more publication of negative results perhaps, or is it improving timelines for peer review once the data is collected? Do you have that type of measurements in place? Yeah, great question. So you're right that more than 300 journals have adopted the model of registered reports so you can submit to them the plans and they will review it beforehand. One of the most recent adopters is the journal nature. So it's not just journals that are people don't know about or are very specialized. It's also some of the most recognized visible journals that have made this an option. And we have, it was first introduced in 2013, the first published registered reports were 2014. And so in that intervening time, a meta science community has emerged to evaluate lots of things about how to improve science. But a lot of studies about registered reports specifically is it meeting the promise that we hope for? Or are there unintended consequences that it actually creates some problems? A couple of others, many studies, but I'll just mention two. One is by Anne Shield and her colleagues where they looked at does registered reports pre-committed in advance make it more likely that unexpected negative, no results are published, things that are different than the hypothesis. And they found exactly that. So in standard reports, they found that 97 of hypotheses are supported, which is like, we're right all the time. We don't even need to do the research. We're always right. With registered reports where that commitment was made in advance, it was more like 40% of the first hypotheses were supported. That's more realistic for anybody that's does the work in the lab. We know we're wrong a lot. Yeah. In fact, 40%, I'd love to be right 40% of the time. I am not. So that's pretty good evidence. Another piece of evidence is was led by our team at COS where we put registered reports and then comparison articles in the same journal or by the same authors that were done in the standard process and put them through a structured peer review process again and had them rated on a variety of different criteria. And what we observed in that observational study was that the registered reports were rated higher in rigor and quality across a variety of different criteria compared to the standard articles. So that's good initial evidence that perhaps like you were saying earlier, the peer review process might actually help improve those or when I know I'm going to be evaluated based on the rigor of my methodology. I make my methodology more rigorous. So that initial evidence is very positive. The last point you raised was on the peer review process itself. Does it add burden? Does it shorten time? What's the impact? We don't have good evidence about it yet. We only have sort of anecdotal evidence and the bits that we have are that one, it may actually lower the overall burden of peer review because in an interesting way, which is most of the time when I have a new paper, I end up having to send it to three or four or five different journals until I get it accepted because they find all these problems that I wish I had thought of. And so the burden, the key inlet of burden is five editors, 15 reviewers, et cetera. With registered reports, the acceptance rate so far appears to be much higher, which suggests that lots of research has good ideas as an improvable, but then it suggests that it could lower the overall burden by only needing to go to a couple of journals at most before it gets into the pipeline. So that's an interesting observation. The second on just reports of what reviewers have experienced is that the experience that it's not much higher burden than doing like a revise and resubmit. You read it once and you read it again, but it might even be a bit lower burden because you review the first part the first time and then you review the second part the second time and the second time when you get it back after the results are in, you're not evaluating whether the results are interesting. You're just evaluating did they do what they said they were going to do and did they interpret their results responsibly. That's it. And reviewers tend to really like it because they're invested too. Oh, I wonder what's going to happen. Oh yes, definitely. I can imagine that being a motivating factor to do the second review as well. Absolutely. So I guess keeping the sales team in mind, we often see that a lot of these open access practices are taken up in the US perhaps in Europe, keeping in mind that audiences across the world, what would you say a researcher should try and do if they're just trying to pick up open access practices? Maybe the institution doesn't quite support them the way you envision a change at the broader level of their policy can be, you know, a repurpose to promote open access in those situations. What's your advice for the project? It's such an important question because the this kind of reform movement relies intensively on community. It's people can't do it alone, right? You need to have others that you can connect with that you can share insights with that you can grow interest in among the researchers that in one's department when one's field in one's region and that's hard to get started. So anyone that feels disconnected from the reform movement as it's happening because of where they live or what the circumstances of the their context are. There are lots of points of connection to make with the existing community. There are a number of grassroots open science communities. For example, in psychology, there's this society for the improvement of psychological science sips in ecology and evolutionary biology. There's a group called sortie that is trying to connect and provide instances of opportunities. Our own organization, the Center for Open Science has an ambassador program where people can join and learn about these issues and learn how to advance them in their communities. So my main advice would be don't try to go it alone seek out these points of connection with the existing communities and then educate those communities about how they need to adapt to be relevant in their in your