So, I'm going to call myself the Horde, and what an extraordinary discovery it is. It's an unparallel discovery. It is the largest collection of treasure from the early Anglo-Saxon period. It involves a unique combination of objects, to a very large number of objects, mostly military, but some of them are Christian function. Mae'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r 550 a 650 AD yn ystod o'r gold o'r sylwgr, ac mae'n ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud o'r ddweud. Mae'n ddweud o'r cyffredin cyffredinol yn ystod o'r cyffredinol ac o'r ddweud. The collection, however, was very fragmented as it was found, the find, are fitting. because they are dysfunctional from larger objects. Mostly swords, the apex weapon of the age. These characteristics have been apparent ever since the fine was made in July 2019 mewn gwirioneddol Llyfrgell ddechrau yn ymddangos iawn. Mae'r bwrdd yn gweithio i'r lleol ac mae'r Llyfrgell yn ymddangos iawn. Ond rwy'n gweithio i'r gweithio i'w yw ddweud a'r hynny'n gweithio i'w gweithio. Mae hyn yn gweld, a'r bwysig yna, yn y cwestiynau cerdd yn y blyg. I will present some of the answers that have emerged from the extensive programme of research and conservation that has been carried out under the auspices of Historic England, as well as the joint owners of the Horde, Birmingham and Stoke-Hall trains City Councils. It will give you a foretaste of the final publication that, as Danielle said, is out later this year, which is a book under the Society of Antiquaries in print, and which will also be accompanied by a digital component which will be publicly available online. Please note what I'm presenting today, and enormously on the work of multiple specialists, over 25 contributors, not least my fellow editors for the book, Tandy Dickinson and Leslie Webster. Now today I shall first set out the essential character of the Horde and its chronology. Then I will present the case for what we think the Horde is, viewing its historic lanes, archaeological setting, and then finally the arguments for why it might have been collected together and audited. The Horde was found on a ridge of land close to the A5 and the modern N6 toll roads north of Birmingham. The metal detectorist Terry Herbert spent over a week recovering finds before he reported his incredible discovery to the port of an antiquity scheme and thereby professional archaeologists became involved in its recovery. Initially, it stuck to county council staff over one meter by one meter test hit. This is the black dot right at the centre of that red square over the fine site. This was expanded into a full recovery excavation and geophysical survey by Birmingham Archaeology. We conducted further fieldwork in 2010 and then there was a final phase of fieldwork in 2012 by Archaeology Warwickshire, which again recovered a small number of further finds by a metal detector survey. This shows you the 30-metre contour, which is the ridge of land. This ridge runs above the A5 here, which is the old road in what they were streets. The red square is the full limit of the recovery excavation. The grey area is the area, roughly speaking, which is protected by the metal detector. What does the Horde contain? Knowledge of what the Horde contained has changed significantly following the years of cleaning and conserving and reassembling of the objects. From a total of almost 4,600 fragments, nearly 700 objects have been identified, and this was no mean. Thetas from the very outset, the owners undertook to display the objects and keep the objects on permanent display in various places in the west midlands. At times, we would find that there were fragments with single objects in more than one place. Whilst the majority of the fragment relationships were identified by 2014, some objects did not fully emerge until later in the research project, such as this socketed stand for our great gold cross in the collection. This was bought together from around 70 small fragments of silver heat sheet, and was totally unrecognisable at the outset. This example also underlines how the fragility of the silver sheet has caused an inverse relationship between weights and fragment counts in the Horde. In total, there are four kilograms of gold objects compared to 1.7 kilograms of silver objects. The silver accounts for far more than three quarters of the fragment count. Whilst many of the objects retain garments or more rarely other inlays, there is very little copper alloy and virtually no iron, and only very small vestigial traces of organic materials, including haul, wood and the remains of wax and pastes. Though, of course, these would have been essential components of the original objects in which the fittings were removed. The contents of the Horde thus appears highly selective, favouring the precious metal. The objects, as we've already said, were drawn almost entirely from the possessions of men and the apparatus of war, even arguably the Christian objects. The majority for fittings, 80% by object count, are through weapons. Most come from swords, with only a small number from fighting knives or sacks. Their array of forms and ornament, some quite new, are transforming our understanding of the weapon, its makers and its elite warrior users. On the basis of the minimum number of pommels, 74, and potential combinations of other hilt fittings present, we estimate that something like 100 swords must be represented by a real metal weapon. With one exception, they appear to be Anglo-Saxon in manufacture, and that exception is pommel 68 here, which we believe, based on its art, is an import from Scandinavia. Most of the pommels are of cocked-hat form, as you can see up here. This is an example. The cocked-hat form is neatly illustrated for us by society's own cocked-hat at the front here. Mainly, they're fixed with Megin's type of beckham voestanarum, which is a type of pommel that's in use from 570 to 650. A few, a smaller number of the pommels are in round-back form, which is a form of the 7th century in England. From all of the gold and silver hilt collars and hilt rings combined, and the hilt, these fittings, these collars and rings fitted at the top and the bottom of the grip. From all of these fittings combined, we have a remarkable 50 pairs, showing that swords in the period were clearly manufactured from the outset with matching sets. The twisted ring type, which we have here, is interesting as it's identical to the form that we find on the sword from the famous Sutton-Hood Mount 1 ship burial, which is a grave to which I will return throughout this lecture for its many parallels with objects in the port. Another type of fitting that we have are hilt plates, and we have over 170 hilt plates in the collection. These reinforce the twin sword guards that we find on the typical sword of the period, a larger guard at the junction of the blade, and then a smaller guard capped by a pommel. Pommel held the town, was fixed over the town of the blade, which ran through the grip. From the form of the plates and from marks left on them, it has been possible to say where they were fitted on the hilt, so that we know that many of the swords in the collection must originally have had sets of four plates. However, there are suggestions that some swords may only have had a pair of plates, one on the lower guard here and one on the lower part of this guard here, and some swords may only have had a single plate. Unlike the forms discussed so far, the over 100 small mounts from our collection are decidedly less familiar. Many have decorated with a fine filigree scrollwork ornament, which I think you can probably just about make out on my exemplar here, which I shall come to. It was only, in fact, after a trip to the British Museum to see this object, which is known as Cumberland Hilt and is a sword hilt of preserved horn with gold fittings. It was only after a trip to see this object that we were able to find a parallel for our many fittings to see that we had another style of sword hilt represented. Now, these small fittings were designed to be inserted into small recesses that were cut into the horn of the grip and the guards, and they would have been held in place with nails, as you can see on the x-ray of the Cumberland Hilt here. It's also important that their association with this sword hilt, this Cumberland Hilt in the British Museum, shows us that the number of weapons represented by the board is very, as we've already said, likely to be larger than the minimum 74 surviving honw, hence our proposal of at least 100 swords. Then there are other small mounts from hilts that are new forms or which have a small number of parallels from Europe. They include pairs and sets of animal form, like these bird-headed mounts and also these little birds. You can see the sharp beak of a bird of prey, and then its claw foot and leg, and then its tail there. So we have these animal fittings that are fitted at the top and bottom of the grip again, and as well as those we have other fittings that we haven't really seen before, the view-shaped fittings, like the bird with garlic claws on a ornament, and these fitted at the ends of the sword guard like that. Besides these fittings, we have a small number of fittings that come from Scarrot, but only a very small number, and interestingly, a much lower proportion compared to the other fittings. We have these pyramid fittings here. We have five pairs of pyramid fittings, and you can see this is how they would have been worn on the Scarrot, and then we also have one pair of little button fittings, again with inlay garlic ornaments and the filigree collar. This button fitting fits into this stone bead, which was also recovered from the excavation. There are, in addition, three small gold buckles, or other, sorry, three small buckles, two in gold, one in silver, which may be from sword harvest, but that's a much lower number of buckles than we would have expected from sword harvest, given the number of swords represented. Now, in some, the sword fittings reveal an array of styles, which are summarised here, and they're best appreciated from the fittings that form sets, and we've been able to identify sets of pommels and collars from their matching ornaments in the collection, and these indicate unquestionably that sword helps with being manufactured with batching suites of fittings. The different styles, I've argued, could reflect the outputs of different regions, or kingdoms. Fittings in gold with filigree wire walnut, as represented here, many of which have analogue designs in a style known as Sarlene style 2, to which you'll come to later, but the style of the design has been drawn out for this pommel, and you may go to