Oh, get out of here.  Oh, stop it. You in the south. You in the south, nigga. You in the south. You in the south. On the canopy, my stamina be enough for Pamela Anderson Lee. What? My hardest eight bars on that song. The eight bars? No way. Eight bars. That's all of you. No way. Eight bars. Shout out to Pipsy. You know I'm gonna hold you down. I'm gonna hold you down every time. But I'm telling you right now. When he say what you know about them Texas boys, that's all they had to say. I'm from Texas. Now we all know about them. Real talk. Spearsburg pot. Yeah. Let's talk about that. I want to talk about where it's at. Now I seen two years, three years ago. Yeah. Y'all been getting it in. How did you even come together with this guy? I don't know who he is. He opened for me one day and then one day turned into another day and another day and then finally he was like, yo, man, do you need an opener? Can I come out on the road with you? And I was like, yeah. So we just started working together on the road. And then one day he said, we should do a pod. And we did one and here we are. I like it. I like it. So what are you guys going to do this year that y'all didn't do last year? Well, we always try to evolve and figure out how to get better. You know, I feel like, you know, evolution never stops. And the goal to get better is always constantly in motion. So no matter how good we may have been two years ago, I'm like, how much better can we be two years from now? Exactly. So just always trying to figure that out and grow and get better. Yeah. I like it. Who is the best new comedian stand up that you see coming up and coming up and coming comedian that you love his comedy? You know, honestly, I don't really watch too many up and coming cats. I just don't. I'm 48. I'm stuck in my old ways. I like who I like. My, you know, Dave Chappelle to me is the goat in terms of today. I mean, Richard is the overall.  That's all in your generation. Patrice O'Neill was a monster. Bill Burr, I'm a huge Bill Burr fan. I love Tommy Davidson. And again, I love Corey. But yeah, as far as new uppercut, that just don't. In your audience, the people that come out and see you, do you have a lot of any young people come out and watch your show? As young as in I watched you on Mad and now I'm in my 20s and 30s. Oh, yeah. Yeah. But like young, young, I don't even really like. I don't do colleges for the reason that a lot of comedians don't like doing colleges. Why? Young people don't know. They don't know. And they so moist and that's that everything is offensive to them. Everything is a reason to cancel you. You know, I come from the days when you could smoke cigarettes in clubs. You know, I like, I like grown folks. People that got scars. You know what I mean? These young kids like. You got kids. Yeah, three. How old is the oldest? 24. Okay. So you definitely understand those age groups. Yeah. You listen to Scarlet? Who? Scarlet in New York. She's a young rapper. No. See, who is your favorite rapper of all times? We do a top three. I do a top three here. My top three is Nas, Jay-Z and Jadakiss. That Jadakiss the hardest one you just named. Oh, come on Nas. Yeah. I said what I said. I said what I said. If I'm going to deal with New York, Jadakiss, you seen what happened on that verse. Stop playing. Yeah. You already know. You already know.  I get it. I get it. Nas is. Female wise. Who's the best one out there? I said Scarlet. I didn't listen to the young news. No, that's young. I don't even listen to them. MC Light. Ever. I would say it. I didn't say it. She's the best to ever do this as a female. I don't call MC Light. Yeah. Because everybody else like little Kim and Foxy Brown. Lauren Hill. Yeah. But Lauren only did one album. Even though that album is beyond classic and amazing. She only gave us the one. But Lauren seemed like she had her own headspace. She got certain. I don't want to use the word issues. But you know what I mean? Right. Seems like something's going on. You know. When you first. I don't mean to cut you. But when you first. I don't want you to get out here without me asking this. You were 14, 15, 16 growing up in New York. When you first heard hip hop. How was that for you? I got to ask you that. Oh it was you know. Run DMC. Yeah. Fat boys. MC Shan. MC Shan. D Nice. D Nice. Yeah. Yeah. Cool Hertz. Cool Hertz. She used to make it. I knew she was going to say it. Yeah. I'm not Cool Mo D. Curtis Blow.  The Goat. Yeah. The Goat King. Without him you don't see these lyrical people the way you see them. Yeah. Rock Him was the one that pretty much was the first one that kind of started that. And that's what I mean when I say like I remember I was walking down the street one day in New York. And I'm about to cross the street and I go.  You seen him. And when I walked up and I was like yo man I just wanted he was like yo God. You that nigga God. I was like. Yeah. Yeah. He knew who I was and again Nas my favorite. I remember I was at the LA live factory and I walked in and I went straight to the balcony and Kalisa was there. And this is when she was married to Nas. Yeah.  She was like he downstairs. He loves you. So I go downstairs and Nas is in the corner. Averick's jacket shades got a little heady. Yo Nas man I. Yo what's up God.  Yo you be doing your thing kid. I was like oh I kept my cool. And I went outside and called my niggas like yeah. So that's what I'm saying man it's like because I'm in the game even if you're not necessarily a comedian we an entertainment game. Right. So and we fans of what we do. Yeah. But if a regular Joe go up to Nas and I don't think Nas would because that's not his character. Yeah.  And they don't hold. That's why I'm like how did you feel about the Nas and Jay-Z when that thing came together and everybody. Oh he destroyed Jay-Z. And then Ethan he destroyed Jay-Z. I agree. I can't even play with you. Oh he destroyed Jay-Z. I can't even play. Now that's a dude who I met three times and the first two times he was so rude to me. Jay-Z. Yeah. What Jay-Z do. You know I remember I did an interview. I had to interview Tamia. Okay. And I met this little restaurant in Beverly Hills and Jay-Z walked in and I was like yo Jay man I'm a fan. He didn't look at me. What. He didn't look at me. He just went straight to talking to Tamia. And then there was another time. What did you say? You were younger? I didn't say nothing else. I just you know I was like. You just heard. Yeah. But now the third time I met him. You said something. Now I'm the airy spirits. Oh okay. So I wasn't really famous. Okay I get it now. So I went to the Mayweather Pacquiao fight in Vegas. So the fight's over and everybody's spilling out out of the arena into the parking lot. So the celebrities is mixing with the regular folks as they walk into their cars or whatever. And Allen Iverson was right here. And all these people were ay-ya ay-ya ay-ya. And then Beyoncé and Jay-Z merged a little couple steps ahead of them holding hands. Niggas forgot who they are. They all ran. Jay-Z and Beyoncé. And it just so happened that as they were walking I kind of merged at the same time. And I said yo hold man I just want to tell you he said he looked at me and went I know who you are Niggas. He didn't want to deal with you. Cause of all the jokes I've made on him. He acknowledged like I've seen you f*** with me. I know who you are. So it was a little bit of a that was some give back for me. What made you channel in to Jay-Z like that? Was it because you had met him a few times? I'm a fan. I'm a huge whole fan. I mean the niggas literally got bars. What's your favorite song? You know I don't know that I have a favorite song. There's so many. Or a verse that touched you. Give me a verse. You know that from allow me to reintroduce myself. My name is Boom. I go up to that every time I go on stage. That's hard. That's my interest. That's hard. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Cause the way that allow me to reintroduce my and then the boom, boom, boom. Bring that energy. That's just, yeah. So let's talk about what you had tonight. You at the, cause I'm driving this. Before you say that, before you say that. So who is the first down south rapper that you ever heard that you liked? I have respect for. Scarface. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. I ain't got that. I can answer this question for you. No, no, no. You don't know. It ain't Scarface? No. You know who I used to, I used to learn that one song by T.I. Bring them out. Bring them out. Oh, he was T.I. Bring them out, bring them out. Hey. Bring them out, bring them out. That's cause, that's not fair. Because of what you do. Why? Because of what you do. Cause what's the name? Producer. DMX, the name producer. Oh, I didn't know that. Yeah, what's his name? The producer. Swiss Beats? Yeah, that's who produced that. Yeah, but it wasn't cause of the beat. The beat was the beat. That's what they do. T.I. was the beat. No, no, no, no. T.I. spent lyrics on that. It definitely spent lyrics on it. But it's the producing and the way that thing hit. No, but I mean that's part of it. You used to it. That's part of it. The DMX and all that stuff coming at you. You don't know what to do. You know what I'm saying? Yeah, listen.  Yeah. The rhyme, scheme and pattern is supposed to be married with the beat. I get it. I get it. You know, I'm Pimp C all day. You know, no matter what. Any killed J-Nem on that, what's that song? They all try to give like J brought them out during that time. Pimp C could never kill J-Nem. What was that song? I don't even know the name of the song. That's the song. What was it? The one where they was on the boat. I know the song. Big Bippin. Big Bippin. Oh, get out of here.  You have to stop. You listen to the style, J-Z. You listen to the song. On the canopy, my stamina be enough for Pamela Anderson Lee. Hold on. Hold on. That's 8 bars. 8 bars. 8 bars. That's all. 8 bars. Shout out to Pimp C. You know I'm gonna hold you down. I'm gonna hold you down every time.  I'm from Texas. Oh. I'm not playing. I don't know about the Texas boys coming down to Kennedy. He won all of them. One of my favorite songs to this day is Ghetto Boys. How you got a little bit? You in the south. That's yeah. When you heard that one, you know you like them boys. I can't lie. I can't lie.  I don't associate Houston as the south. What you mean? I know it is technically, but y'all. What you mean? Y'all don't have that twang that the real south. Man. Y'all listen, Dallas. It depends on what part of Texas you go to. It's so metropolitan and so big. It don't feel like the south. When I say the south, like Mississippi. Y'all have bad experience in Mississippi. Not in so bad, man. They're just far removed from slavery. They're far removed.