local context, right? The COS is US based institution. And so we have our blinders on for what the reality is like for researchers in the US. And so we really rely on our ambassadors and other collaborators to sort of help us say, well, that's great and fine, but that just does not work in the Brazilian context or in the, you know, Slovakian context, wherever. And this is how we need to think about adapting that for this context. That is hugely important for us and hopefully likewise a benefit for those that we collaborate with. Sounds like community development is a success factor. You were right. Absolutely. And then what would be your advice for universities? Let's say sounds like open access practices are lot more domain specific or let's say even openness towards change is higher in certain research fees. Whereas universities are perhaps catching to multiple researchers, their viewpoints different, you know, practices and the fees. So what's your advice there? Two recommendations. The first is that UNESCO has an open science movement that it has coordinated and has a lot of national signatories to that and UNESCO has from that developed lots of resources to help institutions start to think about how they can start to reward, support open science, open access, open scholarship practices. So I strongly recommend connecting with that community and that they're amazing. The second recommendation is to consider the institution signing on to the Kauara agreement that's C-O-A-R-A and it's C-O-A-R-A dot U. This is a commitment that institutions can make to evaluate how they assess research at their institution and it's a fabulous movement with again lots of community building resources, collaboration across national and regional boundaries for institutions to decide how is it that we want to align the values of our institution with how we reward our researchers. And so that is a really important step to making all of this work. That sounds like a fantastic set of resources and I hope this open access week, a lot of universities actually explore these given the theme. So before we leave this conversation and move on to, you know, I'm sure whatever is happening in our day, just a couple of thoughts on where do you see future of open scholarship? And what do you think is the biggest challenge right now that we need to fix to really ensure inclusivity in open scholarship? Yeah, I would say the future of open scholarship is that it's happening. It has passed that point of, oh, that's an interesting idea. And now there is sufficient investment. UNESCO is one example in the EU. There is a substantial investment and commitment to moving towards open scholarship. The US has made very big strides in the last year for starting to make this into policy that federal institutions will have to support. So that is saying like this is coming. If it's not in one's current view, it will be there. So in that context, the opportunity here is to make sure especially through the equity lens is to make sure that communities do not get left behind, right? With all of these kinds of innovations, right? The ideals are big and grand. The implementation moves fast for places that have lots of resources and everybody else is sort of left like, oh, well, now what do we do? And it can ironically even, you know, even though the goals of open scholarship are themselves to increase inclusivity and equity, the inaction of it can create more disparity. And so the key thing for success, I think in the next few years is how do we make sure that the tools that are being developed, the services that are aiming to support it and the community building that's happening around it is available to all and responsive to all the diversity of needs that occur, right? If our solution, for example, the OSF is tuned for the US context and makes all of these assumptions just in how the tools work, that's going to be a real big barrier to how someone in Kenya or Indonesia or Australia tries to engage in that work. Absolutely. So I guess the takeaway is no one solution fits all and we have to adapt and be responsive. Yeah, exactly. Well, that was a great insight Brian and thank you so much for joining us again today and I wish you all the best for whatever falls in the future of COS and I'm sure what could be a busy year for you. So thank you so much. Thank you for having me. I'm delighted to have the conversation.


Welcome to Amsterdam. And KubeCon, CloudNativeCon 2023. Join John Furrier, Savannah Peterson, Rob Streche, and UPScon. As the Kube covers the largest conference on Kubernetes, CloudNative, and open source technologies together with developers, engineers, and IT leaders from around the globe. Live coverage of KubeCon, CloudNativeCon 2023 is made possible by the support of Red Hat, the CNCF, and its ecosystem partners. Good morning and welcome back to Fabulous Amsterdam. We are at KubeCon EU, and we are the Kube, ironically. It's a beautiful serendipitous coincidence we were just talking about on the show. My name is Savannah Peterson. Joined today with Rob. How you doing? I'm doing great. Having a lot of fun already. I know. I feel like your energy is actually up today versus yesterday, which is an accomplishment. It is. Second day, more energy. You're feeding off the community a little bit? Absolutely. It's been fabulous. I'm feeding off our great guests that we have. Should we talk about them, or should we just make them feel awkward sitting on the table with us? No, I think we should talk about them. Gentlemen, Fabian and Andrew, thank you so much for joining us. You're both with Red Hat. You both care about community, and you're here to talk to us about KubeVirt. What is KubeVirt? Just to start off. So, KubeVirt, KubeVirt is a community project, right? In the CNCF. There's a few of them here, yes. There's a few of them. It's so many, but we'll get to that later. So, KubeVirt allows you to run virtual machines and Kubernetes alongside pods, right? So, it's empowering Kubernetes to not only run containers. Containers are great, right? But it's also enabling you to run virtual machines. And maybe we have some time to talk about why. We absolutely have time. Cool. I think understanding the value of that, because we have a lot of people who are trying to make that transition. Containers, VMs, there's a lot going on. It's been very popular for a while. They're trying to get to microservices, but maybe they can't get all the way there. So, maybe, I don't know, is that where this really fits in and helps? Yes.  