make out that it's actually a quartet of serpents that are interlaced together, and in the centre they actually form a little cross, and that gives you an idea of the level of the sophistication of the ornament within the filigree, that there are very sophisticated hidden patterns on many of the objects that very probably relate to the pre-Christian beliefs of the Anglo-Saxons. Then, as well as this distinctive filigree style, we have examples in garnet clozzone, such as illustrated by this pommel and this pair of collars, which also becomes in a different region to this filigree style. And then, the sides, these two, we have a third style, we have what we'd be calling our cumberland hilt style, based on our small fittings from bricks of the gardens. The clozzone style cobbles are very interesting to note, because their closest parallel for manoeuvre saxonymon, their best parallel for manoeuvre saxonymon, is the sword from Mount One at Sutton Hood, the ship barrel, which I referred to earlier. And it's also the case that many of the other pieces of garnet clozzone in the collection have their best parallels within the same royal burial assemblage from Suffolk in the East, down there. Castwork is rarer in the collection than objects manufactured from gold sheep, which is the case with the filigree and the clozzone objects. And completely new is the style of sword fittings in silver with gold mounts, which is illustrated here by Pommel 76, a pair of unique silver guards, and rather than just the enclates, these were little hold guards, made us cast in silver with gold mounts. You can see the gold mount on this side of the pommel. And then there's also a pair of, the remains of a pair of hilt cobbles. And this style, another fourth style, is neatly reconstructed here to show just how extraordinary and spectacular the original sword hilt of this sword would have appealed. The other thing to note is that this is a unique pommel form. Nowhere in Europe has a power level of this because of these strange knobs on the shoulders. And these we call ring knobs. They're related to a custom, a sword ring custom that existed in Europe in the period, but our sword pommels have a pair of these knobs, and they're unique in that respect of Europe. Now, coming up, the horde contains the remains of at least one crested helmet besides a weapon, which is similar to examples from Scandinavia and England. Most notedly again from Suttonville, Marraith 1, what we've mentioned several times. It was originally largely golden in appearance, however nothing remains of the helmet's original iron cap, which has made reconstruction a challenge. The surviving structural parts illustrated here include a two-section helmet crest, as well as a pair of silver gilt cast cheek pieces, both of which are decorated again with complex animal art of Salim style 2, little animals just about to be made out, as well as parts of serfans. And then around the cap, the bottom of the helmet cap, we had a silver band that held a silver gilt sheet showing a procession of running or needing warriors. Besides those solid structural parts, there are many other designs from the helmet that were formed again in silver sheet and that we've reconstructed from well over a thousand fragments. They include again designs of animals, animal art, but most striking are these figure warrior designs, which we have. We have a figure on horseback wielding a spear over arm, which can be paralleled by the example on the Suttonville helmet. Then we have fragments of a dancing warrior design, which again has a parallel on the Suttonville helmet.  They wear bird crested helmets. They have armour and clothing. On both sides of the helmet, they marched from the front to the back, hence the reason they marched in different directions and laid like this, so that they neatly marched from the rear of the helmet to the front. Arguably ours is now the grandest of the known so-called crested helmets. And ours is also unique in actually having had a real crest reconstructed near a horsehair, a dyed red. And all the other crested helmets from the period just had a solid metal crust. We concluded that ours helmet was truly fit for a king, in the same way that the Suttonville helmet is for the Royal Barrier. There are also over 20 large mounts in the collection forming set. Many heavily inlaid with garnets. And many of them probably come from a single workshop. They are so close in their manufacture and high quality production. Some could come from ostentatious military parade here, like the set here, that we reconstructed as fittings for a saddle. As well as having garnet crozzone decoration, these mounts also had little panels. In gold filamory, and they hold little designs of servants. So quite literally had these little nested vipers ready to struck for the protection of the saddle. We also have a strange set of silver fittings, two of which are shown here, and these we've reconstructed as fittings for a horse of private. The eye shaped mount 567 is interesting to note, because it resembles another pair of eye shaped mounts in garnet crozzone, but for which we have a quite different interpretation, to which I can turn on this slide. Most unexpectedly, some of the large mounts reveal Christian treasures created for and by the first or second generation of the early Anglo-Saxon church. And it's important to understand that this is a period in Anglo-Saxon England, the 7th century, when the pagan Anglo-Saxon kingdoms were gradually converted to Christianity. An inscribed strip, seen here, has been the subject of much debate. The Latin text on it, inlayed with Black Lielo, is from the book of Numbers in the Old Testament. It is Moses' invocation of God's protection for the Israelites in the wilderness. Spoken when the Ark of the Covenant was raised up.  Its ferocity endorses the hypothesis that the folded gold strip was possibly in the arm of a golden cross that may have been set possibly on a relicry shrine designed to be carried into battle by a Christian army. Provocatively, one feasible reconstruction for the set of garnet claws on a mouse, to which I've just referred, with the eye-shaped fittings, as well as fittings of strip form, is as fittings for the side of an Ark or a half-shaped shrine. Collectively, we have also argued within our forthcoming book that there is nothing to oppose the century date for the inscription. Technically, the strip's flattened and empty gem setting, at one end, is a closely-related manufacture to the settings of the hord's great golden cross, to which I shall now turn. The great cross, folded, but reconstructed here to its original 30 centimetre height, could have been both carried in procession or placed in a stand on an altar, and remember our gold-socketed stand that we showed at the beginning of the talk. Based on the late Roman and early Christian tradition of the crook's gamata, the jeweled cross, its gold and blood-red garnets would have recalled the cross of victory of the Emperor Constantine. The Anglo-Saxon poem, The Dream of the Rude, also describes just such a vision, illustrating how, for the Anglo-Saxons too, the cross was foremost a talisman of conquest. And I quote from the poet, the portent was all covered with gold, beautiful gems appeared at the corners of the earth, and they were also fired upon the cross beam. The poet of The Dream of the Rude almost certainly had in mind a cross very like ours. On the cross, the red garlic bosses symbolised the five wounds of Christ with the mount of Golgotha at the base. But this Christian iconography was combined too with Germanic animal art, as on many other objects in the world as we've seen, the art of the pre-Christian age. It shows fluent interlace animal ornament known as we've already seen, and it is in his Sarlene's style too. Here is the drawn-out design of that with the animals head at this end, its long body with one leg and another leg at the front which interlaces with its own body and with another creature with whom it wrestles. Significantly, this animal art moathe, which is on this side here, is actually a copy of a ring decoration seen on the cups again in the Suttonhub mount Ron Shipbury. The famous grave dated to 626-40, and therefore the cross and our related inscribed strip, which we've just shown, may be dated to around the mid-seventh century. Now the other object shown here is an unparalleled subconical mount that is topped with this column and then another apical disc. It has animal art that is related to the animal arms on the cross, as well as garnet cross on the ornament, and within its scheme are multiple cross patterns. Professor Leslie Webster has drawn attention to this drawing, this illumination rather, in the Colette's amiotinus of the Prophet Ezra, the Prophet wearing a very, very similar head ornament. It's been suggested that what this is is an early Christian priest or bishop's head ornament based on the head ornament of the Jewish priests. Now, a typological analysis in the study of style has taken us some way to establishing the character of the horn, and to explain how it came to being and why it was buried, we must first establish when and where its contents were made. Now, the concept of object biography or object life history has been current in archaeology for some time, and it is particularly commended for looking at how hordes form from the production of the objects through their doods and rews to their deposition and eventual discovery. Hord has produced an enormous range of information about its production and early Anglo-Saxon manufacturing in general. Most significant for this lecture is the evidence from the filigree panoclosone work. Gold filigran, as we've seen, the decoration of fine wires and granules, dominates on 60% of the objects. Much at first glance compares to objects from southern England, including this buckle from Kent. However, any typical details of the filigree in the Horde, as well as the forms of the objects, suggests that we may be looking at objects that were manufactured elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon England. Beyond that, it is the case that in the 6th century, Scandinavia already had a tradition of filigree-decorated sawthog of furniture like this set here. So it's likely that the influence of the Anglo-Saxon and sawthog fittings of the 7th century was fittings of the 6th century in Scandinavia. The clausone was formed by the inlaying stones, mainly garnets into a preconstructed delicate gold cell work. Most is geometric in pattern, but there is also animal mark patterns like these here. The best parallels for many of the designs and the techniques are found in East Anglia. Again, notably amongst, as we've