BismillahirRahmanirRaheem and As-Salaamu Alaykum ladies and gentlemen. Last time we basically were talking about the corporate governance developments in the USA and we talked about the different laws and frameworks which exist over there. And we were seeing that how the Watergate scandal basically catalyzed or sparked the importance of corporate governance and catapulted this concept into the limelight whereby it was considered very important and critical that the corporations should be properly regulated and that their funds and finances should be properly audited and there should be a publication of all those reports so all the stakeholders have a clear picture of what is happening in the corporation. Today ladies and gentlemen we are going to be talking about the developments in the UK and amazingly when we are talking about the developments in the UK then we see that the BCCI the Bank of Credit and Commerce International scandal played a huge role in catapulting and in catalyzing and energizing the corporate governance movement within the corporate structure of the United Kingdom. Now ladies and gentlemen when we look at what happened in England then the seeds of modern corporate governance were shown by the Bank of Credit and Commerce International BCCI. The BCCI was a global bank made up of multiplying layers of entities related to one another. So what we see ladies and gentlemen is that we had this huge web of entities. They were intertwined with each other and it became very difficult to distinguish between the different institutions, the different sister concerns and the different associated companies which were linked to the BCCI Bank. So things were very complex and complicated and they were absolutely unclear and when the bank collapsed then this huge financial structure came down which affected the whole world and therefore there was this great need and desire that it should not happen again and therefore there should be a proper corporate governance system in place. What we see is that within the corporate structure of BCCI and the shorty record keeping regulatory review and audits the complex BCCI family of entities was able to evade ordinary legal restrictions on the movement of capital because what they would do is that they would shuffle the transactions between each other and it became very difficult to trace and find out that what is happening and how funds are coming, how funds are being utilized, what level of transactions are taking place, what are the profits and all of these different aspects basically created this spider web of entities and they could not be distinguished and therefore BCCI was able to get away with illegal practices over many many years and then because they basically were indulged in so many negative activities that they finally collapsed. So that is what we see that due to the shorty record keeping and again review and audits they basically collapsed. The corporate model of BCCI presented an ideal mechanism for facilitating illicit activity by others. Another landmark that enlightened people's awareness and sensitivity on the issue of corporate misdeeds was the failure of Baring's Bank. So on one side we see that the BCCI was a role model and again for the UK it contributed in catalyzing this whole concept forward but another very important episode was that of the extinction of the Baring's Bank which was a highly reputed over many centuries bank but unfortunately what do we see? We see that the Baring's Bank failure was caused by the actions of a single trader based at a small office in Singapore, Nick Leeson. Nick started trading on behalf of the bank whereas he was supposed to trade only on behalf of the customer. So what we see is that the traders actually had to have limited liability and based upon that they could only basically facilitate or trade with the clients or the consumers. However, Nick Leeson basically found a lacuna and then he started trading for the bank and as a result of that this bank which had its presence around the world was sold for only one dollar. Now what we see is that eventually when a strategy failed because of an earthquake in Japan, Baring's Bank had already lost 1.4 billion and it had to shut office. As a result of these failures and lack of regulatory responses and measures from authorities, an adequate response to check them in future, the committee of sponsoring organizations was established. So what we see is that a new network was established to ensure that what happened with Baring or what happened with BCSI to not happen again and there should be a super regulatory body which would ensure that there would be a certain high level of standardization and also that all of the stakeholders would be protected in that particular context. The report produced by it in 1992 suggested a control framework which was endorsed and refined in the four subsequent UK reports. And those reports are famous reports. We have the Cadbury report. We have the Ruthman report. We have the Hampel report and we have the Turnwell report. And companies such as Polypec and British and Commonwealth and Robert Maxwell's Mirror Group News international were all victims of the boom to bust a gate of the 1980s. So what we see is that many large corporate entities basically had to close down because they could not match up to the regulations stipulated by Cadbury, Ruthman, Hampel and Turnbull and according to the control frameworks which were earlier available. So what we see is that this whole chaos started taking place because companies were being regulated. They were being made responsible and it was very difficult to get out of that quagmire situation or out of that whirlpool situation. So what we see is that the publication of a series of reports consolidated into the combined code on corporate governance. The Hampel report in 1998 resulted in major changes in the area of corporate governance in the United Kingdom. So what we see is that the sea change takes place due to these new regulations, due to these new laws and effective implementation and execution coupled with sporadic monitoring and evaluation exercise. So this whole mechanism ensured that many companies started producing better, started working better and started to create enabling and conducive environments and that was the crux of the different models that were basically emerging and they were not inorganic models. Organic models especially in the context of knowledge generation, knowledge sharing and knowledge inputs. Thank you so much.


Hello, and welcome to the session I am Deepika here. Let's discuss a question it says. In our claim, a man wins a rupee for a 6 and loses a rupee for any other number. When a fair guy is thrown, the man decided to throw a dice twice, but too quick as and when he gets a 6. Find the expected value of the amount he wins or loses. Now we know that the mean of x, denoted by mu, is the number sigma x i p r e taking from 1 to n. And it is also called the expectation of x, denoted by E s. In other words, the mean or expectation of a random variable x is the sum of the problems of all possible values of x by their respective probabilities. So this is a key idea behind our question. We will take up and pop this key idea to solve our question. So let's start the solution to the given question. In our game, a man wins a rupee for a 6 and loses a rupee. Let x take some values 1 and minus 1, 1 rupee, losing 1 rupee, getting us in a throw of the dice, equal to 1 over 6, is equal to 5 over 6. According to the given question, the man decided to throw a dice 3 for a 1 rupee 1. Now the equal to 1 over 6 x is equal to 1 over 6, which is equal to 0. Now we equal to 1 over 6 and probability of getting any other number apart from 6 is equal to 5 over 6 to 1 over 6, which is equal to 1 over 6, which is equal to 25 over 216. So the probability distribution of x, 1 over 6 when x is equal to 5 over 36 and when x is equal to minus 1, px is equal to 25 over 216. Now he wins or loses. Now here v is equal to sigma 36 plus n equal to 1 over over 216. Positive, therefore the expected value he wins is rupees 11 over 216. So the answer for the above question is 11 over 216. So this completes our session. I hope the solution is clear to you. Bye.


Back in April of 2018. That's when I got laid off from my job that I had been at for about three and a half years And I remember at that time thinking like all right, you know what? I had been doing the YouTube on the side of see you know what? I'm gonna go for it for time I'm gonna go for it and I remember some people who I loved and really cared about their opinion telling me Are you sure you want to do that full-time like it could possibly maybe work out? But you sure you want to go that route? Why don't you try to get something? That's more certain right now? and if I would have listened to them and not bet on myself then It would have never worked out so I'm glad I took that chance and took that risk because in the long run it ended up paying off and Not that my situation is even comparable More Jackson could we talk in the whole now the stratosphere when it comes to money? It ain't even close, but I can understand the route that he's taking Because to a lot of people on the outside a lot of people looking at the situation They probably looking at it like ma'am Lamar should have taken that deal Lamar should have took what the Ravens offer Lamar should have just accepted the contract that the Ravens put in front of his face. What is he doing? But Lamar choosing to bet on himself It's gonna work out in the long run now this morning whoo this morning. It's like whoo-hoo. That's that's busy I'm not mad because it's business It's business is business on both sides on both Lamar Jackson side and on the Baltimore Raven side and This leak that came out this morning. This ain't from nobody put the Ravens straight up Invinces to show people like hey look fans media analysts experts. Hello look We tried and we really tried like they've been trying a lot this off-season, but this with Lamar Jackson they really tried to give him a nice deal and It's not a bad deal at all and let's just read these reports. Let's get into it. So We're gonna read reports from Justina Anderson Chris Mortensen and Maybe a little bit more first. Justina Anderson the Ravens put out and another improved offer on the table for Lamar Jackson this past week ahead of his self-imposed deadline that includes metrics exceeding so past more than Russell Wilson, but Did not meet the fully guaranteed construct of the Sean Watson's deal So all the rumors and stuff that we have been hearing about. Oh, yeah Lamar Jackson He wants a more fully guaranteed deal deal deal a lot of guarantee money on there That looks to be true and I mean, it's no surprise, but anyway, let's keep going My understanding is there was some frustration that Jackson's declining of Baltimore's offer didn't include more acceptance of the difference in a Watson situation that led to multiple teams bidding for his services, so what that means is that The the situations were different because with Lamar Jackson He is on the Baltimore Ravens and we know there are plenty of teams that would trade for him But that's not what the situation is right now the situation right now He's on the Baltimore Ravens and there's no bidding war for him right now But with the Sean Watson since there was a bidding war That's why that they really trying to make that an outlier But again, you know, like Lamar ain't gonna be looking at that contract like no outlier try to tell people that man He ain't gonna be looking at that and Sean deal like no outlier He gonna be saying hey, I want that to be the new norm. But anyway It says meanwhile sources have said to me that Jackson not only understands his full value to the team and This is the business side to again. We talked about this too. Lamar Jackson knows his worth So she just reiterated stuff that y'all already knew Lamar Jackson knows is worth. Let's continue She said meanwhile sources have said to me that Jackson not only understands his full value to the team and its marketing So we not only talking about on the football field. We talking off it too. Yes, you you know, you're worth when you Not only to the team and its marketing That's big business right there, baby, but also has an awareness of how these contracts should be looking moving forward Post the Watson deal for dynamic elite Quarterbacks and players like himself in the NFL overall so Lamar Jackson letting me know like hey I know what it's looking like. I'm trying to again make that the new norm But again, this should be nothing new We talked about this before but anyway, um It says I believe that is important to him Especially as athletes involved in collision sport in comparison to the NBA brethren That's something that we also talked about too Football is a very physical sport. So why