I welcome you all to this lecture in this course Introduction to Paninian Grammar. So far, we have looked at what we mean by Paninian grammar, a systemic approach and a textual approach. So we studied the name of the text of Paninian grammar called Ashtadhyay. We also took a brief introduction about the number of sutras and so on. We also looked at the grammatical activity that preceded Panini. We also studied the grammarians whose names are mentioned in the text of Ashtadhyay. This has enabled us to get an idea about the scientific enquiry into language that happened in Indian Civilization at a very early date known to us. And today in this lecture, we will proceed further and try to see how this particular tradition of grammatical enquiry continued even after Panini, even in non-Paninian environments. In the last lecture, we also took note of many scholars who have contributed in the continuation of the Paninian grammatical tradition right from Katyaayana and Patanjali onwards up to Nagesh Bhatt, 18th century CE. In this lecture, we shall study the non-Paninian grammatical treatises and also the Paninian grammatical tradition that continued post Nagesh that is 18th century CE up to this particular day. We are going to study further the grammatical tradition, especially the non-Paninian grammatical traditions and there are 11 of them known to us. The first of non-Paninian grammars and this is Katantra grammar also known as Kaumar or Kalab. As the name suggests Ka-Tantra, this is a short treatise composed by a scholar called Sherwa Varman around 1st century BCE. It consists of 1400 sutras, an important historical grammatical tradition. Then we have another important tradition, Chandra tradition. The author of this grammar is Chandragomin. He is a Buddhist grammaria who is believed to have lived in around 5th century CE and had close links with the Paninian grammar. This grammar is written with an aim to improve the existing Paninian grammar. It consists of 3100 sutras into 6 adhyayas with 4 padhas each per adhyaya. Obviously the aim is to improve Paninian grammar therefore the problems that are faced in the explanation of sutras in Paninian grammar are the basis which are thought about and improved in this grammar. So reduction of the number of sutras is a strategy in this direction. This grammatical tradition also consists of dhatupatha, list of dhatus, ganapatha, list of nominal roots or stems, parimhasapatha, meta-rules. The most important omission in this particular grammar and grammatical tradition is absence of the vedic rules and the sutras describing the accent. We have noted that Paninian grammar notes down accent even on the non-vedic language. Chandra tradition omits that portion all together. This particular tradition is currently known to have good contacts with the Paninian tradition and certain texts of the Paninian grammatical tradition notable amongst them is the kashika vrutti mentioned earlier and also the vakyapadhyaya of vratra hari mentioned earlier. The next grammatical tradition is called jainendra, jainendra vyakarana which was composed by a scholar called Devanandi or Puja Padha who is a follower of Jainism which the name also suggests. This was composed around 5th century CE. It consists of 3000 sutras and these sutras are commented upon by another scholar named Abhayanandhi. This grammar also consists of dhatupatha, list of verbal roots, ganapatha, list of nominal roots and parimhasapatha, the list of meta-rules. An important omission once again in this grammar is the rules on accent and of course the vedic rules because this grammar is composed by a follower of Jainism it may look obvious that it omits the vedic rules. But it becomes non-obvious as to why it omits the sutras on accent of the language which is an extremely important feature but nonetheless we have to note that both chandra as well as jainendra they omit the sutras on accent. The next non-Paninian grammatical tradition is that of Shakatayana also known as Shakatayana Shabdhanu Shasana the grammar of Shakatayana. This is composed by a scholar called Shakatayana who is also a scholar and a follower of Jainism he is believed to have lived around 7th century CE and it follows the Jainendra school already established. It consists of 3200 sutras into 4 adhyayas with 4 fathers in each adhyaya. It also consists of a dhatupatha, a list of verbal roots, ganapatha, a list of nominal roots and paribhashapatha, a list of meta roots. Once again we note that this grammar also omits the sutras on the vedic data and it also omits the sutras on accent. The next important