said, the Royal Assembly from southern Hwy. In terms of distribution of parallels for our gold pommels, outside of the Horde, just 15 instances of gold pommels are known, mainly for metal detector finds, which compares with the over 50 examples from the Horde. The distribution of these, the triangles, suggests that the style emanated from Angliaid regions, or a region north of the Thames. Notice the absence from Kent. Possibly we're looking at a style that was focused on the Kingdom of Lindsay, or maybe perhaps the powerful Kingdom of Northumbria. This here is the rough location of where the Cumberland hill must have come from. So again, perhaps with the Cumberland hill style we may be looking at a northern style. Study of the where repair and modification of objects reveals how they were used and something of their generation use. For example, where patterns on the pommels and the tips of fittings from the hill guards represented here on this schematic show that where was heaviest at the ends of the guards on the tops and the ends of the pommels. What we've suggested from this is that the majority of the where that occurs on our sword fittings is the result of the sword being worn and scabeted at the waist and that it's rubbing against clothing. If it was the case that these swords were constantly drawn and used in warfare we would have expected more where on the creek. It looked like the majority of the time that the swords were being worn peaceably with and at threat of violence. On the whole, it's been found that the amount of where on the fittings correlates with their age of the objects. That's suggested by their typology and style. It hasn't proved straightforward to provide a chronology of the objects in the horde because of the rarity of the forms and the extraordinary character of the collection generally. We also have an absence of coins in the collection and we don't have any radiocarbon scientific data either. We've turned therefore to looking at the animal art with decoration on the objects since animal art has long been studied by archaeologists for its development and chronology. We have, as well as the style 2 which I've already mentioned, the style 2 animal art we have a pair of hill collars which had the earlier animal art known as style 1. This was in use in Anglo-Saxon England from the late 5th century up until about 550 AD. These collars may therefore be the oldest objects in our collection and are very possibly there for an antique sword or what we might consider an heirloom sword that was already very old when it came into the collection. Sarlene style 2, the later animal art occurs on about 140 objects in the collection. My research proposes that we have two forms of animal style 2 in England and in the ball summarised here we have an early style 2 which comprises of these highly abstract zoo and wharf creatures the little black heads around and grey jaws with certain light bodies and then we have a later style 2 which is based on the quadruped shown in profile so we only have two legs shown but we're actually dealing with a four-legged creature and you can see the dates here ones earlier late 6th to early 7th and one is early to mid 7th century. So based on the study of the forms of the objects and this animal style we've suggested four phases of chronology to the metalwork in the collection which are summarised here. We have the earliest is this as a small number of silver fittings from the swords that were made in the 6th century and that we may consider as heirloom swords then the bulk of our collection is gold fittings the earliest fittings ticker-thied by early style 2 and infilligory and then we have a subsequent third phase with golden garnet fittings and then we have a final phase of silver fittings with gold mounts and our final phase is surface 630 to 660 and it's this final phase of objects these latest objects which help us to come to conclusion about the mighty dated burial or deposition for the horn itself and we've suggested a dated deposition from surface 650 to surface 675. So what does it mean I'm aware that I'm running out of time so I'm going to have to go through this fairly promptly. Horns tended to be interpreted in two ways either as economically valuable materials that were hidden for safekeeping and for some reason were never uncovered or as objects that were committed forever, permanently for ritual reasons to engage with the supernatural as gifts to gods or as accompanents for the dead. Studies informed by modern archaeological theories suggest however that hoarding practices were more complex. The structure and motifs behind hordes are hauled by biography so to speak and may be best revealed by combining detailed analysis of the finds which we've just done with the examination of the context that is the structure of the deposit in the ground and the surrounding historical and archaeological landscape. Much has been inferred already from the material character of the hoard and to summarise. In its material art and symbolism it belongs to the pinnacle of 7th century masculine warrior society. We're dealing with the warrior elite here and arguably a small contingent of church work. It represents the form of powers secular and spiritual on which kings depended. Yet it was infragment, deliberately dismantled and selective in its context. While the horrible artefacts can be compared generally to our status finds from elsewhere from cemeteries and from non-funery contexts there is nothing that matches the combination of mass weapon fittings, precious material and fragmentation. We can compare very generally with the war booty weapon sacrifices of Scandinavia such as the example here from Nudum that there are important differences. These sacrifices occur in southern Scandinavia in north Germany. They typically comprise whole weapons, not fittings stripped from high status elite weaponry. We can also make very general comparisons with treasure hoards of the late Roman period and the sub Roman period both in Britain and elsewhere across the rest of Europe. But it's very important to note that as a whole hoards are very rare in contemporary early Anglo-Saxon England. We have just a handful. I've suggested that the Staffordshire Hall was buried some point in the third quarter of the 7th century. At this date it's fine spot lay within Mercia a border territory. The last of the major Anglo-Saxon kingdoms to emerge into history. And it was not yet the power it would become in the 8th century. According to the ecclesiastical history and the later Historia of the Ptollum Mercia was born a protracted warfare waged by a pagan king Pender often in alliance with Welsh kings and mainly against Anglian neighbours to the east in particular the Kingdom of Northumbria and the Kingdom of East Anglia. This blue line here shows the limit of Anglo-Saxon culture in Britain at the time. On the west side we have the Britons and the Welsh. And there's our fine spot there. The 650s was a particularly turbulent time for the Kingdom of Mercia. It saw the death of Pender in battle in 655 of Windward. His son Pender was murdered a year later. Another son, warfare, was eventually restored to the throne. And he and his brother Eiffelred enjoyed long reigns continuing the expansion of the Kingdom. We have of course suggested that the objects in the board were derived primarily from areas controlled by Anglian kings. And we've made notable parallels with East Anglia as well as Northumbria. The very regions with which Mercia was a war in the 7th century. It is however important to note the very liminal location of the board right at the limit of Anglo-Saxon England here. The incidence of chance finds. Anglo-Saxon chance finds backs up our limited Anglo-Saxon culture and again the board here. We have some evidence of Anglo-Saxon settlement in the Mercia region by the late 5th century and by the 7th century we have evidence of rich barobarials to the north of where the board was found. However, there was very little to suggest that Mercia was manufacturing prestige equipment in the way other kingdoms were in the earlier 7th century, the datamile metalwork. The objects in the board were brought together brought into Mercia in some way. I'll skip over that one. It's likely therefore as we've already argued that most of the weaponry in the board was probably made in kingdom workshops for circulation amongst leading warrior members of royal retinues. Some of the items as well like this possible saddle mount could have been gifts to kings and the church equipment could have been made in royal workshop for the first generation of the early Anglo-Saxon church. Given the big range of the objects the objects could have joined the board cumulatively and episodically so not all the collections coming together in one time but as a result of various episodes. But we cannot specify exactly when or how each came to form part of the treasure nor how they entered Mercia Nevertheless the multiple recorded conflicts leading up to and beyond the painful battle of Wingward and the death of Emmer in 655 provide us with provocative models for how such material could have entered the kingdom of Mercia and the west midlands. Toward the end the assemblage underwent extensive damage with fitting systematically and crudely strict away from the swords and other objects. Much of this was done with knives used to cut or leave but smithing tongs were also used to pull off some pommels and this points to the likelihood that smiths were involved The experts who would also have had the ability to differentiate the golden silver from the base skilled materials but would also have been in circulation and used as sword fittings. Possibly the collected bullion was to be recycled into new objects but if so the job was left incomplete as the many garnet inlaid objects show. However this explanation overlooks the extremely selected character of the objects They are the supreme symbols as we have said of the power of kings They are not simply a random sample from a royal treasury The alternative is that the Horde was an ideological act a way of deactivating the symbolic power of objects Perhaps the objects are defeated and humiliated right at arm In addition there is evidence for the deliberate damage to some objects illustrated here by by our pen and cross its arms were deliberately broken this is not an accidental break the arms are a box construction and very strong someone deliberately broke the arms across in what we might consider an icon plastic act Finally we turn to the context of the burial itself but sadly this is where we have the least evidence only 13% of the fragments have no locations and then only to the 1m grid square to which