not try to coop as much guaranteed money as you possibly can Because and this is not just for Lamar Jackson. This is what we talked about for any single NFL player When you step on that football field You never know what's gonna happen next So that's why you try to get all the bread that you possibly can Anyway, she said I've heard a lot about this past week and didn't have much time to report on it So that's a little little humble brag little humble flex like a had this sitting on my on my phone for a little while I had this information, but I was a little busy. So I couldn't get to it But anyway, while Calamari and Russell Wilson's contracts didn't carry the Watson trend should the force continue to revolutionize these football Contracts while there's been a lot of debate and emotion behind the scenes saying he's risking injury You take the burden hand he won't recoup the 26 mil in additional compensation for 2022 I've heard just as fervently. It don't matter what may happen to Lamar Jackson. He will still get paid I wonder if you've seen Anderson been watching the videos. I know we've been saying that this whole time But anyway, let's keep going. She said look at that press guy look at Kirk Cousins, whichever route he goes He will still get his money. I think maybe she has been watching videos But anyway, even another NFL head coach remarked to me last week Lamar also knows there will eventually be a market for his services one day and teams will line up to have him That is the absolute truth That is the absolute truth and Again, if y'all been listening to stuff We've been saying then none of this stuff that she's saying comes as a surprise to you At all none of it Nothing that she's saying Because it's business now again with Ravens. It's business with Lamar Jackson is business with timing is business This timing that the Ravens have this being leaked It's not coincidental Because this could have been leaked on Saturday. This could have been leaked on Friday This could have been leaked so many other times, but a Ravens are like, all right Lamar You turn down our deal. All right, that's cool Now we we're gonna put that pressure on you cuz you put that pressure on us. Okay, cool Cool, we're gonna put that pressure on you now We're leaking this on game day You better show up my friend You better show up. You better go out there and do your thing because all right you want to decline our deal Which was a nice deal and we're about to get into the details of that deal in a second But you want to turn down our deal. All right, show us why you deserve more We ain't leaking this on Friday on the deadline day. We ain't even leaking this the day after we're leaking it on travel day either We're leaking it on the morning of game day Just so everybody that watches they watch that much closer They watch you that much closer that much more pressure is put on you It's business, baby. It's business So again, I ain't got no problem with what either side is doing because either side is they trying to win Lamar side trying to win Raven side trying to win both trying to win and Lamar like Price keeps guy rocking. Anyway From Chris Mortensen now we get into some more details Said sources Lamar Jackson rejected a Raven six-year contract offer with 133 mil fully guaranteed at signing which is more than Russell Wilson's 124 million and Kyla Murray's 103.3 million so The cop that what was fully guaranteed at signing for Lamar would have been 133 mil so that is Seven mil more. No, excuse me when I'm tripping. That's nine mil more Then Kyla Murray. Oh, excuse me. I'm not more nine mil more than Russell Wilson twenty one hundred twenty four mil and a little less than it's about thirty two Yeah, about thirty two and change mil more than Kyla Murray's so significant amount of guaranteed but Says but well short of the 230 mil fully guaranteed deal that the Sean Watson got so Lamar Jackson said hey Ravens cut the check Cut the check and Ravens and we tried we tried and Lamar look this. Oh, okay. Oh y'all are trying well I need more guarantees But anyway, he also said in terms of total money over the six years Jackson could have earned in excess of 290 mil and his average per year would exceed so be passed be more than Russell Wilson's recent deal at forty eight point five average per year Which did adjust the Ravens final offer, but the contract was not fully guaranteed as Jackson saw so Let's do some math real quick. And this is an easy way to tell how much contracts are worth By okay, so this it says in excess of two hundred ninety mil and the average would have been more than forty eight point five so so what you do go to your calculator and Put in two hundred ninety mil and divided by six that is forty eight point three three So it's like okay, so the deal would have been more than that because it said it is exceeded forty eight point five Which is what Russell Wilson got so let's do two ninety one divided by six. That's forty eight point five So now let's do two ninety two divided by six. That's forty eight point six. So this deal was worth at least 292 mil at least so again the Ravens are trying They they they doing a good job of trying so we can't can't be mad at the Ravens for this Can't be mad at either side again. It's business So you gotta be mad at either side both sides of they they trying So continuing it said Jackson received active counsel from the NFL PA at the highest levels in the union advised that based off performance and age He was justified to demand a fully guaranteed contract if that's what he wanted sources at it So NFL PA say Based off of who you are how old you are and what you've done You deserve to ask for all the fully guaranteed money that you want to Lamar go do your thing Anyway, it says Jackson gets 23 mil on the fifth year option and for now source to say he is willing to explore the Kirk Cousin strategy The team can use the franchise tag on Jackson in 2023 and 2024 the unions model projects formula would net him About 100 mil fully guaranteed for two years So with that with the franchise tag with the exclusive franchise tag because if they mess around and try to do that that non exclusive That transition tag He's gone even with the franchise tag. I told you I think if it gets to the franchise tag I think it could get ugly But the franchise tag will give him about 40 right now Based off of contracts right now franchise tag next year will give him about 45 mil and franchise tag I was you know fully guaranteed now if Ravens try to go to franchise tag route that could force the hand That and that could force the hand either way because you franchise tag Lamar Jackson It's like that and you know what Ravens in the salary cap. They can find a way if they really want to they could find a way but With 45 mil with the franchise tag franchise I fully guaranteed again I'm fully guaranteed proven deals, but franchise tag is fully guaranteed. So that all goes on the cap right then right there So that will force the Ravens hand quick fast and in a hurry because With the franchise tag with it being fully guaranteed That takes away that 45 mil from your cap and that's a little fat chunk of change right there, baby It takes it away So that will force the Ravens to either be like, alright, we sign him the March Jackson tour extension right now We can't do this franchise that oil forced him to trade them It would really put that pressure on the Ravens like boom like alright Something got to get done and something got to get done fast So again, hopefully it doesn't get to the franchise tag that that's all the franchise tag I mean it could work out, but it also could not work out and then with the franchise tag That's where the holdouts that that's why I think the holdouts will start coming into play But anyway, let's keep going. It says If Jackson takes that path absent a new contract He will be an unrestricted free agent in 2025 and use leverage to get his fully guaranteed contract from the Ravens Which is his preference or entertain other options sources at it. So My well actually Ravens they letting it be known like all right. Yeah. Hey This little this little Mars doing just what he's doing But anyway, um union sources frame the Ravens talks with Jackson's as good faith Although the team included 2.5 mil in annual de-escalator clauses if Jackson did not attend a high percentage of off-season workouts So they were like a every year you could lose up to 2.5 mil if you don't Attend a high percentage or a certain percentage of off-season workouts So they like hey, you don't show up to these off-season work You try to hold out with the new contract with what with whatever the contract would have been They're like, hey, then we would have took that 2.5 mil from you every year that you don't do that so But the off-season workouts. He's always been there for those But anyway It says FYI fully guaranteed money covers regardless of skill injury and salary cap Oh What a morning what a morning um, so So now we got we got some more details We got some more details, but this um, it doesn't really change much It doesn't really change much in anything. It just lets us know how much It lets us know More more so what Lamar Jackson is turning down and again Both sides they look in they operate this business. I Love it and I respect it from both sides again Lamar Jackson. He betting on himself the Ravens. They gave him a nice offer gave him a nice offer and It was not a cheap offer either It wasn't so that was another a lot of people's thinking oh man Ravens They probably offered Lamar Jackson something cheap. Well, no, it wasn't cheap But then at the same time it just it wasn't it wasn't next to the Sean Watson It was higher average per year than the Sean Watson, but not close to the guarantees and Hey, if you want them guarantees go for it go for it now something else that I thought was funny. Well, very interesting Was some some other timing this morning is it coincidence Who knows I always say timing is everything but just something to think about this morning The Ravens they leaked this About Lamar Jackson and the contract that they offered to him. Hey Sean. Hey, we we offer them a nice deal. Da da da. Cool All right, no problem. That's business But also this same morning it just so happens to come out that Oh, this is expected to be Tom Brady's final season. He's expected to retire after this season I don't know. I don't know but a Mmm You tell me Last but not least if from Ian rapper poor he said Jackson was offered a deal that eclipsed that of Broncos Russell Wilson in key areas With Baltimore's attempted extension being more than the 49 mil per year in average and new money that Wilson received on September 1st The belief is that it also approached or beat Wilson in terms of guaranteed money with Wilson receiving 68% of his deal Guaranteed it was nearly that of Packers quarterback Aaron Rogers Who earned 50 mil per year over the next three years in a highly guaranteed deal struck in March with regards to guaranteed money It fell short of the 230 mil fully guaranteed deal that Browns quarterback to Sean Watson received after Cleveland traded for Watson in March and it says in fact fully guaranteed money is to believe is believed to be the heart of the issue But Jackson is singing as close to 230 mil as possible choosing to play on a fifth year option of his rookie contract until he gets his desired deal So meanwhile Ravens owner Steven Shaddy spoke out in the spring telling a small group of local reporters I don't know what I don't I don't know that Watson should have been the first guy to get a fully guaranteed contract to me That's something that is groundbreaking and it'll make negotiations harder with others So yeah, so a bunch of the same stuff that y'all already know now as far as the franchise tag I said after the season he faces the first of two franchise tags with the non-exclusive tag equaling 29.7 mil There's no way that they give him that there's no way that they put the non-exclusive tag on well actually there is a way but If they do that he's gone If they do that he's gone for sure now if they do the exclusive franchise tag Which right now is 45.5 mil But that could change that could go up it could go it could go down it could change probably gonna go up a little bit, but um Yeah, if they do that then it's still risk that he's going but that they do that non-exclusive then he's gone for sure But he said if there's no deal Jackson would likely get another tag the following year and then likely face a tag So he'll so high he'll become a free agent But there's risk considering only the fifth year option is guaranteed right now Jackson has always done things his own way And based on Friday's decisions. He set to bet on himself cool So just a little extra information right there on Lamar Jackson. So Team keeping clean Hopefully Lamar Jackson when it comes to him Being with the Ravens. I'm hoping that in the long run He doesn't end up telling the Ravens the same thing we tell y'all at the end of these videos. We out