And Kubernetes came around to make it easy to orchestrate them. Is that there's no more choice to deliver applications. That's great on the one hand side, because containers are so well-suited, right? To improve all the workload flows that we have about delivering applications. And organizations have to choose how do we get there, right? How do we use it efficiently? And the problem is, they have to choose between containers and VMs. And we've cubered, and by the way, it's not only containers and VMs. It's also that we have functions as a service, so we have Vasem, right, a new thing. Yep. So there's more more... We talked about Vasem yesterday here, yeah. There's more and more workload types which come up, and all of them unite in Kubernetes. And why is that a benefit? Because we say, once you talk about the same platform, right, you already know how the platform behaves, how you provide resources to that platform, how you manage it, how you operate it, right? Operating Kubernetes is another nice topic. And that's why we said, let's bring VMs to Kubernetes as well, so that all the knowledge that you already have to build up for Kubernetes, because you want to use Kubernetes, can be reused for VMs as well, to a large extent. Not completely, but to a large extent. So that's the core idea of why we want to run VMs on Kubernetes. We do it already, right, for a while. Yeah. I think it makes a lot of sense. Again, my background, I was at AWS for a little bit, building services there, and I've been at a couple startups building SaaS-delivered products. And when you start to look at it, the complication of running a Kubernetes environment or going from one Kubernetes environment to another really complicates being able to build that up. I think it goes to an expertise-type thing, where maybe you don't have the expertise for Kubernetes straight out of the gate. Can this help people bridge into that? Is this a way where they can have some Kubernetes, they can find a platform, but they can move over some of the VMs that they're currently used, get used to the management frameworks around that? Is that kind of the value you guys are driving at? Yes. I think the main point is... You can also say no. If I'm wrong, feel free to tell me. We told you about this last night, right? Maybe I misunderstand your question about what you're going on about, but it is, and one of the value that Qvert provides is it's all in Kubernetes. You're not looking after multiple infrastructure stacks. You're not looking after virtual machines in virtualization and containers in Kubernetes. It's all together. There is a, if I'm allowed to name-drop a burden in the way, which is that someone coming from traditional virtualization will have to learn Kubernetes. And potentially that's a blocker for people. But once they have jumped into that, and I think a lot of people here will probably agree that that's the future, or at least the present, then they can look after their pet virtual machines. And bring them over from your virtualization stacks. And then it's just the same way of dealing with VMs as you would containers or anything else. What I would just like to add, I think the fact that you have to know Kubernetes anyhow, regardless of VMs, is the point that makes Qvert survivable. Because we're saying we want to run applications. We want to run them in the introduction. We want to make them stable. We need the whole life cycle around the applications. So you have to create that expertise in addition to your virtualization platform. So you have two domains that you need to become an expert of. Complex domains, too. Exactly. And then you have interactions between them. And if we speak about the hybrid cloud, you have them in different places. You have Kubernetes in the public cloud, but you also have them on trends. You have them on bare metal. It's everywhere. It's everywhere, exactly. And with Qvert, you can at least try to reduce some of these barriers, unify the domains to a certain extent so that you don't have to double the knowledge you need to operate with. So where is Qvert in the sandbox incubation, graduation stage right now? We're very happy to say that we're in the incubated stage. And that happened about, what, 11 months ago? On a monthly basis, roughly a year. Roughly a year. That's good to know, because I think when I was in the keynote this morning and they were describing, and I think it was really good for them to go through and describe how different projects move and giving a path, a pathway. I was involved with Global Grid Forum, Open Grid Forum and OpenStack in previous life. And it was always a complication about how you move things through to be from a research group to an ongoing group and sustaining group and all of these different things.  Is Qvert one of those that you see end users coming in or is it more the companies like Red Hat that are sustaining it at this point? Go ahead. Yeah, I mean that's a tricky one. In the last 12 months, we've added, I'll see if I can remember, six new adopters. Not all of them are end users. Some of them are integrated, some of them are vendors. But if I'm allowed to see if I can run through the list. Are you kidding me? You're allowed to do whatever you want here. I give you permission. I validate, you can name drop, you can run through the list, whatever you want, sweetheart. Tell you what, I'm even going to bring out my book so I don't miss it. You're allowed to have notes. You did your homework today for class. I love this. Keep going, Andrew. So we've got Killicota, Puzzle, OS build operator, Trilio Vault, Deckhouse, and yes, no, Tuesday, we merge Castlem into that list as well as an official... Hey, that's exciting. Super exciting. They're