they were recorded Nevertheless, within the centre here we have a 3x4m area which suggests the focus In addition we have 21 soil blocks that were recovered by the metal detectors These comprise mainly small silver fragments but with some gold objects mixed in that may well represent a sort of a filtrate from the bottom of a pit We believe that it is likely that the board was buried in probably a single pit with all of the objects together and that its dispersal was the result of the plaring that happened just beforehand and which revealed it As we can see some of the objects are now just at the very surface There was in addition a single fragment recovered during conservation of a textile and it's possible that this fragment of flax and linen represents all that remains of a bag that was used to contain our collection This shows here this is the edge of our ridge of land and this shows what has ultimately transpired to be a natural feature There was talk of a mound having been at the end here and it's possible that this was a natural mound resulting from glaciation but it may well have been a low mound at the time and it may well have had a distinctive vegetation and our board was found just there just at the edge of it There was however evidence of other Anglo-Saxon activity except for a disc mound from horse harness in the art style of the latest objects in the collection It was found at some distance from the horde this is the two fragments here and because it's copper alloy we don't believe it's actually part of the original deposit but what it represents is either another single deposit of an object or possibly the presence of a horseman at the site with around the date of the deposition which is tantalising in terms of whether or not that horseman was involved in the deposit of our horde The last clues to the horde's meaning lie in its topographic location On the one hand as we've said it seems peripheral environmentally the area was part of Cannock Chase and it remained unimproved land up until the 18th to 19th century enclosures Culturally as we've seen the horde in its wider context is also liminal it's at the very fringe of early Anglo-Saxon England Nevertheless politically the fine spot is between several small folk territories that became incorporated into the kingdom of Mercia The first was that as the Pensa set then we have a royal state of Wethnersfield Wethners preserving the name Woden if possible but this also had some pre-Christian religious significance and then there is the territory of the Tom set and the horde seems to have been buried between the two folk territories but perhaps more within the landscape of the Tom set This is that the area is also significant as Tamworth becomes the royal centre of Mercia and Lichfield is where the bishopryg is established following the merger So it seems very likely that we're dealing with the royal heartland of Mercia here where the horde was buried Most significantly perhaps the site is beside Roman Watling Street and then we have another Roman road Rytnill Street coming along here Now although these are Roman roads they remained in use into the early Anglo-Saxon period and these would have provided the main routeways into the territory of Mercia from the north, from Northumbria and Rytnill Street down to the southeast Thus the site was evidently accessible and perhaps if it had been marked by a low natural mound or distinctive vegetation it was also quite identifiable perhaps if some would have wished to return to it Yet it was also liminal it was out in the landscape exactly the sort of place that we see in prehistory was used for ritual deposits and in the early medieval period in the middle ages for assemblies To conclude therefore there are multiple possibilities for exploring and explaining at Staffordshire Hall as well as many uncertainties I've been able to give you a glimpse today of the arguments although I'm fully aware there are many other scenarios that can be conjured and there is plenty of room for further debate In the end it is impossible to say exactly why the hall was treated as it was exactly who might have owned it and why it might have been buried Our leading suggestions are that it was a royal mercy and treasure possibly derived from captured battle loot that was in transition between decommissioning and recycling but the completion of this act was arrested for some unknown reason leading to a final burial or that it was the deliberate and permanent removal of royal treasure from circulation for political, superstitious or religious reasons Thank you


Hi everybody, this is Dave Vellante. Welcome to this CUBE conversation with Thomas Hazel who's the founder and CTO of Chaos Search. I'm also joined by Ed Walsh who's the CEO. Thomas, good to see you. Great to be here. Explain JSON. First of all, what is JSON? JSON is a powerful data representation, a data source. But let's just say that if you try to drive value out of it, it gets complicated. At Chaos Search, we activate customers' data lakes. Customers stream their JSON data to this cloud of storage that we activate. Now, the trick is, the complexity of a JSON data structure, you could do all these complexity of representation. Now, here's the problem. Putting that representation into an Elasticsearch database or relational databases is very problematic. So what people choose to do is they pick and choose what they want or they store it as a blob. And so I said, what if we create a new index technology that could store it as a full representation but dynamically in what we call our data refinery, publish access to all the permutations that you may want, where if you do a full on flattening or flattening of the JSON, one row theoretically could be put into a million rows in relational databases. So it explodes. It just explodes. And then it gets really expensive. But everybody says they have JSON support. Every database vendor that I talked to, it's a big announcement. We now support JSON. What's the difference? What's the nuance? Exactly.  So instead of picking and choosing upfront, now you're picking and choosing in the back end. What you really want is the power of the relational analysis of that JSON data. And that's where Chaos comes in, where we expand those data streams. We do it in a relational way. So all that tooling you've been built to know and love, now you can access to it. So if you're doing proprietary APIs to your JSON data, you're not using Looker. You're not using Tableau. You're doing some type of proprietary, probably ETL now on the back end. Okay, so you're saying all the tools that you've trained everybody on, you can't really use them. You got to build some custom stuff and okay, so maybe bring that home in terms of what's the money? Why do the suits care about this stuff? The reason this is so important is think about anything cloud native, Kubernetes, your different applications, what you're doing in Mongo. It's all JSON. It's very powerful but painful. But if you're not keeping the data, what people are doing with data scientists is they're just doing leveling. They're saying, I'm going to keep the first four things. So think about it's Kubernetes, it's your app logs. You're trying to figure out for Black Friday what happens. It's literally saying, hey, every minute will cut a new log. You're able to say, listen, these are the users that were in that system for an hour and here's a different things they do.  So it's really important data have. So if you're trying to figure out either what happened for security, what happened for performance, or if you're trying to figure out, hey, VP of products or growth, how do I cross sell things? You need to know what everyone's doing. If you're not handling JSON natively like we're doing, either it keeps on expanding. On Black Friday, all of a sudden the logs get huge and the next day it's not. But it's really powerful data that you need to harness for business values. It's what's going to drive growth. It's what's going to do the digital transformation. So without the technology, you're kind of blind and to be honest, you don't know because the data scientist has kind of deleted the data on you. So this is big for the business and digital transformation, but also it was such a pain. The data scientists and DBAs were forced to just basically make it simple so it didn't blow up their system. We allow them to keep it simple but have all the power.  The video is gone because you weren't able to save it because it's too darn expensive. Well, it's funny. This is the first data source that's driving the design of the database. Because of all the value, we should be designing the database around the information it stores, not the structure and how it's been organized. And so our viewpoint is you get to choose your structure yet contain all that content. So if a vendor says to a customer that says, hey, we got JSON support, what questions should I ask to really peel the onion? Well, particularly relational. Is it a relational access to that data? Now you could say, oh, I've ETL this JSON into it, but chances are that explosion of JSON permutations of one row to a million, they're probably not doing the full representation. So from our viewpoint is either you're doing a blob type access to proprietary JSON APIs or you're picking and choosing. Those are the choices. That is the market thought. However, what if you take all that vegetation and design your schema based on how you want to consume it versus how you can store it? And that's a big difference with chaos. So I should be asking, how do I consume this data? Are you ETLing it in? How much data explosion is going to occur once I do this? And you're saying for chaos search, the answer to those questions is what? The answer is, again, our philosophy is simply stream your data into your cloud office towards your data lake. And with our index technology and our data refinery, you get to create views dynamically instantly, whether it's a terabyte or petabyte, and describe how you want your data to be consumed in a relational way or an elastic search way. Both are consumable through our data refinery. Which is natural for us. Our refinery gives you the view. So what happens if someone wants a different view? I want to actually unpack different columns or different matrices. You're able to do that in a virtual view. It's available immediately over petabytes of data. You don't have that episode where you come back, look at the video camera, and there's no data there left. So we do that. We appreciate the time and the explanation on really understanding JSON. Thank you. All right. And thank you for watching this CUBE Conversation. This is Dave Vellante. We'll see you next time.