grammatical tradition non-Paninian grammatical tradition is that of Hema Chandra also known as Haima Vyakarana, Haima tradition named after the great Jain monk called Hema Chandra who lived around 11th century CE and the name of the text he composed is Haima Shabdhanu Shasana. There are historical records to establish the identity of this monk available to us. He composed 4500 sutras into 8 adhyayas with 4 fathers in each adhyaya. It consists of adhatupatha, a list of verbal roots, ganapatha, a list of nominal roots and paribhashapatha, a list of meta roots. Once again we note that the sutras on accent are not part of this grammar. Another important feature of this particular grammar is that amongst these 8 adhyayas the last which is the 8th adhyaya consists of a grammar of prakrit languages. And this particular adhyaya consists of more than 1000 sutras all put together. Thus this grammar, this particular tradition also notes down the rules of prakrit languages in a similar fashion that is the important feature of this particular tradition. Then we come to the next important grammatical tradition called Saraswatha. This is believed to have existed around 13th century CE. It consists of 700 sutras. This particular grammar was composed by an ascetic named Anubhuti Swaroopacharya. This is an abridged grammar catering to particular demands of the time and of particular region notably the northern part of India. However, it must be noted that this particular grammar came into contact with the western scholars who wrote treatises on Sanskrit grammar at an early date. The next non-Paninian grammatical tradition is that of Mukdha Bodha grammar. Mukdha Bodha grammar was composed by Bhopadeva around 13th century CE. The purpose of this grammar is the simplicity and brevity as the name suggests. This grammar is written so that even a non-matured person can understand the grammar. One of the devices used is God's names as technical terms to describe certain technical grammatical phenomenon. Goddha Bodha grammatical tradition also has a dhatupatha and a paribhashapatha, a list of verbal roots and also a list of meta roots. Next we come to Jaumara grammatical tradition which was initiated by a scholar called Jhumaranandhi who is believed to have lived around 15th century CE. Once again this is an abridged version of grammar. It consists of a dhatupatha and it is very popular in Bengal. Then we come to another related non-Paninian grammatical tradition also known as Sankshitasar, Sankshitasar to abridged. This was composed by Kramadishwara and this is an abridged version of grammar as its name suggests. Then we also know about Saupadma grammar. This was composed by a scholar called Padmanabhadatta around 13th century CE. This is a remodeling of Paninian grammar. It consists of a dhatupatha, a list of verbal roots and paribhashapatha, a list of meta roots. We come to a very interesting kind of grammar called Harinama murta. This was composed by Rupa Goswamin around 15th century CE and the main feature of this particular Vyakarana is that many names of Krishna and Radha are employed as technical terms. So this grammar also helps in the element of devotion. That seems to be one of the purposes of writing this particular grammar, Harinama murta vyakaranam as the name suggests. So to summarize there are 11 non-Paninian grammatical traditions that we briefly got introduced to and several scholars are researching about many of these traditions and their interrelations with Paninian grammar. The scholars who have studied the methodology of these grammars have also come to the conclusion that they are following on the whole the methodology adopted by Paninian grammar. The most important feature of most of these, all of these non-Paninian grammatical traditions is the omission of the sutras which deal with accent, which is a very big loss as far as grammatical information is concerned. But the point is that apart from the Paninian grammatical tradition there are these many grammatical traditions which existed in India alongside the Paninian grammatical tradition and some of these traditions have survived even till today, albeit in some sectarian environment but still they survived that is an important fact which tells us about the overall background about the grammatical inquiry that exists in the psyche of Indian intellectual space of scholars. Now we go on to study the post-Nagesha 18th century CE Paninian grammatical tradition in brief. So, this is what we are going to study now the post-Nagesha but the grammatical tradition. The first scholar to be mentioned here in this