Live from the Javits Center in New York City, it's theCUBE, covering Inforum 2017. Brought to you by Infor. Welcome to day two of theCUBE's live coverage of Inforum 2017 here in New York City at the Javits Center. I'm your host, Rebecca Knight, along with my co-host, Dave Vellante, and Jim Kobelius, who is the lead analyst at Wikibon for AI. So we're here in day two, fellas. We just heard the keynote. Any thoughts on what your expectations are for today, Jim, and what you're hoping to uncover, or at least get more insight on what we learned already in day one? I'd like to have Infor unpack a bit more of the Coleman announcement. I wrote a blog last night that I urge our listeners to check out on wikibon.com. There's a number of unanswered issues in terms of their strategy going forward to incorporate Coleman AI and their technology. I suspect that Infor, like most companies, is working out that strategy as they go along, piece by piece. They've got a good framework that... But we've got Duncan and Gov on. Right after this segment, Dave and Nian, you will grill Duncan on that much more. But that in particular, AI is great. AI is everybody's secret sauce now. There's a lot of substance behind what they're doing at Infor that sets them apart from their competitors in the ERP space. I want to go deeper there. So yes, so I'm looking at the blog right now, but what are the particular questions that you have regarding Coleman in terms of how it's going to work? Yeah, well, first of all, I want to know, do they intend to incorporate Coleman AI in their premises-based software offerings? For, I'm sure the vast majority of their customers want to know when, if ever, they're going to get access to Coleman, number one. Number two is, when are they going to complete the process of incorporating Coleman in their cloud suite portfolio, which is vast and detailed. And then really, number three, are they going to do all the R&D themselves? I mean, they've got AWS as a major partner. AWS has significant intellectual property in AI. Will they call on others to work with them on co-developing these capabilities? Those are like the high level things that I want to get out of today. Okay, okay. Well, so a couple of things. So I mean, the keynote today was okay. It wasn't like mind-blowing. We had customer appreciation, which was great. Alexis, who was from Footlocker, CubeLum was up there, and B of A got customer of the year and met those guys last night at one of the customer appreciation dinners. So that was kind of cool.  Heard a lot about design thinking and they shared some screenshots, essentially, of this new UI. So they're talking about AI is the new UI. It was very reminiscent of the conversation that we had in May at the service now. Knowledge conference, where they're bringing consumer-like experience to the enterprise. It's always been something that service now is focused on, and certainly, Charles Phillips and Hook and Looper have been focused on that. The difference is, quite frankly, that the service now showed an actual demo. Got a lot of claps as a result. Info said this is ready to be tested and downloaded, but they didn't show any demo. So that was sort of like- They didn't show any demo. Is it really baked out? Steve Lucas was up there. He killed it. Very high energy guy, you know, again, another cube alum.  And I thought he did a really good job. From Marketo. Talking about the whole engagement economy. You know, we think it's going a little bit beyond engagement to more action, systems of an action, I think is the term you guys use. I think systems of agency or enablement, yeah, but yeah, bringing more of the IoT into it and robotics and so forth. And then DSW was up there. I said yesterday, I love DSW.  And I said, okay, when the girls and I go to DSW, I break left, they go middle right. We meet at the checkout to negotiate what actually goes home. So that was good. It was kind of fun. And then a lot of talk about digital transformation. Mark Scavelli was talking about that and IoT and AI and data. So that's sort of, you know, kind of a summary there. As you know, Rebecca, I've been kind of trying to make the math work on the $2 plus billion investment code. And the messaging that Infor is putting forth, there's this desk, this is a source of new capital for us, but I'm, you know, as a private company, they have the right not to divulge everything. And they're not on a 90 day shot clock. Charles Phillips, I think, said yesterday, we're on a 10 year shot clock, so okay. I think what happened is, so I scanned 10 cues and I've been doing so for the last couple of days. There's virtually no information about how much exactly the cash went in and what they're doing with it. And so I suspect, but there are references to Golden Gate Capital and some of the management team taking some money off the table. Cool, that's good. I'm just, it's unclear to me that there's any debt being retired, I think there is none. And it's unclear to me how much cash there is for the business. So the only reference I was able to find, believe it or not, was on Wikipedia and it says citation still needed. Okay, and the number here in the math works is 2.68 billion for 66.6% of the company. And a valuation of 10 billion, which Charles Phillips told us off-camera yesterday, it was 10.5 billion. So you can actually make the math work if you take that 10 billion and subtract off the six billion dollars in debt. Then the numbers work. And they get five out of 11 board seats, so they've got about 45%, they're 49%, I think is the actual number. You know, voting control of the company. So here's the question, is what's next? And now, a couple billion for Coke is nothing. It's like the money in my pocket. It's really, yeah, exactly. And so, and I suspect what happened is, because it always says 2 billion plus. So in squinting through this, my guess is, this is a pure guess, we'll try to confirm this, is that what happened is Coke provided the additional funding to buy Burst recently, that up their share to 66% and maybe that's how Coke is going to operate going forward. When they see opportunities to help invest, they're going to do that. Now one might say, well that's going to further dilute the existing in-force shareholders, but who cares? As long as the valuation goes up, and that's the new model of private equity. The old model of private equity has suck as much cash out of the company as possible and leave the carcass for somebody else to deal with. The new model of private equity is to invest selectively, use, I mean essentially what is a zero interest loan, that $6 billion debt is like free money for in-force, pay down that debt over time with the cash flow of the company, and then raise the valuation of the company. Even at some point have some kind of exit, public market exit, and everybody's happy and makes a ton of dough. So I think that's the new private equity play and I think it's quite brilliant actually, but there's not a lot of information, so a lot of this has to be careful of speculation on my part. What you think is will the Coleman plan initiative raise the valuation of the company in the long term if it's an attrition war in ERP and they've got SAP Oracle, Microsoft, all of whom have deep pockets deeper than them for investing heavily in this stuff. Will Coleman be in that net just table stage? Well, so I think again, there's a couple ways in the tech business as you guys know to make money and one is to invest in R&D and translate that R&D into commercial products. And some companies are really good at that, some companies aren't so good at that. The other way to make money is to do acquisitions and tuck-ins and many, many companies have built value doing that. Certainly Oracle, certainly IBM has EMC back in the day with its VMware acquisition at probably the biggest home run ever and Info has done a very good job of M&A and I think clearly has raised the value of the company. And the other way is to resell technologies and generate cash and keep your costs low. I think a software company has the opportunity, like Info, has the opportunity to innovate, to do tuck-in acquisitions and to drive software marginal economics. So I think on paper that's all good if to answer your question they can differentiate and their differentiation is the way in which they're embedding AI into their deep vertical, last mile approach and that is unique in the software business. The other big question you have is beautiful UIs and it sounds really great and looks really great. Well, when you talk to the customers they say, yeah it's a little tough to implement sometimes. So it's still ERP, ERP is complicated. So it's not like Info is shielded from some of the complexities of Oracle and SAP. It might look prettier, they might be moving a little faster in certain areas, they might, they clearly have some differentiation. At the end of the day it's still complicated enterprise software. Right, exactly. And we heard that over and over again from the people, from Info themselves and also from customers is that it isn't seamless. It's complicated, it involves a lot of change management initiatives, people have to be on board and that's not always easy. Well, and that's why I'm encouraged that to see some of the larger SIs, you see Grant Thorne, Capgemini, I think Accenture's here. We're having Capgemini later on. Deloitte's coming on as well. And so those guys, even though I always joke they love to eat at the trough and do big complex things, but this is maybe not as lucrative as some of the other businesses but it's clearly a company with momentum and some tailwind that in the context of digital transformations and AI, the big SIs and some of the smaller SIs like AVAP that we had on yesterday can do pretty well and actually help companies and customers add value. And with a fellow like Charles Phillips at the helm, I mean he is just an impressive person who as you pointed out multiple times is a real visionary when it comes to this. Except when he's shooting hoops, he's not impressive. No, oh! I tweeted out last night, he's got Obama's physique but not his hoop game. So don't hate me for saying that, Charles. But yes, I think he's, first of all he's a software industry guru. I think he single-handedly changed, I shouldn't say that single-handedly, but he catalyzed the major change in the software business when Oracle went on its acquisition spree and he architected that whole thing. It was interesting to hear his comments yesterday about what he sees. He said, you'll see a lot more tech industry CEOs running non-tech industry companies because they're all becoming SaaS companies. And once they have been so invested in understanding the vertical, they really get it. You can see someone who worked on a retail vertical here going in and being the CEO of Target or Walmart or something. Yeah, so I thought that was pretty interesting comment from somebody who's got some shops in that business. And again, very impressive. I mean the acquisitions that this company has done and continues to do, you and I both like the burst acquisition. It's modern day BI, it's not sort of just Viz. And I don't mean to deposition, click and tableau, they've done a great job. But it's not, it doesn't solve all your enterprise grade, BI sort of problems. And you talk to the Cognos customer base, as great of an acquisition as that was for IBM, that is a big, chewy, heavy lift that IBM is trying to inject Watson and Watson analytics.  And they're doing a pretty good job of that, improving the UI, but it's still, you know, big, chunky, Cognos, you know, BI, old cubes, wait for results. Yeah. So in many ways, you know, the burst acquisition for Infor and their portfolio is a bit like the thematics that IBM's been putting out on H-Tap, you know, injecting analytics into transactional processing to make them more agile and so forth. What I like about the burst acquisition, vis-a-vis Coleman and where Infor is going is that the burst acquisition gives them a really good team, the people who really know analytics and how to drive it into transactional environments, such as this. They've got, I mean, ostensibly a deep fund of capital to fund the Coleman development going forward. Plus, they've got a really strong plan. I think there's, and with potential strong differentiators for Infor, far more comprehensive in their plan to incorporate AI across their portfolio than SAP or Oracle or Microsoft have put out there in public. So I think we're, we're there in a good position for growth and innovation. Well, we have a lot of great guests coming up today. As you said, Denkoninko was going to be on up next. So I'm Rebecca Knight for Dave Vellante and Jim Kobilius. We will have more from Inforum just after this.