Hello, Lewis. Thank you for all that MQTT feedback. Yeah, you're welcome. It was very helpful. You caught all my sins. You can tell that I wrote the MQPP spec and then converted that to MQTT. You caught me on a few places there. Yeah, it's the way to do it. That's what I do all the time. Hey, guys. Good morning. Hello. You sound very happy and cheery today. Good morning. Hey, Lewis. Good morning. Hey, Austin. You know, one of these days I'm going to figure out and then remember how to actually spell Huawei. I can never remember that. It's one of those words. H-U-A-W-E-I. Okay. H-U-A-W-E-I. Thank you. All right. Got it.  Hi Doug. Hey, everyone. Yeah, I went to Sedona in Arizona. It was beautiful. It's one of those places that people say, oh, it's so beautiful, so beautiful.  It really is so beautiful. It's been a few days hiking and just being outside and away from the screen. Cool. Hey, Aaron. Hi. I brought a guest with me, Aaron. Hey. Hello. Am I sharing the right window? All right. Thank you, Mark. I think we made this time for Rob to join. I forgot all about that. It'd be funny if he didn't join. Remind him. All right. You want to get started, Mark? Or you want to wait? I don't think he's going to join. Sure. When we get started. I believe that from last week, we were curious what Austin has come up with. It's one of the key items. I think that there is an issue that you put in. We didn't get to discuss on Thursday. So Austin, would you like to start with discussing this? Sure thing. Let's see. So I kind of outlined the goals of my presentation in the beginning of this issue. You know, I want to introduce cloud events and announce the initial version that we finished. Make sure we communicate the why. You know, why this is important. Why it's going to be a big deal now and in the future. And communicate use cases of cloud events. Want to kind of paint a picture of possibility of what, what cloud event will enable in the future. And then also make it real for the audience by showing, by showing up just a taste of this in a real demo. And lastly, of course, tell our story of collaboration and celebrate the people who've been working on this. So anyway, I only have, I think 30, 35 minutes, I believe in the talk at the same time. There's a lot of people who've expressed interest in participating in this demo. And there's a lot of stuff we could do. So it's a bit of a challenge here for inspiration. I've outlined a handful of use cases for discussion topics of things that we can illustrate. And then I followed up with a comment of kind of something I think that we might be able to pull off. And that may be able to accommodate all the people who want to participate in this comment is a proposal for a e-commerce and event driven e-commerce store. And I'd simply walk through it during my presentation and I pretend to be a user and I do a couple of actions in this e-commerce application. I'd register for the application. I'd view a couple of products. I'd encounter an error and I'd also purchase a product. And these actions are going to be expressed as events. And these events can integrate. There are going to be cloud events, of course. I think I might just publish them directly from the client side of the web application. And I outlined a few events in this flow. There's the user profile is created. That happens when the user is registered. A storage object is created. That happens when we fetch the user's profile image. An error is received. That happens when the user encounters an error on the client side and gets some type of five-putter's status code. A user-viewed event, which happens when the user is simply viewing a product on the website. And a user-purchased event, which of course happens when I pretend to go and purchase a product. The way I think this could work is if we incorporate our company's project called the Event Gateway, the whole thing was designed as an event router for the serverless era. And it could simply, anyone could hook up their fast product to it directly. And I could basically rig up this whole demo to publish events from the client side, through to the Event Gateway, through to the various companies' fast products. In their respective platforms, they could also do some cloud events handling. I'm not sure how far they want to take it. It's really up to them. But this is the general story I was thinking. The question is, can we pull it off? Of course, because there's a lot in here. And how does everyone want to integrate? And my general thoughts were we'd publish these events and people can pick what they want to do with them. I think the best is to try and show something which is a really mixed environment, like maybe events from few cloud providers, maybe more than one router, and then multiple functions consuming it to try and make it messy. Yes, we can do all that. It'll be a complicated architecture and difficult to rig up. The other question is observability. My goal here is to make it real for people. How do we actually show them what's going on and how do we show them across all these integrations, what's going on? Cloud events can solve this problem because we have consistent metadata finally and we can put tracing information in there. In the long term, we're going to be able to nail that and provide a great event-driven observability story but as for the demo, which is coming up very soon, I'm not sure how much I'm going to be able to pull off and that's contingent on the complexity of the demo itself. That's actually something I was trying to wrap my head around because I understand everything you said there in terms of the demo. You've got a client generating events, goes through the gateway, spits out events that is function calls to all the various platforms that each platform then receives it. And the next step that I'm having to wrap my head around in terms of how did you envision presenting the output from all our various companies receiving these things in your demo environment? I mean, were you thinking something as simple as having a whole bunch of different, you know, mini windows that here's the Microsoft one, here's the IBM one, here's the VMware one, and look, they all received events and you could see that they all got it.  Great question. It depends, of course, what providers want to do with this. You know, because we have a centralized piece of middleware which all this stuff will be routing through, we can always put in something to add tags and use that to create some type of visualization afterward. I don't know how much of that we're going to be able to rig up before the demo, so I might just have to kind of fake it for the demo.   So you're thinking of each of our companies function, basically generating a tweet, and then Austin can just monitor that tweet stream on the screen. You can see which company actually receives it and tweets about it. Yes, and even maybe print something from the content to make it a little interesting. Interesting.  Interesting. That's, yeah, the challenge here is to define a simple story that everybody can integrate into. And that Twitter example is actually a pretty good one. I guess I also wanted to try and make sure that we're showing off the value of cloud events and what can we do to show off the value of cloud events in that Twitter example you think you're on? Well, I would wave my hand to say at least the events can be simplified multiple sources. I think just solving the shared problem of, you know, multiple frameworks receiving the same events from different sources. You know, it's not trivial today. Demo TCP IP is not attractive. I realize that. I've been doing this for the last 25 years, but we can do a fancy scenario and with that very effectively show off Austin software or we can do more less scenario but show kind of end-to-end interrupt between all different platforms. And I'm more leaning towards the latter, I have to say. What do you think that looks like, Cummins? Well, we can have, there's function as a service endpoints and there are publishers. And I think if we can show that the functions as a service endpoints can receive and dissect cloud events from all kinds of different publishers if we can basically just show that. And that might be such that, you know, you send an event and then the code does nothing but just dumping the contents of that event into a log and it does so on OpenWISC and it does so on our platform, does some other platforms, and then you can go and publish to that from different providers and you basically wire them together. That's already a win and for that we don't need to have a fancy scenario. And the fancy scenario is harder and more work, I guess, than just putting, having existing event publishers, you know, changing them to go and publish or make up an event publisher that published an event but where you can go and generically parse that thing. I think that opening multiple consoles seems a little complex. I think that's why having something like either throwing an object in a bucket or a Twitter feed or anything that can show all the messages arriving from all the different fast platforms will make it simpler. I do agree that having more than one publisher allows us to make a stronger point versus having a single, you know, even maybe one event from Google, one event from Azure, you know, et cetera. Yeah, and so unifying all the kinds of events that we all have, like getting on, because what happens here with the events is that there are some semantic alignments that I don't think we're ready for. Like the storage object created thing, there is no such event that all of us publish, right? Yeah, that's what I mean. Now you would have to normalize twice. You normalize from A, whatever current event format exists to the shared event formats that we have agreed to, and then now you're doing a second transformation where you need to have the storage event and need to go and normalize that across platforms, and that's something that's just not something we've done in this forum. Right, but I don't think the example is that you get a notification about an object bucket change in S3 and in Azure, and then you create a thumbnail, because that's really not something that we've standardized, but just at least printing out that, you know, got an event from Azure or got an event from Google. I agree, the visualization of that you got the event, if you want to do this via Twitter or via some other platform, that's fine.  