regard is Sri Vaidyanatha Paigunde 18th century CE and he is the direct disciple of Nagesha Bhakta. He wrote two very important commentaries one Chidastimala on Shabdendu Shekhara and Gada on Paribhashindu Shekhara. He is also credited for creating a tradition of students to whom he imparted the valuable grammatical knowledge he had obtained from his guru Nagesha Bhakta. So another important student, direct disciple of Nagesha Bhakta is Sri Bhairava Mishra who also lived in the 18th century CE and who composed a commentary called Chandrakala on Shabdendu Shekhara and Bhairavi on Paribhashindu Shekhara. Then we will take a brief introduction of the 18th and 19th century CE lineage of Panimian grammatical tradition. Neelakanta Shastri Thattai was a direct disciple of Sri Vaidyanatha Paigunde and here are some other important scholars in the same lineage. Neeru Shastri Gurbole, Raghava Acharya Oak, Raghavendra Acharya Gajendra Gadkar, Bhaskar Shastri Abhyankar, Ram Shastri Gurbole. These were the scholars who continued studying and imparting this particular tradition. Then we look at the same lineage that continued in the 19th and 20th century CE and one of the important scholars in this particular tradition is Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar who lived in Pune and composed various commentaries and translations. For example, he composed a commentary called Tattva Darsha on Paribhashindu Shekhara and Gudhartha Prakash on Shabdindu Shekhara. He also translated the entire Vyakaran Mahabhashya in Marathi which was published in six volumes from Pune. He also translated the entire Brahmasutra Shankar Bhashya in three volumes again published from Pune. Now hereafter, I will be focusing on a particular lineage of the Panamanian grammatical tradition that flourished a particular geographical region which also comes down to this instructor, to this day and that is the reason why it becomes significant to follow this particular line. In doing so, by no means we show any other feeling than respect to other scholars who flourished in other different regions of India. But to highlight the lineage that continues till today, we follow this particular line. So these are some of the students of Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar, Ganesh Shastri Godbole, Kashinath Shastri Abhyankar. He is the son of Vasudeva Shastri Abhyankar, Shankar Shastri Marulkar, Lakshmana Shastri Joshi Murugudkar and Maheshwar Shastri Joshi. It is these two on the mention on the last two bullets, Lakshmana Shastri Joshi Murugudkar and Maheshwar Shastri Joshi, they will be also referred to in the next slides. So Vaman Shastri Bhagwat, who is a disciple of Lakshmana Shastri Joshi Murugudkar, is an illustrious name in this particular lineage and tradition. He lived between 1918 and 2005. He was a former principal at the Balamukunda Sanskrit College, Telak Maharashtra Vidyapit, Pune. Apart from creating a generation of Sanskrit scholars, he also published a Marathi translation of the first chapter of Vakepatiya, also prepared the first part of the Sukti Ratnakara, a commentary on the Vyakarana Mahabhashya. Next we have Shivram Shastri Joshi, who is the disciple of Maheshwar Shastri Joshi also mentioned in the earlier slide. He is also known, Shivram Shastri Joshi is also known as SD Joshi, who lived during 1926 and 2013. He was traditionally trained as well as trained in the university method. He obtained a PhD from Harvard University and wrote extensively in English. He translated various parts of the Vyakarana Mahabhashya into English and also translated many parts of the Ashtadhyayi into English. It is these two scholars whose training this instructor got for more than 12 years and this instructor considers himself privileged to have received the tutelage of such illustrious teachers. So at this point in time, I salute both my direct teachers and this entire lineage of teachers and scholars who have continued this particular tradition to this day. To summarize, we can say that the tradition of teaching and learning of Panini and Grammar continued in the 20th century and also continues in the 21st century. This tradition absorbed the newly found methods proposed by western scholars and SD Joshi can be said to be one of the stalwarts in this particular area. This tradition tried to enrich itself by adding new thoughts and new theories. Such a tradition continues even today and will keep enriching itself by studying the new technological developments. Thank you. Next we shall look at the other features of this particular Paninian grammatical tradition. Thank you.