Since the onset of COVID-19, we've had to appreciate our farmers and the people and businesses that distribute our food even more than usual. They belong to a special category called food heroes. Hi, I'm Garth Williams and in this video, I'm going to highlight two food heroes in my life. There's a Jamaican saying, Yehafi Tonyahan make fashion. It's the equivalent of necessity is the mother of invention and that's exactly how Simnan Williams and his partner Georgia Grant started their market on wheels in the middle of a pandemic. Here's how it all began. They make great sacrifices to take food to communities across the corporate area. Chief among those sacrifices is sleep and that starts from early out in the week. They have an extensive route across the corporate area and that's thanks to Mr. Williams converting his former taxi passengers into buying customers. They're food heroes in more than one way because on a Friday, Ms. Grant sells food. That's right.  She's the real food hero. Cooking is my hobby. I love cooking. I must get it from my granny because of what she used to do and she used to carry me all over the market. I grew up in small land so she used to have me up and down with her and I used to say like push them fear and then something they tell me to sell juice, they must kill fish so how long can I do them something? Only for years. Yeah, from your fire, my granny came and got market. So I know all of this stuff about doing them something. And to me, hard work. Only when my body say yes, I'm tired, I'm really tired but it's like hard work coming like nothing to me. I'm happy to have these food heroes in my life.  And please always remember, let's not waste any food. Take care till next time.


Welcome, Commander Whitehead, you are now recognized for your opening comments. Thank you, Chairman Tester, for your kind introduction. Chairman DiCano and all members of the Committees on Veterans Affairs, thank you for providing me the opportunity to present the 2021 Legislative Program of DEB, Disabled American Veterans, an organization of more than one million members for ever changing wartime certs. My full written statement thoroughly details DEB's legislative priorities for the 117th Congress and reports on our many programs and accomplishments. So today, I'll just highlight some of our most critical policy goals. But before I do, I'd like to introduce my DEB colleagues joining me today. DEB Washington Headquarters, Executive Director, Randy Reece, DEB National Service Director, Jim Marslack, and DEB National Legislative Director, Joy Emel. I also want to thank the many DEB leaders watching this hearing at home who are vital to our organization's success. They include DEB's Senior and Junior Vice Commanders and the leaders of the DEB Exhilarate. I also want to extend my gratitude to DEB's National Agenda, our National Headquarters Executive Director, our National Executive Committee, our National Legislative Interim Committee, as well as my Chief of Staff. Of course, I also want to recognize our dedicated DEB members across the country, hundreds of whom would have been here in person to support me at this hearing if not for the ongoing pandemic. And finally, I want to thank my wife, Kim, who remains my most steadfast supporter and partner. Mr. Chairman, this past year, DEB commemorated a century of dedicated service to America's veterans, the families, and survivors. While it looked and felt different than we had planned, it gave us an important opportunity to reflect on our organization's history and the lessons we have learned in the face of adversity. DEB was formed in 1920 in the wake of World War I as the influenza pandemic of 1918 due to its end. We can find many parallels between the time of our establishment and our centennial's anniversary, a viral outbreak sweeping the globe, overburdened healthcare systems, economic downturn, soaring unemployment, an underlying at all, oppressing need to address critical issues impacting our nation's war-time disabled veterans. I'm proud to say that despite the significant challenges of this past year, and thanks to the dedication and indebted ability of our teams in Kentucky, Washington, D.C., and across the nation, DEB's mission did not change and our commitment did not falter. Mr. Chairman, at our core, DEB is rooted in service. When veterans needed us most, as many lost their jobs, fell ill, or became isolated in their homes, DEB members, volunteers, and staff quickly pivoted to provide necessary help and resources. Although our offices across the nation were closed to foot traffic to help limit the spread of the virus, DEB rapidly stood up for staff in newly two toll-free hotlines for veterans so our experts could assist them with claims and benefits. Since the pandemic began, we have fielded nearly 190,000 calls, and last year, DEB's service officers filed 140,000 new claims for veterans' benefits. DEB also established a COVID-19 Unemployment Relief Fund in April, provided financial aid to service-connected disabled veterans who lost employment or small business income in the wake of the outbreak. So far, DEB distributed more than $2 million in unemployment relief nationwide to veterans. And as we watched our unemployment numbers soar last year and hundreds of thousands of veterans were without work, DEB transformed all of our in-person career fairs to virtual events. Since 2014, our employment program has hosted 700 traditional and virtual career fairs, which has resulted in over 150,000 job offers for active duty service members, garden reserve members, veterans, and spouses who attended. As many of you know, DEB's transportation network has become a resource that veterans rely on for free transportation to their VA medical appointments. While safety precautions require the program to be halted as the pandemic began, DEB volunteers in my home state of Minnesota have nationwide approved it as possible to carry on through challenging times by implementing new measures to keep themselves and the veterans they serve safe. Despite COVID-related challenges last year, our volunteers logged almost 10 million miles and provided veterans nearly a quarter million rides to VA hospitals, same taxpayers more than $18 million. Mr. Chairman, although the full and lasting impact this pandemic is not yet clear, we do know that there are many issues our nations must stand ready to address. Healthcare is chief among them. Over the course of this pandemic, DEB had to make drastic changes in healthcare delivery. We saw a significant increase in telehealth services as VA adapted to the ever-changing landscape. There have also been serious economic impacts. Nearly 800,000 veterans were left searching for work last summer with disabled veterans disproportionately affected. How many of those veterans today are still unable to pay their bills, feed their families, and make ends meet? We know that before the pandemic, many veterans were already struggling with post-employment challenges, mental health issues, and in some cases, thoughts of suicide. While the VA has worked hard to keep veterans connected with their mental health providers, we are concerned that many face dark times. Many have been isolated from friends and family, and many have been without access to the support system and resources they had before the pandemic. We will all need to work together to ensure we do not lose ground in the battle against veterans' suicide. And we must also explore the future of VA healthcare will look like in the post-pandemic world. While we have many challenges ahead of us, we know that when we work together, despite obstacles we face, we can make progress. For example, led by your committees, Congress expanded access to benefits in healthcare for Vietnam veterans suffering from impacts of agent orders. Last year, more than 30,000 Vietnam veterans gained access to long overdue VA healthcare and received almost $800 million in retroactive benefit payments due to the passage of the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act. In addition, this past December, Congress approved legislation to expand the list of presumptive agent-orange diseases, extending healthcare benefits to 1,000 more Vietnam veterans and their survivors. We are grateful for less progress, but we must not allow other generations of veterans, like those exposed to birth pits, hazardous chemical agents at K-2 Bays in East Pakistan, or contaminated water stateside, to endure similar unnecessary delays getting healthcare and benefits. DAB is proud to be the organization that first brought the issue of birth pits to light more than a decade ago. While further research will help us examine the health impacts of these exposures and help determine whether to create presumptive disease associations, there is action Congress can take now to help veterans who serve near birth pits. We want to thank Senator Sullivan and Manchin for reintroducing the Bipartisan Veterans Birth Pits Exposure Recognition Act last week. This bill will create a concession of exposure to birth pits to help veterans more easily prove claims for benefits. We call on Congress to once again take this legislation up and quickly approve it. Mr. Chairman, we know that when veterans are injured or became ill in service, their families are affected as well. We must ensure that they continue to receive recognition and support, particularly when the veterans pass away. As we all know, thousands of veterans have died during this pandemic. And while their official cause of death may be listed as COVID, it is vitally important for survivors to have the relevant, service-connected conditions identified as principal or contributing factors in order to file claims for survivor benefits. We ask Congress to pass the Ensuring Survivor Benefits During COVID-19 Act to require identification of these conditions on veterans' death certificates so we can properly care for these families. Another important issue that requires urgent congressional action is the expansion of EA's Comprehensive Caregivers Program. As you know, Congress mandated that the expansion of caregiver assistance to all generations of severely disabled veterans in two phases. However, the first phase was delayed by a full year due to the VA's failure to certify a new caregiver IT system on time. While veterans of World War II, the Korean and Vietnam War eras became eligible in October, the delay pushed back the start date for the second phase of expansion. That impacts the golf war veterans and others who were injured or became ill between May 7, 1975 and September 11, 2001. We ask Congress to pass legislation and provide full funding to mandate that Phase II of the expansion be completed this year as the law intended. Another critical policy goal for DEV is assuring that the VA healthcare system has the resources, personnel, and facilities necessary to provide timely, high-quality care to all enrolled veterans. VA has begun an asset infrastructure review to develop a long-term plan to rebuild and realign VA's facilities to serve veterans where they live. In order to be successful, VA must consult closely with VA souls and veterans who use the VA healthcare system as they design this plan. In addition, Congress must be willing to fully fund the cost of maintaining all of VA's healthcare facilities. Mr. Chairman, this past year has challenged us as a nation in ways none of us could have imagined. But like President Abraham Lincoln, I have faith in America's resilience in such difficult times, he said, whoa. To give the truth, people can be dependent upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them real facts. Undoubtedly, we'll be experiencing this impact of this pandemic for years to come and must stand prepared to address the long-term ramifications for America's veterans by confronting these new realities. But together, move forward with candor and transparency, we can work to overcome the challenges and setbacks this past year has laid at our nation's doorstep. In closing, thank you for the opportunity to present DEV's 2021 legislative priorities and highlight the many program and services we provide to our heroes forever changed in service. May God continue to bless DEV, the men and women who serve our great nation and the United States of America. Thank you, Commander Whitehead. Your full written testimony will be included in the hearing record.