That's reasonable. But I think fundamentally, what I see from Austin's proposal is he's wanting to understand the real world use case. And I think what you're saying is, perhaps we don't need to show or we can't show real world use case and we should just show interop. Is that the distinction that I'm hearing? Yes, that's my point. Showing interop is going to be easier than showing a full scenario, because the full scenario really means that we have to figure out how to align the semantics. Yeah, to clarify, this demo tries to go for interop and a real world use case. So Austin, one thing I'm not really clear. Let's say I have an S3 event notification that generates an HTTP. That could generate directly into the function. So what will be the role of the event router in that case? Could you clarify that question? You're on? For example, I want to generate an S3 bucket event. I go to SNS. I say, here's my HTTP endpoints and send a message to it. And the HTTP endpoint will get, using an API gate, we will get to the function. So what is the role of the event router in that scenario? Is that instead of registering the function, you register a generic location and that would route based on some policy? Or is that to register things that don't have a web book? If you wanted to create a scenario where you're reacting to an event from AWS S3, we could have that S3 event be published. It could be sent via SNS over to a Lambda function. The Lambda function could normalize it and the Lambda function could send it anywhere, to be honest. Or it could go through the event router. The event router, to be honest, I think the event router is a very, our event router is a very convenient way to rig up this demo. At the same time, I don't want it to be centered on our event router. I am trying to show off some other mechanism for, I mean, thanks to cloud events, you could just send these off anywhere without an event router. I think the event router can be a value value. Right, but if we can show something interesting about the event router, I think it's a plus. I'm just trying to see what's this interesting thing we want. Because if you're just forwarding an HTTP request, people say, okay, why do I need it? But if you're showing something more interesting, maybe transforming an event, you know, something, then it sure shows value. To me, I thought the point of the event router was to sort of, what's the word I'm looking for, to sort of interject the interoperability in the sense that, sure, you could take an event producer, hook it up to an event consumer, and that could work just fine. But you also could very well just set yourself up to be locked into one or the other. But sticking the event router in the middle, where all five or however many platforms are all hooked into that, the event router is allowing us to easily have a single event producer broadcast this thing out to a whole bunch of different people. And while it's not necessarily ensuring their ability by doing the broadcasting for us, one, the producing side doesn't need to know how to do the registration of all these various guys. It goes through an intermediary. And then because we have multiple consumers on the other side, they're all going to receive, in essence, the exact same event, but they are guaranteed, they're guaranteeing the interoperability because they're all processing it correctly. So I look at the gateway is just or the router is being sort of the middleware that's sort of helping guarantee that everybody can talk the same thing without being hard-coded to each other. Yes, absolutely. And plus there's going to be a lot of value in the future because it's the centralized pipe that you can add tracing information. You can do transformations that you can do validation. So you could do a lot there. But I just want to back up a bit. It seemed like there was some consensus earlier on in this call that if we just simply publish the same event to multiple fast providers that that would be enough to show off right now. Is that what people were communicating earlier? And is this what we think will be enough to win hearts and minds of developers? I think we're not the same event. But so we can publish arbitrary events from arbitrary sources if they comply with our spec, right? So I have this I posted this earlier the email unfortunately didn't go out. I have this generic function which basically goes so an Azure function now which goes and takes any event grid event and turns it into a cloud event. So you can hook up anything that's in our platform. We can now spit out as a cloud event and then send it to everybody. I think what we need Austin is to think one is show more than one event maybe potentially even from two separate cloud providers just for the sake of showing off the interoperability. And then we need to make it visual like either the Twitter or any other idea where people can relate to that it actually arrived. Okay. So I like this first year on I think the Twitter scenario using Twitter to make it visual is great because it has kind of verality built into it potentially. People can look at it and interact with it and I think that's a great solution. What is the premise? What is the scenario and how do we get more than one event from each provider and integrate Clemens functions and Azure events into this as well as Google's as well as well as other people's what is that and also how is that like can we get that close to a real-world use case too at the same time? You know in some ways being able to show the same function running on all the platforms would be the most interesting to me or something very close to the same. In other words converging the interoperability and portability of functions. And that's why I did this in Node.js which is not my happiest place to be. So effectively I have I sent the link in the chat window for my yeah for that thing. Actually I'd like to push back a little on that only because if you run the exact same code everywhere I don't think it tells as much of an interop story. Our fast platforms are incompatible enough for that not to be possible. We have to write a standard signature. So but I think the core code can be can be just good enough. So if you since you're sharing if you go and take a look at the cloud event have our piece. By the way if you write everyone writes a sheen to some common thing that we defined in the sense you can have the same function be executed from everywhere just with a tiny wrapper that maps it to the signature of each no actually actually meant that code that you just looked at. So this is this is the you wanted this? So that is what this does is basically just brings out the cloud event as the body of a cloud event as it comes in. So we can make that function just speak to Twitter and just take the events or parts of the cloud and then as you deploy that in your past platform with different scaffolding around it it's going to go and tweet. And then the other handler so this is the cloud events handle that's being able to parse the cloud event per se. The other one that's the event grid handler that knows how to turn and this is something that now that uses now our native binding to event grid that knows how to take our event set into cloud events effectively and then goes and posts them out. So I have kind of both ends of this. This is hooking into our platform and I have a hardwired URL here so basically you would kind of deploy your bridge to go somewhere else here. I didn't want to make this too fancy. And then on the other side you have your tweeting thing and if so with this we, so this is the microsoft preparatory if you will bridge that translates from our stuff into generic cloud events stuff and on the other side that function is able to tweet that out. If we I think already I think we need to go and maybe you need to go and build a little bit of a scenario around it but already if I can go and and I can go and push with four deployments of this function to open WISC and over to AWS I don't know and somewhere else and I can get tweets from all of those different implementations that's already a win. I agree with that actually and I think we could show the story could also be here's something coming from Azure to Google and I hear something coming from Google to Azure here's something coming from AWS to Azure and here's something coming from AWS that is now will be reacted to by Azure Google IBM and multiple ones and I think there's a good story to tell. And not just cloud but also open source is a nice thing. Yeah I mean you can go and write this mapping function here such that the mapping function knows five URLs of all different targets rolls the dice and then the event goes this way or that way and then they all surface out in Twitter feed all together. Yeah. You're saying each of us produce or each of us become other than producers and we randomly send out an event to one of the other guys and then that person just tweets about it. Yeah they tweet about it and we can make it a single that single tweet stream or we can all have our own tweet accounts for that that's up to how we want to do it and how we think it's better we can I think everybody having their own Twitter account for this purpose and then having a Twitter feed that goes and subscribes in all of those maybe the fanciest one. Okay I like it simple. And then we show this a tweet deck so that it actually screams. Sorry I just want to clarify so a platform publishes an event that gets transformed to a cloud event and sent out to another platform which reacts to it and posts to Twitter. Yeah pretty simple. Yeah and what's the mechanism by which we all find out about each other's target endpoints is it just offline we just tell each other it? Yeah. I think we'll just swap URLs and that's it. Okay easy enough. And then so the way we would and then it's really up to the respective platform how you trigger your events so we might go and just you know so my case might be based on blobs and I might just throw random flicker pictures into my own of course into an account and then let you all know about it. I like this. So again you're saying every function will do something else? The events could be anything that happens on your respective platform then you emit it and then the subscribing function on the other platform is just going to post something to Twitter but we'll have to figure out what those scenarios are. So I will tell you the events I raise so let's say I'm building a thing that goes and uploads clicker pictures into the storage account that then will contain links to those pictures because I'm going to make that account public and if you understand my events which is easy for you to tell because you have a cloud that you have an event type then you can actually go and dig into that into the details because then you know what it's all about and then you could actually go and tweet that picture. Okay. Right. Let's write it down and then let's do it. Yeah. We want a few of those things like every function to do something else. So that's one use case. Yeah, maybe we'll do something simple like sentiment analysis on a text or something. I love that idea because IBM we have an IBM Watson service that does tone analyzing. So yeah, similar type of thing. That'd be cool. Yeah, bring in Watson. Of course. It already won Jeopardy. Come on, it could do this easy. Yes. It also can, it can cure everything. It can also put tomatoes on the blockchain. Exactly. We got Watson on the brain over here. You know that. Come on. All right. Let me run this. Let me run this by you guys. So there's, I think we could do kind of these one-to-one interoperability scenarios, you know, rigged up via Twitter. One platform publishes an event. Another platform reacts to it and we can actually nail real world use cases with each one of those whether it's an image was uploaded, whether it's sentiment analysis, whether it's processing clickstream data or something. I think that'll be, that'll be great. And then I think it'll be even more interesting if we could show one to many connections after that. And so something, something happens when we react, whether they're on cloud platforms and open source platform and maybe there's a function in the edge that's also reacting to this. And I think that'll be kind of the cherry on top. Yeah. So to limit complexity, are we going to tackle a whole, so if, if we like that, that story, and I do think it's pretty compelling. We should nail down these use cases. We should nail down each example and get to work. I agree. I already wrote an example for S3 so I can sort of listen on, you can throw something on S3 and then we trigger on that and send the information of the text file to something else. So it's a, it's a, what's the, what's the exact use case you're on? A text file is uploaded to S3 and Yeah. And then I'm reading it and writing