Thanks for checking out this movie review video. This is for the 1986 film from beyond not to be confused with it The Beyond which is a Lucio Fulci film. This is a Stuart Gordon film and RIP Stuart Gordon We lost him earlier this year That is sad. The guy definitely loved attempting to do HP Lovecraft films Obviously from beyond is an HP Lovecraft film reanimators an HP Lovecraft film. He did um One of his masters of horror films was I think it was called Dreams in the Witch House That was an HP Lovecraft film. He loved to pull from HP Lovecraft. So From beyond not my favorite. I mean after watching reanimator The comparison is not so great. I will say I'm glad I watched this film when I watched it. It was kind of blowing up a little bit in this horror group I'm in on facebook Because a lot of those people have shutter and it shuttered I added it recently when I'm recording this So a lot of people were kind of discovering it for the first time or rediscovering it and just being like oh wow And there are good things about it. Don't get me wrong. The practical effects are awesome This film is 100 worth checking out at least once just for the practical effects. They are great Which you know, it's Stuart Gordon. Brian Usina is involved who did society And some of the practical effects feel a little bit like the ones in society because there's a lot of like Kind of goo on them So yeah, for that reason it felt a little society-esque But for some of the big names involved in doing the practical effects, you know, you have Robert Kurtzman You have Greg Nicotero. You have Mark Schostrom people who have done really big name amazing film practical effects and It's on full display in this and they do throw a lot of practical effects into this film Which is something I really appreciate now On the other side what I don't appreciate is it feels like there's a great concept for the story introduced And then it just doesn't go Far enough like there's not enough story to it It feels like they get into a story and then they're just kind of treading water until the runtime runs out So for that reason, I think the script could have used a lot of work It just needed to go somewhere more But anyway I put too much of that up front, but that's fine Once like I said it's directed by Stuart Gordon who did reanimator dolls the pit and the pendulum Castle freak and Dagon just a few other ones Now not only was brian using it involved with this film as a producer But so was charles band who as we know charles band has done full moon studios. That's his label or his studio It was written by Dennis Paoli who had written scripts for reanimator Gullies too Uh and the pit and the pendulum and Dagon. So has worked quite a bit with Stuart Gordon Also, there was input from Stuart Gordon and Brian Usina For the script and obviously based off h.p. Lovecraft It has jeffrey combs in it. I love jeffrey combs his acting to me whenever he's on screen His acting is it's not only good acting. It's fun acting You know what I mean like those actors you see and you don't just look at him and be like, oh, they're a good actor You're just like I have so much fun watching them act on screen And jeffrey combs is one of those actors for me. So whenever I see jeffrey combs in a film I have to watch it So obviously he's been in reanimator the man with two brains cellar dweller bride of reanimator Castle freak the frighteners Beyond reanimator. Those are just a few of the films. He's done a lot But those are the you know the bigger names of better ones Barbara crampton is always in this. I love Barbara crampton Her acting from the 80s is solid Not the best but solid And I think I like her most right now in the present because her presence on social media Is unbelievably positive and she seems just like such a nice person It's just really nice to follow her on twitter and just kind of see the positive things She's doing and saying each day and it's it's uplifting because you know, sometimes we need that every now and then So I think as a person. I think she's wonderful. She's good in this film Although I think her character was A little underused in a sense. She could have been a stronger character and I think should have been a stronger character in it Uh, she was in films like body double obviously worked with combs in reanimator and sir gordon She's in chopping mall castle freak. You're next the lords of salem We are still here beyond the gates puppet and puppet master the littlest rike just to name some but she's still working She's doing a lot and then ken for re is in this big name from the past dawn of the dead texas chainsaw three The devil's rejects halloween the lords of salem So the guy's been in some good stuff and he was fun in this film as well. I will say Although I also think his character was a little bit underutilized although he had some kind of funny lines I liked the little bit of like a comedic aspect that his character Injected into situations. He kind of seemed like the dude that kind of like stepped in between um Dr. Mick michaels and crawford Uh multiple times in in in many ways So this film we had a budget of 4.5 million and it only made a bit over 1 million So not a success not a success. Um, I And like I was saying before like I see why it's like the story doesn't really go far enough You just it ends and you kind of like wanted more especially because you wanted more from the development of What was really going on with the um, what is it the resonator? The whole idea behind the resonator. I know they touch on it a little bit But I feel like they need to flesh that out more and then dr. Pretorius like his real motivations I feel like his motivations were just set up as like this really vague like man. He's into like Pleasure and a lot of kinky sexual stuff. So like obviously he wanted to take feeling something to the next level So he wanted to get to a parallel universe like Like give me a little bit more than that like it feels a little bit lazy I think and I don't know and it and it feels also like hellraiser even though Hellraiser the first hellraiser came out a year after this film It feels kind of like hellraiser and hellraiser did it better And more in a more interesting way, but With less