I don't know what I'm looking at right now But I have a feeling when I press play My life is gonna change You know what?  I don't even wanna do an intro I just wanna get to this episode I've been waiting for the pussy monster All my life I can't think of a better way to start September Than an octopus with a toga What is he gonna do?  What is he gonna pop a wheelie on him?   What is this? The YouTube comments? Wait, we're getting a Bicycle Man episode? No! I gotta do my best Y'all told me I'm a like in this episode I don't wanna like him It's the Squid Games Whoa, that's a nice design I'll help They did have spent half the budget of the episode on this one girl So Crunchyroll, we're gonna act up already, right? I'm just trying to rewind, but you wanna stay on the screen You know exactly what you're doing Dude, I wanna be a part of this gang Damn The clan of the sea folks This is like the underwater KKK What's that?  What a way to start September Alright, we're back to normality Chenos Esatama, okay?   What are you doing? What are you doing? What are you doing?  That's running to him right now?   Is this what Japan thinks a gay guy looks like? An ax like?    I love it Don't want your combo What is this mortal combat?  Y'all said I would start loving him He ain't doing anything This motherfucker is stopping at a red light right now I I I swear to God World War 3 is literally happening right now And this motherfucker is stopping at a red light You said I would start liking him I might love him now It's a green light, go Is this BTS, man? It's K-pop, man It's literally K-pop, man He's gonna start doing the moonwalk He's gonna start going like this This guy's over here promoting a single While Eren is fighting a super fish Oh my God No! Oh, thank God Eren's naked Oh, we need that in a different show Bro, what's going on?   So please don't attack Please Kousan I don't know if I should give you my name Well, I said it What should I do to the other guy?  The first name of my books would be Moving Rider Shit Oh, you're fucked now Oh my god, Tabi continued I think this is the first episode that ended without a climax It's a Tabi continued The sea monster is still in that stadium killing everybody No worry though, no worry at all Bicycle Kid just went up the stand-up pedal mode It's over, it's over, yalla fucked I hope in the next episode The sea king gets that bike and beats him to death with it Like I would love to see that I am so excited for this next episode It's called The Unyielding Justice I think it's the first episode that doesn't have the in it Why is it the only episode that doesn't have the? I think it's safe to say this was the greatest episode of all time of anything Because we got to see Eren Yeager naked Anyways guys, that's gonna be it for today's video We'll see you all in the next one


All right, I'm going to go ahead and get started. Thank you, everybody, for coming this morning. I'm excited about this talk. I hope it is interesting to you all. My name is Joe Betz. I'm an engineer at Google. I've been working on Kubernetes for about five years. I spent a couple of years as an LCD maintainer and quite a bit of time as a contributor to SIG API machinery, where I've been working on extensibility features. Today, we're going to talk about some enhancements that take advantage of something called the common expression language. We're using this to try and address some of the problems that people have been facing with web hooks with Kubernetes. So I got quite a bit to cover today. I'm going to get started by giving a brief history of web hooks that kind of motivate the problems that we're trying to solve.  It's going to help us solve problems. I'll then dive into two major use cases. The first use case is going to be CRD validation, which most people would prefer not to use a web hook to do. And then the second one is admission control, usually focusing on policy enforcement use cases. I'll then wrap it up, tie it together, talk about the future, and some areas where we can use some help. So let's get started by talking about the history of admission web hooks. So these were introduced back in Kubernetes 1.7, roughly. This is about five years ago when I was first starting to work on the project. CRDs at the time were pretty young. And there was a lot of people looking to use Kubernetes for all sorts of things that it couldn't do natively. And so the kind of the extension ecosystem was flourishing, but not all the extension points were available at that time. And I went back and looked at some of the documents explaining what people were trying to accomplish when they introduced admission web hooks. And I think they got the list pretty right, because when you go and look at what web hooks are used for today, it more or less matches this list. So they had identified that organizations needed better policy control, that cloud providers needed better extension points to integrate with Kubernetes, and that extension authors needed better way to perform CRD validation. It's actually a pretty accurate list. And at the time, there was a couple different options. There was a feature called initializers that was in alpha at the time. There was the built-in admission controllers in Kubernetes that are compiled into the API server. And then there was an early form of admission web hooks that was also in alpha. And so after some kind of comparison of these options, the decision was made to invest in admission web hooks mostly because it solved more of the use cases than any of the other alternatives. And in some sense, this was a success because it turned out to be a powerful pressure leaf valve. And by that, I mean, it was an extension mechanism that allowed people to do all sorts of things, both anticipated and unanticipated. And people were successful in implementing a lot of what they needed to build with this. A ton of great stuff has been built. You can see web hooks in pretty widespread use across Kubernetes. But unfortunately, that's where things started to get into trouble. Reports started coming in of people. Cluster admins and cloud providers were reporting control plane outages from web hooks. They were reporting failed upgrades. They were even reporting failed rollbacks. And it took a while for everybody to kind of start to get their head around what had gone wrong. But I think there was two major categories of problems that were causing web hooks to cause so much trouble. One is that they're operationally complex. So every time you want to introduce a web hook into a cluster, you're introducing a new binary. It has to run somewhere. You have to figure out how to deploy that binary, upgrade it, roll it back, monitor it, have run books to deal with any problems with it. It effectively becomes another component in your control plane. And so if you have a lot of web hooks, you have a lot of components in your control plane you now have to manage. The other problem is they're way too easy to misconfigure. I think the most obvious example of this is that whenever you install a web hook, you have to decide what its failure policy is. You either have to choose fail open or you choose fail closed. If you choose fail open, what you're saying is that if my web hook fails, the binary stops serving requests, either it's become unavailable or it starts returning errors, then I'm just going to let the request through anyways, even if that web hook would have rejected them. So if the purpose of your web hook was to enforce some security policy, that's clearly a problem. On the other hand, if you choose to fail closed, what you're saying is if that web hook's having a problem, it's returning errors, if it's unavailable, I'm going to reject all requests that were being routed to that web hook. So if I was matching all pods or all deployments, now I'm going to reject all those requests and I'm basically losing my control plane availability. Those are your two options, right? That's kind of at the heart of some of the problems that we have with web hooks. The one way I like to think about this is the more web hooks you're using in the cluster, the lower the expected cluster availability and the more types of issues you can expect to have happen. I think over time, cluster administrators have become aware of this and have become more and more wary of web hooks, but we're stuck in the situation where there's a large classes of functionality that we want and web hooks is the only way to do it. So the story isn't over. We're going to try and tell the rest of the story. Hopefully we can turn some things around here. And one of the pieces of good news is that if you actually go and look at what web hooks are doing, the vast majority of them are doing super simple stuff. They maybe need to make sure that a particular field in a CRD is immutable. They need to make sure that a label works the way they want. So maybe they always check that a label's value conforms to a specific format. Or maybe if they have a policy in their company where they want all pods or containers to have some particular values set in a particular way. Most of these share the common property of being able to be expressed in just like a line or two of code. So this is a good chance to apply the 80-20 rule. We can say that there's 80% of these use cases and probably more than 80, honestly, could be easily handled by something simpler than running your own full binary with all the power of a complete programming language. There's probably a small percentage of these that still require a call out to some other system, right? Having a fallback as where we continue to use web hooks is probably not a bad thing, but I think if we can solve this 80% use case, we've already made a huge amount of progress on this problem. So I'm gonna focus on that today. And the tool that we're gonna look at is called the common expression language. Let me give you just a couple examples of what that looks like. So here's some code. There's three examples here. The one thing I hope everybody notices is that this is a pretty unsurprising syntax, right? This is, if you've worked in any C-style programming languages, you can probably guess what this code does and you're probably right. I'm not gonna read through all those examples, but I am gonna give you a little bit of access to some of the documentation from CEL. I think the authors have done a pretty good job of explaining what the purpose of this language is. Now it is only an expression language, it's not a scripting language, so you're only gonna write a single expression assay program. And that limitation causes some problems, but I think in our case, it's more of a benefit than anything. It's easy to run CEL quickly. It comes with a really nice syntax checker. You can run a type checking pass on it. It's easy to extend and it's really easy to embed and integrate with languages. So we've been able to successfully integrate this with the Kubernetes data system very well, both for CRDs and native types, and it works really well. So here are two of the major limitations you should know about CEL right away. The first is because you can only write a single expression, you don't get any native for or while looping. Instead you're gonna be using kind of a comprehension form. So there's the comprehensions listed here. Also, you don't have an explicit if-else, so instead we're gonna be using the ternary operator. I just wanted to show a couple examples of that because this is one of the less obvious things about CEL. So in this first example, what we're doing is we're verifying that two sets are disjoint. So we're using that all comprehension to iterate over one set and then we just check that none of those elements are in the second set. The second example is even