sort of the sentiment analysis of that file. Okay. Or maybe, you know, we'll figure out something to do with the text. And, you know, we could have another example, which was like looking for like social security numbers and credit cards and so sensitive data in a file. They're kind of PCI analysis. Yes. So this way I don't need to write it already have it You're on. If you could pick one. But right now I have you down for AWS to Nucleo example. Some, analyzing a text file. If you could just, if you could just pick one thing. Sure. That'd be great. DeClemens, what do you, what do you think you'd like to do? I will do the following thing. I will write a periodic agent that goes and fetches a random picture from my wonderful aviation geek photo library. And then we'll go and take one of the thumbnail sizes and throw that into an Azure storage account. And then I'm going to use that this gateway effectively to be sitting between Event Grid and an arbitrary and any number of arbitrary services and I will basically just use random function to go and balance them. And that image that's uploaded is going to be sent to what type of the image gets uploaded to Azure storage. And I will give all of you a cloud event that is the Microsoft storage block created event of which I will tell you the detail data schema and then out of the data schema you can fish the URL and then you can go and tweet that you got this event and then you can also include the image URL and that will actually then show in the Twitter feed. Just for the daisy chain, you know what, maybe we listen on an S3 event and we convert it to a cloud event and forward it to someone else to generate a thumbnail so we can show the daisy chain. Since you're going to get an event that has a picture on it because I'm generating that already you can do that. Actually since Watson IoT for instance has, sorry Watson IoT has all kinds of fancy image classification logic in it you could go and classify that picture and figure out what airplane it is. By the way, we have an example with using Azure face recognition API. Yeah. One thing that I might say is we should be careful about having a carefully constructed chain operating because then if any one site fails then we all fail. Having the broadcast and having us do things randomly sounds like a better bet. Yes, because something is always going to work. Keeping it flat was also one of my ideas here in terms of just making sure that it all works because if you have a chain then one piece failing makes the whole thing fail so that's a good look. Right. We want to show success across the board but I'm also cautious on demos. Oh yeah. All right, so I'm still trying to map out the story here. We've got a clear AWS to Nucleo example. We have an Azure image uploaded to Azure Storage event that's going to be published. Is there something we want to do specifically with that? Yeah, but the question is to show cloud event let's assume we got an S3 event we need to generate some cloud event to something else. Yeah, and that's your example right now. Right. We could do something uploaded to S3 and react to it with a Nucleo function. Okay. But who's going to convert the S3 event to a cloud event? Is that going to be a separate function or maybe event router or something? That's going to have to be a separate function. Okay, one thing you could do there is just run that as a Lambda. Yep. Just like what Clemens did on Azure with Azure. Yeah, that's the exact code that I'm showing here is that's taking our preparatory event format and turn that into cloud event. Oh, so you're saying we'll do the same and convert it to... Yeah. Okay, or any other function convert it to a cloud event and then something else processes the event. Like two functions, one converting the S3 to cloud events the second one takes the cloud events and does the text processing. Yeah, and that's my question to Clemens right now. Clemens, if there was another platform receiving this event, do you have any ideas as to what it should do? Do you have a function on another platform? Yeah, so since we had this Twitter idea I think for my storage event I would propose that you guys if we're doing this Twitter thing that everybody writes to a Twitter feed and the way they write to the Twitter feed is they pick up some properties from the some attributes from our cloud event and say this is what I got and then they can in the image case since everybody understands that can then go and take the image URL and just include that in the tweet as the image element and then the image will actually show in the Twitter feed. Pointing back to our storage. Mm-hmm. Sounds like this could be a candidate for the one to many connection. Yeah, and that's how I think about it. I would literally, everybody who writes in their platform which will probably be if we're doing this in Node be the same code but just with different scaffolding around it Yep. Will give me a URI and then I will go and basically make a list of URIs in this function here in my deployment and then choose a random number for every call I get and so I randomly spray across them. Oh cool.  Exactly. That's what I'm going to do. I will within the next um now it's going to be difficult with promises because I'm traveling to Hanover mess in tomorrow morning um I will as soon as I can I will say within the next two days give you a working example of all that. Mm-hmm. Is it going to be stored in somewhere without the password? Or are we the password that we know? Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. I will find a way to make it all known. All right. It sounds like we have we have two pretty cool examples. We have AWS to Nucleo. Something happens on S3 Nucleo is going to react to it doing maybe sentiment analysis of a text file something like that and write it to Twitter. That's a cool example because that's combined with an open source platform. I think that will be pretty compelling to use. And then we have the Azure example to many fast providers. So whoever wants to integrate with that can write some functions to do so. Clemens is going to provide that information and the use case is doing some type of something with an image and also writing that to Twitter. Yeah. So Clemens you know we could certainly help out writing a function to react to the image and do something with it. If you have a if you assume that you get a URL for me it would be good if someone could pick up the work and do the tweeting thing in Node and it's basically that there must be 400 different Node.js libraries mostly abandoned that all know the Twitter API. Yeah. Actually Clemens before we actually get into giving up work we have two examples here. Do we feel like we need a third one? We can do more. So Austin do you have time for a third one? It depends on how compelling it is. I think AWS to an open source fast platform is very cool. I think Azure really fast platforms is very cool. Are we missing anything? Well again I think the real world use case what posting to Twitter isn't necessarily real world but in some ways I care more about the interop right now and show real world later on. In my mind we're not showing off in these examples we're not showing off posting to Twitter. We're actually doing something and then the result is posted to Twitter for solutions and durability and maybe help this thing get some viral traction. I like the way you think. It's all in the market. You know what let's just move forward with these two examples and then let's see where we get to with these. So there's the AWS nuclear example you're on. I think that's the balls going to be in your court on that one. It sounds like you just run a lambda function which transforms to a cloud event which sends it over to your platform. Since we're already doing an image example I think the sentiment analysis of a text file or doing some other type of data processing would be compelling that's my opinion at least. And then regarding the Azure to many scenario our team can certainly write one or multiple functions to react to that image uploaded event on Azure Storage. Clemens if you could just give us an example of what that event looks like and everything we could get started and we'll start all this by let me outline all this in the GitHub issue just to clarify expectations and everything and we could keep the conversation going in there and then get to work on these two scenarios. Yeah so you got the I sent email just before this meeting which shows effectively what the structure of that event looks like. Great.  Is it possible for us to write this up in such a way that anybody can choose to participate on either side or at least on the receiving side? That's my next task. So Maybe we can even do a few things you know if it's a text file everyone can choose a different type of manipulation on the file. Yeah or something. Yeah so you can you know one can do sentiment the other one does you know PCI compliance the third guy does I don't know word count. Well I think the key here is let's get some things you know at least simple up and running and then we can then we can expand the use cases so we have time. Yeah that's right I think keeping it simple especially your example you're on just because that's how I think the story should start in the demo it's just like here's a one to one connection across platforms and then the next chapter in that story is here's a one to many connection across platforms and I think that's that's fine let me let me try and write this up in a github issue and we'll get some feedback hopefully on on Thursday but but this is pretty good in my opinion. Would it make sense for us to create a private Slack channel in order to share URLs and you know user name passwords etc. Can't hurt. Yeah we could probably just use the cloud events channel right. Okay if you're okay with the publicizing that are who ever subscribed to that. Well Dax you got rid of the different you actually said URLs I'm not that worried about but then you started talking about passwords and stuff I was assuming at least from my side I was going to not require authentication for you guys to send me stuff do we want to talk about that. Sorry Doug why is it why is the authorization necessary. Well I was going to say it's not because I was going to have a function that lets anybody post to me and I was going to just do something with it but Mark had mentioned something about user names and passwords are you guys assuming that your functions are going to require authentication. No I I don't think we should we should worry about that. Okay I agree too I just want to make sure. Yeah first for me. Okay cool okay Doug I think I could write this down in a way where people can plug in I think we should keep the first example simple just showing that one to one example between AWS and Nucleo the same example Azure to many is going to be a good candidate for other people to plug in and I'll write down some criteria as to what that should look like people want to integrate and then maybe we could take it from there. Yeah I think both of them could include one to many the first one doesn't have to be one to one. Okay yeah I agree. So one thing it might so one thing that might be required for the Azure to anybody thing is that so we require I'm asking my engineering team for what the white listing procedure what the white listing procedure looks like but we have a handshake that is kind of a parallel function so you don't need to show it and I can give that to you how the handshake looks but we have kind of this anti-abuse function which I'm trying to formalize in our web hook spec but that's kind of in place so for