friends of the Cube as well. Oh yeah. And they're throwing a party tonight. Hopefully we'll see you guys there. That is great. Good reminder. Yeah, hey, you know. I still need to get my ticket. I do my homework on the important things. You brought your notebook out to make sure you could hit your talking points. I'm here making sure we're hitting the right parties. I just want to add to that. So it's... Always. What we've seen, like with the Cube project meeting and we expected like 20 people. In the end, the room was over full. The people were standing on the hallway. This is great. And many of those were... How validating was that? It was... I thought that was a special moment. It was a special moment. You know, it's... For me, it's the first... I feel it as a community builder just talking to you. In person, CubeCon, right, after COVID. And so it's like, it's a huge jump. Yeah. We were sitting, I don't know where it was. It was like, you know, there were like 10 people in the room, right? And like, I don't remember who it was, but it's so great to see it being validated. Many of those, by the way, are end users. But what we see is the barrier. So we have... These big companies coming up, like we have Platform9, we've got Susie, we've got Redhead, we've got many who contribute to CubeBird and they are skilled, right? They know how to be... Not behave, but how to act in open source and how to step up. Yes. You know how to own parts. But we see that a lot of the newcomers of end users, they need to get adjusted to that ecosystem, right? They need to understand, they have a role, and they have a voice, right? And we want to hear them. I think it's our responsibility to help them to raise their voice in our community. So this meeting was great because we know there are a lot more people out there who want to actually learn about us, they want to use it, and we want to see how we can connect them to us. Yeah, you mentioned the ecosystem there. It feels like the Kubernetes ecosystem is really matured and it feels like dramatically over the last 6 to 12 months, it seems like so many different players. Do you guys agree? Definitely. Definitely. Yeah, definitely. We're in a whole new ballgame. So how long has Kubert been a project? We just spoke about that last yesterday, right? Since potentially the end of 2016. I love the interpretive date here, just kind of. Kind of, like, that well, Savannah. But yeah, I think I was correct that yesterday was 2016. Yeah, 2016 to 2017 is when the first work on Kubert started. That's pretty early in the Kubernetes game. It is. Yeah. I mean, back then, I mean, back then, I mean, I come from a virtualization background where I was working over it before, and we have good friends in OpenStack, and we're working with the whole open-source word stack, like Livered, KVM, Q-Move, which is all in Kubert, by the way, today, right? So, for example, if you take Kubert from Reddit, we surfaced it in OpenStack virtualization. The stack that you're going to use with your workload is actually the very same that we're using in our other virtualization project. In upstream, it's the very same, right? We're using Livered, Q-Move, and KVM as it's produced by these ecosystems, or these communities, and we've been working with them since then to make sure that these virtualization components work nice in Kubernetes, but at the same time, we actually had a good run with Kubernetes itself. I mean, who remembers TPRs from Kubernetes in the very early days, like very early extension mechanisms and webhooks, CRDs, all of this was not there, and we were able to work with Kubernetes to see that these extension points were added so that we can be good citizens of Kubernetes. And why do you tell all of that? Because yes, I think we've grown so much, Kubernetes is such a nice, extensible platform, and what we saw in the last year, I believe is that, I mean, we have so many projects here, right, and so many companies, and we see that there's more collaboration, right, towards maturity, right, to see, I mean, there are gravity points, right, on certain topics. You see that, like the tags and the zigs, right, they reform, and we see what is, you know, what is emerging, what do we see, we see more stabilization in these areas. And I think Kubernetes connects to that as well, like on Monday, we had a session with NVIDIA, NVIDIA is running G-Force now, on Kubernetes for years, not for years, but no, actually, plural, years. And we have customers at Red Hat running Kubernetes production, so that's all a good validation. This event is a lot about validation, I think, and especially with the sense of community, we're all here, it's buzzing, everyone's excited. Oh, it's just great vibes. I just want to call out, you have the best mustache that we've had on theCUBE. Is that a big, is that a part of your look? Is that, is that been a long time aesthetic, as long as Kubevert, or is this a newer aesthetic? No, this is a, I shaved it off from 2015 and a lot of my close friends were like, what did you do? What happened to your face? Whatever you, whatever it is that you're doing, get rid of it. And I recently got married and my wife has never actually seen me without the mustache. And I almost shaved it off for the wedding just to like, mess with that. But thankfully, or else it might not have gone through. That would not have been the case. Yeah, I was going to say, you don't really want to chance things when you're getting close to that aisle there. That's a... Sometimes you just got to shake it up a little bit. Yeah, no. I love it. I like to call out the fashion here at Kubevert, well, at CNCF and all of our nerdy conferences because why not? Well, while we're doing that, I just have a little bit of a, we've got the Kubevert going on here.  There you go. Show it off. Very nice. Thank you. Thank you so much for being here.  It's been awesome. Rob, love co-hosting with you and thank all of you for tuning in to our live broadcast here from KubeCon EU in wonderful Amsterdam. My name is Savannah Peterson and you are watching The Kube, the leading source for emerging tech news.