practical effects though Well Maybe less grandiose. I will say practical effects Uh, Gordon chose combs and crampton for familiarity of lovecraft material since he'd work with them before And they would know that he would end up asking them for very odd things in the film So it's they it's this kind of thing is I don't want to have to explain to new people That I asked for some weird stuff for these films because they're kind of weird films and from beyond People have to admit is a pretty weird film. It's it's definitely weird It was shot in italy with an entirely italian crew in order to cut costs down So even with that it was 4.5 million and from what I read They actually ended up running out of money by the time they needed to shoot the finale of the film So that kind of sucks because I wonder if The finale would have been even bigger even more grandiose and they really would have gone for it more had They actually had more money at that point because a lot of times when productions get to the end Then they still have some extra money with a film like this in particular. They'll kind of be like Well, let's go bigger. Let's do more practical effects. Let's do more things. Let's make it look bigger and look better Just saying Much like with reanimator gordon had medical advisors to ensure that what the doctors and nurses did made actual real life sense I that's one of the things that like an attention to detail that I loved about steward gordon Especially when I was doing my review for reanimator, which is on my channel Um is finding out that he really looked into the actual medical aspects of things and then he did it again here Now he didn't even need to do that in this film Because there's not a whole lot of real medical stuff that goes on It's mainly like the scientific like everything having to do with the resonator and the parallel universe. So But the fact that he did go to that length respect for that Uh, it was challenging apparently for steward gordon to be able to cut this down to an actual r rating Now I assume I didn't see an uncut for well, you know, maybe it was an uncut version I don't know what I saw But if it was an uncut version that I saw on shutter, then I don't get how it had to be cut down Uh, it's not that crazy. I've seen films that got r ratings that are way less crazy than that back then So anyway The large scale of the resonator in this film works very well in that kind of big open room Which is in the attic of that building And the color lighting looks really really awesome I just think that there's set construction of the room with the resonator is very cool And they build it big enough that they can make sure that there's room for things to like really happen in there And obviously they could, you know, move the cameras around enough, but It because it's in such a big room and because the resonator and its apparatus all the machine setup around it Are so large it gives this feeling of it being a big deal and being Something that had a lot of work and a lot of time put into it And that just kind of adds to the aspect of the the awe of this resonator machine So I like that setup for it and all those lights the colored lights in this the use of the colored lights Especially the pink ones look really really cool the way they shot it and I dig it I'm always for colored lights They can really add a lot of aesthetic interest to a film and it does with this one The line it bit off his head like a gingerbread man I laughed at when it came up when um crawford said it uh jeffrey combs character because It caught caught me off guard because I thought it'd be more of like a serious type line coming When he said it bit his head off like and then he said gingerbread man and I just like Not only did I laugh but since charles band was involved with this It just made me think of ginger dead man with gary bucy So I was just like oh my gosh Just a side note Early on you see clear ties to reanimator The whole thing about messing with science And basically coming to an unintended terrible result by messing with science And it truly is one of those things of just like in reanimator Doing something because you can do it not doing something because you should do it And in this in from beyond it's a little further than reanimator because doctor I think it was dr. Hill I think was his name in um reanimator. He was going after the reanimation serum because He wanted to be you know, he wanted to do it. He kind of wanted to feel like a god He wanted to be noticed within the scientific community as having done this amazing thing whereas Pretorius in from beyond like he's not looking for notoriety. He's just looking for that next level Of pleasure that he can experience so it's it's more of a personal thing and I Guaranteed that he didn't he really want anyone to know about it, honestly So but there's some ties between the films and it makes sense because they're both love craft material based on it Crawford has a tough choice to make in this early on you stay in an insane asylum Or you go and recreate the experiment that is very very dangerous Obviously, he chooses the second one because Who wants to just spend their time in an insane asylum? I mean, maybe if he goes and takes the chance and does the experiment again, it comes out way better But as we see it doesn't I did not see the reveal of the snm room coming up And this is kind of something that's been used in the past in films Uh, especially horror films as like a shock value thing Is this like sexual deviance aspect and obviously it's very strong in this film and sexuality in general is very strong in this film now I would have a big problem with the sexuality in this film because Uh of just being there to be there, but it's not just there to be there Like it is kind of the whole reason that the resonator exists and that's who pretorious was so I'm not mad at it. Like it's fine. It's just Something that I noticed is like the whole snm It In the past has been used as like this deviant behavior sexually that people are supposed to be so shocked by but you know Over time it's been very very different. You know, there's a whole kink community now that is advocated for people to not You know put things like that in film to make it so um Uh taboo, I guess and then you know things like 50 shades of gray like that's kind of Popularized I don't know if I can say popularized but made it a little more mainstream the whole snm aspect of things You know, there are people who are into that and that's fine.  