more complicated, so what we're doing is we're taking a list of objects where every object has a priority field and we're making sure that no two of those objects have the same priority value. This is possible to do, it's kind of on the edge of what you can do with CEL and it's not super obvious how to write this one. I wanted to show a more difficult example to give people an idea of kind of where the limits of CEL might be. Now one of the things that you'll probably occur to you pretty quick is, well if I can only write a single expression that does limit me in many ways, are there utility libraries that I can take advantage of to do more things? And the answer, of course, is yes. CEL comes with a pretty good standard library. There are extension libraries for things like strings, regex matching and things like that that we're including in Kubernetes. We also went and looked at four or five major programming languages and just kind of went through all of the most fundamental utilities available in those languages and built out an even more extended library that we're gonna make available with Kubernetes. So that includes more things for regex, more things for list processing. We also identified that even though you could handle like URL parsing with regex, that that's pretty awkward to ask people to do. So we're gonna provide first class support for that. So here's some examples of some things you can do with CEL using the function libraries. You do get kind of like a method type syntax or if you're go a receiver type syntax where you can say dot to call functions. We have added a couple special functions like the ability to check if the list is sorted because we think that's really useful in validation. And then the URL processing, we were pretty careful. We looked at a lot of examples on how to do that right. If you wanna learn more about CEL, I would encourage you to check out the spec. It's being used in a variety of policy systems. It's been used in some systems that extend Kubernetes. It's being used in other cloud provider systems. It's got pretty solid adoption and we've been working a lot with the authors. We're pretty confident in it. So next I'm gonna dive into two major use cases. The first use case I'm gonna look at is CRD validation, which all had to do with a single field. So this is that field. It is the x-kubernetes-validations field and here is it in use. You can use this anywhere in a CRD starting in Kubernetes 1.25. We put it in beta there. We hope to bring it into GA sometimes soon. And what you can do is you can just start writing cell rules under this extension in the OpenAPI schema. So in this example, the self variable refers to the location in the schema where we put the CRD validation rule. So this rule is written right under the spec. So self refers to spec and the spec contains both a replicas and a max replicas integer field so you can access both of those in the dot operator. If you then update your CRD after writing this, any custom resources that you try and write will be validated according to this rule. You can add a message next to the rule if you want to give it a human readable error. If you mistype the name of a field and try and update the CRD, you're going to immediately get an error when you try and write the CRD. This prevents you from actually updating a cluster with a malformed rule. So we're doing type checking. It's type checking against the fields down below. If you just fix the field name, then you can write the CRD and you're good again. Now you can put multiple validation rules in a CRD. Here's an example of me placing the same validation rule at two different locations. So one is up at the spec level and one is down on the field foo. They're the same rule and they do exactly the same thing but the one on the foo field is more convenient because the field's optional, if you put the rule up at the top at the spec level you have to first check if the field's present but you don't need to do that if you put it on the actual field itself because it'll only be run if that value is present. So there are some conveniences that you can get for choosing where to scope the rule. We encourage you to scope rules as narrowly as possible because it makes them easier to write. Sometimes you need to put the rule higher in the schema tree so you have access to more fields if you're doing things like cross field validation. In addition to the self rule we give you access to an old self. What old self is, it is the value before your update. So if you're updating the foo value from four to five old self will be four, self will be five. You can use this to do things like an immutability check which is what we're doing here. You could do things like enforce that a value is only a monatomically increasing. You could have an append only list. There's a large variety of use cases for this. My colleague Alex Zelensky wrote a nice blog entry explaining a bunch of the use cases that you can support with this. One of the things that comes up pretty quick when you think about adding a programming language into YAML is like what types of abuse are we prone to from this? So the good thing is cell is by design preventing a lot of types of abuse. The way it's interpreted means that you can't really break out of a sandbox. The fact that you can't allocate variables means that there's tight memory constraints but there's still the ability to write programs that could take way too long to run. So we're using a kind of a three prong safety approach against this. The first is we're gonna take advantage of the fact that cell is not a Turing complete programming language and you can use static analysis to figure out what its worst time running, worst cost running time is. So we make some assumptions about how big lists can be by the fact that you're processing YAML and there's a three megabyte limit on that YAML. So if you intentionally write a cell rule that does like an O-cubed operation on the longest possible list, we're gonna actually detect that when you write the rule into your CRD. We're not gonna allow you to do it. You'll get a narrowsay in something that you've exceeded the estimated cost limit and you're gonna either need to rewrite that rule or give it hints about the size of lists and things. So that's kind of our first prevention. That happens statically when you author CRDs. The second safety functions very similarly but it happens at runtime. So again, we're gonna use this abstract cost unit measure and when your program's running, cell is going to start accumulating the cost and that's platform independent so it doesn't really matter if your CPU is running slow or you've got a lot of load. It's still going to run the same programs towards the same completion but if you do hit that limit, we're gonna halt cell execution to prevent it from running it, definitely. We even have a third fallback which is why it goes context cancellation into cell so that if the request is canceled in any way, either because the client went away or because we've hit a timeout, we're also going to stop cell execution immediately. So we've put a lot of safety nuts in place to try and keep cell runtime under control. Just to summarize, you can use CRD validation rules to write complex validation for your CRDs. You just use cell, you put it into these x-cubernities-validations fields, you can do complex, multi-field validation, you can use transition rules to do things like immutability. We think this is a sufficient substitute for the vast majority of things people are using webbooks for when they do CRD validation. We think this is mostly a solved problem. I'm sure people are gonna find corner cases that we can't support come talk to us but I think the vast majority of these are pretty well solved. So once we got that in place, we started looking for other opportunities to use cell. In fact, one of them was the thing I'd wanted to use cell for in the first place, which was policy enforcement. When we looked at all the things people were using admission webbooks for, this was by far the largest bucket. Everybody was kind of telling us, generally the things I'm trying to do fall into this category. This is a big and complicated space. There are many systems built to do policy enforcement and it took us a while to get our heads around a lot of the things that people were trying to achieve. And we looked beyond just Kubernetes. We talked to other people doing policy enforcement, other parts of cloud infrastructure. There are entire programming languages written around this. It's a big space. But what we did is we tried to focus down on what we needed to do in Kubernetes to make this possible with a minimal use of webhooks. Ultimately, we wrote a cap for this. It's called self-admission control. You're welcome to check it out. And what I'm gonna try and do next is explain what's proposed in that cap. We're working on implementing this right now. We're hoping to get our first alpha in 1.26, which should be out in around a month or so. And to kind of motivate what we're trying to do, we wanted to make a clear distinction between two major roles when you do policy enforcement. You have the policy author, and you have the cluster administrator. These are usually not the same person, and they're usually in completely different organizations. The policy author is concerned with the correctness of a policy. So in our case, they'll be writing cell. They wanna make sure they wrote that right. They wanna test it. They also want to write reusable policies. Usually they're trying to support more than one organization, so they're very concerned with making their policy sufficiently configurable to handle more than just one customer. Cluster administrators, on the other hand, are very concerned with making sure that a policy matches the goals of their organization, and they're very interested in the operability of those policies. Rolling out a policy can be kind of a scary thing, and they want to make that as safe as possible. So what we've done is we've introduced some new Kubernetes resources that are aligned with these different responsibilities. So the policy author is going to be responsible for writing a validating admission policy. Here they'll define in the match constraints which resources that policy applies to. This is very similar to how an admission webhook works today. Then they're going to write cell rules that express what that policy does. In that cell rule, they can reference both the object and some other fields, and they can reference the params that they use to make this configurable. Last, they define a params kind which says what type of resource they're using to parameterize their policy. In this case, they're using a CRD. In a simpler case, you could choose to use a config map. Next, the cluster administrator is going to create what we call a binding. The binding is what connects this policy definition to their cluster. And they do this with a couple fields. The policy name says which policy they're binding to their cluster. The params ref says which object they're using to parameterize that policy. And then lastly, they can have what's called match resources which further constrain what resources in their cluster this policy applies to. So in this case, the cluster administrator has constrained this policy to just the objects in their test namespaces by using this environment label on their namespaces. And they've set the max replicas to three for that environment. They could create an additional policy binding for their production environment and set this to a different limit for that. So you can have more than one binding for a policy and you can have as many params as you want. You can share params between policies if you need