us to be able to actually push to you you need to opt into our abuse mechanism so I'll give you an answer on whether you need to do this or not for us to be able to push to you. Glements can you can you just push to a single endpoint like our event gateway because we can handle the one to many connection well the point is that Azure should be able to go and like an Azure thing should be able to talk to all those things right so let me talk to that let me talk to our guys in doubt we can go and talk to your gateway okay so we'll figure this out I'm just saying this is something that is in the picture so this abuse mechanism that I'm writing into the HB hook spec is a real thing got it okay just to clarify the use cases here we have an image uploaded to Azure storage people can react to that and then we have sentiment analysis of a text file so that text file is going to be uploaded to AWS the image will be uploaded to Azure that's right okay action item is for me to write this up I should get that done by the end of today let's just keep chatting about it if anyone has other suggestions just add it to this issue and hopefully it will be in a good place to present this on Thursday and I will say that we will need to check with our friends at Oracle and Google see whether they want to participate as well yeah I think the best way to do that is to write it down in a way that's clear and that gives them a clear way to integrate yep yeah this is Lily we'll be an end consumer so we'll take the event and put it to Twitter awesome and I love the Twitter suggestion you're on nice one yeah that's gonna be fun it's gonna work the demo guts will be with us yeah as things go Twitter will be down in that thing most likely but yeah what a great solution to the observability story right now so anyway this is cool maybe we'll prepare a slack but in case Twitter is down we'll figure it out worst case scenario I'll just record a video beforehand so I can always fall back to that the man has done it before I don't know I mean Austin's giving a keynote of course Twitter will be up yes yes yes what do you think about it yeah so my I'm gonna be as good as I can in terms of coding I will be in a banner or message for the next two days and I will try to squeeze it into whatever time allows me but it might I will do it as fast as I can you're wrong I got a quick question for you in the first example is now AWS to many doing some type of sentiment analysis of a text file would you be okay if we rig that example up through our event gateway we could author the lambda function that does the transform and just yeah over to you okay so you're gonna essentially write the lambda function pass it to you and then we should expect a cloud event that's right and we'll post it via HTTP we just need to know where to where to post it to sure and can you send us again a postman example of a dummy event absolutely yeah yeah we can do that we should come up with some what that text file is figure out just try to take the free part of the message yeah we're just going to put it in the request body I think this is what Clemens refers to as a structured event that's why I'm saying the best if you send us an example if we have any issue or clarification we could we would test it against the function the email that I sent earlier to the list actually contains an example already what I still have to do is to send you an example with where the URL actually the URL for that for the image bulb actually resolves and you can get at it so for that I need to make it count public we also need an example based on the S3 event which have a slightly different metadata that is the truth and good luck with that yeah but that's Austin's problem that's the fun the nice thing is the differences will now be miniscule and we can tell because we now have a standard yep yep absolutely cool I will write this up in an issue I think that's it unless anyone has any other further comments sounds like we're done here okay alright I like this thanks everyone thank you


In a matter of three days, the Red Lake Police Department arrested 12 people while executing three drug-related search warrants in Red Lake. The department issued an overdose warning to community members on Friday, February 9 following an uptick in overdoses on the reservation. According to a post on its Facebook page, the Red Lake Police Department said it has been aggressive in investigating the selling of illegal drugs and its concentrated efforts on opiates and methamphetamine. The Red Lake Department of Public Safety served and executed three drug-related search warrants at three separate homes, resulting in 12 arrests in the seizure of heroin and methamphetamine and the recovery of stolen property. Children were also found at two of the three homes. All individuals were transported to the Red Lake Detention Facility and face tribal charges and some will be extradited for outstanding state felony warrants. Now more details on the individuals arrested can be found on our website lptv.org backslash news. If you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS.


Network theory is a way of describing the world in terms of a model called a network that allows us to capture the information about the relationships between things. But let's first think about why we might be interested in this at all. We often describe the world in terms of objects or things and their properties. We talk about a country and its GDP, people and their age, or the colour of a car. This type of component-based analysis works well when the system we're interested in is relatively isolated. But when we turn up the interactions and connectivity between elements within a system, it is increasingly the connections that come to shape the elements and define the system as a whole. And thus we need a model that captures this information about the relationships and allows us to reason about it. This is where network theory comes in. Network theory starts with a very simple view of the world as made up in nodes which are things or objects like people, cities, computers, etc. and the relationship between these things called edges such as friendships, trading partners, cables and so on. This abstract representation of the world can be used to model a wide variety of things, thus we can have social networks, biological networks or logistics networks composed of interacting suppliers and consumers. Network theory gives us a set of tools for analysing the individual elements and relations within these networks, the structure of the network and the properties that these different network structures give rise to. The first set of questions we might like to ask about a particular network relates to its degree of connectivity, that is how connected an individual element or the whole network is. This will tell us many things about it, such as how quickly a new event could spread or propagate through the system. The average degree of connectivity will give us a quick answer to this. This is calculated by taking the total number of edges and dividing it by the total number of nodes within the network. We also need to take into account how large the network is, that is to say how far it is on average from one point to another. This is called the average path length and we can calculate it by taking the average of all the path lengths between all the nodes. Because networks are all about connectivity, we often ascribe value to individual nodes based on their degree of connectivity. There are various methods for calculating this, but a popular one called eigenvector centrality measures both how many edges a node has and how connected the nodes it connects to are. Popular web search engines use variants of the eigenvector centrality measure to rank web pages by calculating both the number of links into a web page and the total degree of connectivity of the pages that link into them, thus gaining an idea of the relative importance of a website. Next, we're interested in talking about the overall structure of a network. This will be largely determined by how the relations between the nodes was formed. If the relation between the elements was generated randomly, we would expect a relatively even distribution of edges across the network. This type of structure or topology is called a distributed network, as the relative importance of any node is distributed across the entire network. A second type of network structure we can get is called decentralized or small world. This is generated by having local clusters of connections, but also having some random distant connections. An example of this might be a group of friends, with some of the friends having distant relatives in other parts of the world. By using these local connections within the group and distant connections, research has shown that it's possible to connect two random people within an average of just six steps and thus it is termed small world. Lastly, we have more centralized networks, called scale free networks. This is where many nodes have chosen to connect to the same node, giving a degree of connectivity that greatly exceeds the average, whilst leaving many with a very low level of connectivity. Many real world networks are thought to be scale free, including social, biological and technological systems such as the World Wide Web, where very few websites like Wikipedia have a very large amount of links into them, whilst the vast majority of websites have very few. These various types of network structures give rise to different properties. A key question we're interested in asking here is how robust or fragile is a particular type of network, as this will not only help us understand networks better, but it will also be of great significance in how we design and manage them. For example, think about a country with many small to medium sized cities supplying the population with various public services. If we were to remove one of the cities, it would have a limited effect on the overall system, because the network has a distributed structure, making it robust to failure of this kind. In contrary, if we take a country with one dominant capital city, with the rest of the urban network dependent upon it for core services, this centralized network may be more efficient, but it is also in what is called a more critical stage, as affecting this single primary node would have a large systemic effect. As we transit from an industrial to information societies, networks are merging as a new paradigm in how we structure our systems of organization, both social and technological. Network theory is a young and rapidly growing area that provides us with a set of tools for designing and managing these new types of organization, and more generally understanding the world around us from a different perspective.


About 24 hours ago in this exact location, in a sleepy little beach town, a group of peaceful protestors met. I wanted to better understand why they were here. Some were local, some traveled from the mainland and elsewhere to participate in a visual display of solidarity. I stopped by. This is what I encountered. Let me see your signs. Let me see your sign, man. Did I see your signs? Thank you. Let me see your signs. Let me see your sign, man. Let me see your sign. You got a sign. Hold them up. Let me see them. Let me see your signs. Why are you guys here? All equal. Let me see your signs, guys. Let me see your signs. Tell me why you're here, man. I'm here because I throw history. I really think it's unfair how white people treat black people, especially today. I think it's really bad. And that's what you're here supporting. Absolutely. Thank you.