If it's too concerning adults or more whatever I don't care. That's fine But it just I didn't see the snm room coming. So when they reveal something like that, you're like, oh, okay You just don't see it coming It's an interesting tie between dr. Pretorius's desire for some stimulation And that leading to the remu the resonator creation It's similar to hellraiser. Like I said, even though hellraiser came out later Now that said I would say the hellraiser films are better While the first two hellraiser films are definitely better than from beyond in my opinion I'm sure there are people who disagree you can put comments down there and that's all good It's a pretty high concept with this film Having a parallel dimension Existing around us and we can only see it and interact with it When the right frequency is emitted from this resonator machine That is really cool And then the fact that they tie it into the the concept of maybe having a play with people who have schizophrenia And then maybe being able to use the resonator in order to solve that mental illness problem This is what I'm saying interesting high concept But then I just don't think they do enough with it in the film because they introduce these concepts And they just don't do enough with the concepts after they've been introduced in my opinion And that's one of the things I just wanted more. I wanted them to go deeper. I wanted it to be smarter Because when they introduced that concept, you're like, whoa, okay, this film is interesting This is high concept. They're gonna get deep and then it's like they kind of back down from that It's just like, well, here's the concept and we're just gonna play with it in the most kind of base way possible So I I just wanted more All the crazy body stuff that happens to praetorius is really fun. Obviously, that's the amazing practical effects coming into place Whenever praetorius showed up, I was just like, here we go. We're gonna get some cool practical effects and it did not disappoint Nothing kills the sexual mood faster than a deformed old guy watching the part where um Crawford and mc michaels are like getting together and they're making out hard and then all of a sudden this This deformed praetorius pops up and starts like talking and making noises. Yeah, nothing kills the mood more than that um There's a lot of sexuality. Oh, I already talked about the sexuality in the film Which which I said I would normally bother me because it doesn't need to be there But it doesn't need to be there because it's in the story. So that's fine Just like in hellraiser. It's a part of the story.   That's kind of what it feels like but I guess you call it like an antenna or something like it's weird when that comes into play because I don't know. It's just weird like you don't see that coming And then the fact that like when it it goes out and then goes back in so many times and then also like The movement of it especially combined with jeffrey combs acting where he's kind of like Like great acting for it, but it's just like It's kind of uncomfortable to be honest and it's weird And then I guess they're kind of he's seeing colors When that's active like he's not using his his normal human senses that it's all just filtered through that like forehead penis um I guess that's what's going on. That's the idea. I got but if you have a different idea go ahead put it in the comments When crufford was eating the brain In the hospital It appears that he didn't actually know what he was eating because he was being consumed so much by just going through The senses of the thing coming out of his forehead and then eventually when he kind of Snaps back to it.  He realizes. Oh my god. I'm eating a human brain.   That just seems kind of odd to me like I just I couldn't tell what was going on and it happens a few times.  Where did she get it? Like it's such a random thing that like all of a sudden She's got this big big pack of dynamite with a timer on it Makes no sense. It's very out of nowhere Pretorius and Crawford fighting within the same body is an awesome scene And when like, you know Crawford's kind of like coming out of his mouth and then he like swallows him back in and it It's a cool scene and I don't know how you conceptualize that in the first place And be like this is what we're gonna do and then further I don't know how you make it a reality But you know with the people like Kurtzman, nicotero and showstrom You know the talent is there to do it obviously It doesn't really feel like there's enough story like I've been saying It's just having a concept and then treading water in that initial concept The main goal of Pretorius seemed to be getting mcmichael But why? Just for pleasure It just doesn't seem like enough like you understand why the resonator was created in the first place because Pretorius Wanted to get that next pleasure moment like that next level of pleasure You know another sense So that makes sense Then he gets sucked over to basically his head gets eaten then he's living in the other dimension Okay, we get that much But then after that all the conflict that ends up happening between Uh mainly between Crawford and Pretorius Why like what's the point is is it because it seems like it's because Pretorius wants to get a hold of mcmichael But why like there's no real motivation there it's it's not fleshed out at all And it's it's just this kind of like confusing Why is this happening like you need to know the motivation for the main villain You know the motivation for him to have gotten into the situation he was in But then past that What's the motivation for all this fighting and everything going on like there really isn't one So that's another aspect of what's missing from the film in my opinion but That's all I have to say about it. I did enjoy watching it one time through it does feel a little bit slow And it's only like an hour and 25 minutes.  I'm sure there are people who love this Uh, there might be some people who hate it some people in between. I don't know but let's go ahead and talk about it But do me a quick favor hit that subscribe button. I really appreciate it Helps my channel grow and it you know motivates me to keep doing these so if you could hit that subscribe I would personally very much appreciate that Uh, also hit the notification bell if you're gonna do that because then you know whenever I'm putting up a new review Or in a boxing or doing a live stream, but regardless Thanks for checking this out and until next time keep it brutal