or you can create new ones for each. Now one thing you might notice about this which is a bit of a downside is this is quite a few resources to create to get something done, right? Here in this example, you're looking at four different Kubernetes resources. We can simplify that. If you don't need parametrization, we can go down to just two resources. If the policy author doesn't specify any need to parameterize their policy, then the cluster administrator just needs a single binding. You're done, we're down to two resources. We take that even further in the most basic case. If you're writing a one-off policy, you can write the whole thing just in the validating admission policy. Basically what you're gonna do is inline your binding information into that and you can do that as a single resource. We think that's useful for cases where somebody just needs to do something simple. So one-off case and they're not building like a larger policy engine or something like that. We're just getting started with this feature. So we're working to try and get it out in 1.26 which is in development now. In the future, before we bring this to beta we hope to support a variety of other things. We hope to support more actions than what we support now. So right now you can only admit or deny a request but we don't think that's enough. We want to be able to have you support like creating an audit annotation or sending a warning back to the user but not blocking the user if the policy fails. We want to support what we call secondary authorization checks. This is an interesting case. So the example I like to give is imagine that you want to set up a policy that only allows certain users with like a certain RBAC role to change an enum to a particular value. That's actually really easy to do in cell because you can check whether or not somebody's changing something to a particular enum value. So all we need to do is give you some access to the user's permission sets and you could write a check like that. So we do intend to support that use case. We also intend to add a lot more support for the rollout of new policies. So as a cluster administrator, you probably when you first introduce a new policy, you probably don't want it enforcing yet. You probably want to just turn it on in kind of a dry run mode and see what happens. So we're looking at some ways to do that in a really safe way so you can gather metrics, you can look, you can see what the policy would do before you turn it fully on. There's a fuller list of features here in the cup. I would encourage you to check it out if you're interested. This is still in development, so we're very much looking for feedback from the community on what would be the most valuable. All right, I'm gonna start drawing some conclusions. The way that I've been trying to think about the work that we've been doing is that you've got this established set of use cases for Kubernetes. Many of these are supported by declarative APIs. This is the stuff that you're most familiar with, jobs and deployments and RBAC. Then you've got this other category of emerging use cases. This is the kind of stuff that I've been talking about. So these are things that are not yet supported by the declarative APIs. We're using our extension mechanisms to handle them. The way that self fits into this is it allows us to move this boundary. Now that we believe that these use cases are pretty well understood, we wanna move that boundary and make these supported by declarative APIs. So you don't need to get web hooks involved in things like this. There will always be things that you need web hooks for and that's okay, but we want to lower the barrier of entry to get things done. You should be able to do a lot of these use cases without the operational complexity of web hooks. Cell moves the boundary for these use cases. We think there are a variety of other use cases that we have and have not thought of that would also be useful. I've identified a couple of them here. So right now, if you do have multiple versions of a CRD, you need to do CRD conversion. Right now you have to introduce a web hook to do that as well. We think that's another good place to use Cell. The KCP project has already been working on the implementation of this. We've been talking to them. We really like the work they've been doing. We hope to bring that into Kubernetes. Also, I've been talking mostly about CRD validation, but we do validation of all the native Kubernetes types as well. So there might be a benefit to the developers of Kubernetes to do that in Cell also. That could have impact to users if we do it right, because right now what happens is if you want to do a lot of shift left validation of your Kubernetes YAML, you don't get all the validation rules that are compiled into the API server. But if we were to express those in Cell and then put them on the open API, then that would be available to tooling much earlier to check. So a lot of the static analysis that we actually know for sure would be invalid. We could then check much earlier and get ops flows and things like that. The other thing I was going to mention is right now we're focusing mostly on validating admission, but there's a whole nother class of admission called mutating admission. And we are interested in supporting those use cases in the future. This would probably be a separate KEP. But Cell does support the construction of data and manipulation of data in a way that would work for this. It's one of the things that we considered when we chose Cell. So we think it's possible. We hope to do it sometime in the future. If you want to learn more, here's a couple of links. The documentation for CRD validation rules is in the main Kubernetes documentation for CRDs. The KEP has a lot of useful information. You can learn a lot about Cell, just Google for it. You can reach us at the API machinery mailing list. And we also have our own Slack channel just for talking about Cell. You're welcome to drop in. We'd love to hear from you. I am going to stop there and take questions. So one of the co-authors of this KEP is Max Smyth that works on OPA. So we have been working very closely with the OPA team on making sure that we build something that they can use. Now, it's possible that they might not be able to get all their rules directly into the API server this way. But we believe that the vast majority of OPA would not require a webhook once we do this. They intend to work on an implementation. I have two quick questions. Do you have some tips around how to debug Cell once it's in YAML and how to test it once it's in YAML? Yeah, so that's a really good question. I think this is something where we're going to have to do some work. So the good news is because we get type checking, you get a lot early on. I have seen people do things like run little kind clusters and or mini cubes as a way to get a control plane and just test things that way. So for a stock CRD, you can actually do a lot with that because you don't need the rest of the cluster. So that might be a way to do it. We are also providing a lot of our cell stuff as a pretty accessible library. This is something we want to make better over time. But it should be possible to run some cell just in isolation in the Go program. So Luke, like for someone trying to extend. So it's extensible in the sense that whoever brings it into a binary can change the libraries that it uses. There are some settings that you can change. So it is going to, as a Kubernetes author, we can extend it by adding more functions and things like that. If you were to use it in your own programs, you could also do that. We don't have any way to say, have you registered new functions at this time? So in that sense, it's not extensible. I hope that makes sense. Thanks for the talk. Could you speak to when this might get integrated into a cube builder at all? So extouch validation rules are already there. There is, I don't have it listed here. But if you just look at the open API extensions available, you can use it today. Yeah. So when you use cell today with the expressions you were showing, and it refers to self, is it limited to just looking at self, the resource that's updated, or is there a way to do cross-resource validation, like the must have a unique name? No, we can't do cross-resource validation today. So that is a limitation. And that is a much harder nut to crack. So if you have any ideas, let us know. It has come up before, so we have heard about this problem. But it's a harder one to solve. Can you declare these validating policies on a per namespace basis? So different policies are in effect in different parts of your cluster? So we think that we want to do that before we go to beta. So the way that it's defined right now is everything is at cluster level. But we think that it makes sense to also have a local validating admission policy binding. So you could bind it at the namespace level. You could put that resource in the namespace and it will automatically apply to that home space. Something we have also listed as a feature before we go to beta. For the parameters that are referred to by the validating admission policy, is it the author's responsibility to define the CRD for the parameter kind, or will it auto-generate something there? We leave it up to the author to define the CRD. If you don't need a whole CRD, you can just use a config map, which is appropriate for really simple use cases. Yeah. If a user fails a policy, or if they apply something that fails a policy, how does that return to them? Is it just in the terminal right there when they do apply and it just fails? Yeah, you'll just see it. If you're using kubectl, you'll just see it just like you would most other validation errors. It actually gets surfaced in the same way. Is there a plan to do like a send, like an HTTP send that you can like give it to like a Slack webhook or anything like that? Sorry, I didn't follow that. So like we have like a, like we use ultima. No, I haven't heard of that. I would love to talk to you more about that. You can understand what the use case is. Thank you for talking. I was thinking if only in a specific case that I need to make sure that if a service name exists across resource validation, do you think we can see anything like this in the future release? Crossfield stuff's harder. We don't have any immediate plans for it. I would love to talk to people and understand more of the use cases. Right now, we're mostly focused on the per resource case because that's really useful. I know when you talk more about the policy admission case, which I talked about second, that there are people very interesting cross-object checks. So I would love to understand more of those use cases. Maybe we can find a way to do something in the future. Right now I'm a little pessimistic because it's hard, but who knows. We have time for one more and it was over here. If you have a question, cell expressions. All right, this one better. Okay. Web hooks and cell expressions. What's the order of execution? Dict each other. Are there any built-in safeguards? Oh, yeah. So the order of execution is pretty well defined. So validation is comprehensive. So CRD validation happens at the same phase that CRD validation has always happened and it's comprehensive. You get all the errors that you get back, right? So it's gonna check all your rules. The admission policies are gonna happen in the admission control chain, which has a very particular flow. So first it runs all the built-in controllers and then it's going to run the policy ones and then it's going to run the web hook ones last.  So there's a very well-defined order. All right, I think we are at time. Thank you everybody for coming. I appreciate it. Thank you.