Smart people are a unique set of people who apply a high level of intelligence in their interaction with others and in their work Do you think you're smart? How can you tell if someone is smart or not? In today's video, I am going to show with you 10 things only smart people do One work smart and not hard Most smart people do not like working hard on something if there is another way of going about it When they are given a task they can spend time figuring out how best to do the task instead of just doing it They as a result produce a better quality of work than other employees or staff Everyone wants a smart person on your team Smart people are critical and have a predisposition for problem-solving They also naturally have other smart people as friends who they can collaborate and solve very difficult problems two Accept their own weaknesses smart people know their weaknesses and don't fret about it They search for ways to maximize the strengths instead a smart person knows his weaknesses can influence his work and avoids working during such periods He also observes himself for other weaknesses. He may not have already noted so as to boost performance A smart person is not afraid to ask friends and co-workers to tell them the weaknesses They have observed in him so that he can improve he receives criticism with an open mind And works very hard to overcome his weaknesses He knows that if he can overcome them his performance will improve People who are not smart deny their weaknesses and spite those who point them out They are unlikely to ask others for their faults and think they are perfect just the way they are three Talk to themselves. Do you ever talk to yourself? If you do you're in luck According to elite daily blog talking to yourself is a sign of genius There are this orders associated with speaking to oneself though smart people can often be seen talking to themselves They sometimes argue a point and chat on endless about subjects people listening would probably never know Since most smart people are innovative. It is likely that while speaking to themselves They criticize their propositions and weigh the alternatives their minds are always active It is likely talking out loud is a byproduct of their active mind If you talk to yourself, this is a sign. You're really smart. Remember the smart people deal with other people better Don't freak out others with this spend more time with yourself if you can't help it for Think things through a smart person is very unlikely to act without considering several alternatives and the Consequences the decision to go to college and which college for example is Unlikely to be made on the basis of where his friends are going Smart people make smart decisions that hold the most benefit for them in the long run What decisions have you made recently? Did they benefit you in the long run? smart people in a team also figure out their team strengths and weaknesses and Maximize the strength in order for the team to achieve their goals Five listen to music often. Do you listen to music often? If you do This is a clear sign that you are very smart music is sometimes a combination of complex notes Constantly listening differentiating and remembering them can improve cognitive functions Which invariably makes one smarter a person who listens to music is more likely to try singing than a person who doesn't Smart people are also super creative. This may be as a result of listening to lots of music or other inherent talents Six make jokes and have a great sense of humor most smart people are funny and can spin a joke out of almost anything Their understanding of a lot of concepts and people can help them spin jokes That can make people laugh and feel relaxed around them according to the world economic forum Evidence suggests that having a good sense of humor is linked to high emotional intelligence And is a highly desirable quality in a partner being funny is often linked with being smart if you are funny Then you're probably very smart 7 learn from their mistakes Smart people do not make excuses for their mistakes. They learn from them They understand that they would always have responsibilities and that mistakes are bound to happen They take responsibility and commit to doing better people who are not smart always argue when they are confronted with their mistakes And because they don't learn they subsequently make those mistakes again and again 8 the search for answers Smart people research for answers all the time. They don't seek them in just one place They ask questions use the internet and go through case folders in search of clues because they are smart They have parameters to measure through research They set high standards for themselves and apply themselves to their work because of this they produce better results 9 they don't participate in unproductive conversations Highly smart people do not engage in gossip and unproductive conversations Because they are so smart. They usually want to engage in intellectual conversations Most people would rather talk about other things smart people perceive such conversations as unproductive and let them be They therefore come off as aloof to others Smart people should associate with other smart people that way they can have their fill of conversation and analysis Interestingly smart people can drift off in the middle of a conversation or while reading Their minds are always working and this can make talking to them boring 10 stay rational a smart person always remains rational in their approach to work and life They sometimes find it difficult to maintain romantic relationships Most smart people do not see such things as productive while their partners may disagree They always measure their actions and decisions with a firm logic and retrace their steps once they go outside it This can be a disadvantage in dealing with people do because human beings are more emotional than rational a smart person's Inconsistence and logic will yield little result in understanding people people who are not so smart do better with relating to others than highly smart people If this video inspired you subscribe to our channel. We love you


This is not this is going to be one of the more difficult talks that I have given Not because of the things that I'm about to share But because of the things that I need to keep to myself And you might be asking like why what is she talking about? So I'm a keynote speaker on KubeCon stage in two days and My research team and I've been working relentlessly on this report this thought leadership article on top publicly available containers on Docker hub and In the last couple weeks we are burning the midnight oil and I'll be sharing Those results right after we publish the report online tomorrow on stage. I'll be talking about the high-level insights but I wish This conversation was a couple days after that point So that we do a first principle steep dive into the findings and talk about what we found in that research But today is not going to be that day My growth team didn't allow me to share a lot of those insights the cool thing is that I would like to give you a An insight into the journeys that we embarked upon and we have published the same report last year So I'll talk about that a little bit and I'm going to share some insights of being a data scientist I did some sneaking into and and pull some clusters in the data set some samples that will signal the findings So we will go into that so I I know that I might be able to get you excited about that But my hope is that you download that report and maybe come to The cube con keynotes so that you can hear the messengers I'd like my goal for for that speak is basically just get out of the mail of the message because I think You know, I don't say this very lightly, but this time I think data speaks for itself Before I go into any detail I would like to talk a little bit about myself and slim AI the company the startup that I work for Before I do that dough, can I see a show of hands? How many of you have heard about slim AI or darker slim of impressive several people? so slim AI or Maybe I should start with darker slim because that's our open source genesis our DNAs darker slim is a popular GitHub project on container optimization. It has been on GitHub for about seven years right now A lot of stars. We have passed 15,000 stars a while ago and again It is our open source genesis and DNA with slim AI we take this technology and we build upon it This is the score foundation that we are extending making it simpler more It's more secure layered and more efficient with slim AI our SAS platform at slim we are Scanning hundreds of thousands of containers regularly this year alone. We have seen more than 900,000 unique containers in our SAS platform and as a data scientist working with this data and my research team doing the same We observe these containers. We deconstruct them. We try to understand what makes these containers developer friendly and Production ready. So last year around this time The publish this report slim AI top public containers report 2021 and I will go into the details a little bit and again, I'm going to talk about the Delta between then and now But before doing that, I would like to say something about the data So this is the type of data that Again as a data scientist I really enjoy because it's dry hard cold facts, right? I can go into the system pull the data look into the trends and whatnot But for me, although data is beautiful is decision intelligence that matters and for that You need to look into the people and the processes the data that data's impact on people To be able to do that this year we partnered with a research firm dimensional research and We carried out this survey this global randomized survey asking questions to developers in DevOps engineers and Being a data scientist looking at people I see data points I'm joking. I Would like to ask some of the questions that we asked to those developers to you and I would love to hear your Opinions on that I would basically like to take that survey To a test drive before we go into the technical results So the first question that we asked there are multiple, but I picked a few was this one And it's a simple soft one. Would you like to know more about containers than you do today? And it is more about, you know, it might it might start from a very simple conceptual understanding of containers, but deeper understanding of container slimming and hardening how Containerization works at scale Understanding these things we were we were looking for these things, but I would love to hear your answer on this one So repeating the question. Would you like to know more about containers? than you do today Or you think your knowledge is pretty good already Okay Some some people want to learn more 92% of the people that we asked admitted that they would like to learn more about containers and This one is the sequel to that question, which was eye-opening to me because I realized that You know this question that I would like to read here right now It says which of the following do you fully understand about containers and you can see that most of the developers said they Conceptually understand how containers work Container deployment creating containers and whatnot, but it when it comes to more advanced topics like all the components within a container or Container orchestration those percentages start dropping down and when it when you know We were asking about the hardening and slimming of containers only one in four developers said they understand these areas Fully another question. Did your company ever use publicly available containers? Can I see a show offense? publicly available containers Less than what I saw in the data, but 66% of the developers that we asked said yes, we still do 15% said yes, we don't use them anymore, but we did use them in the past and Only 90% less than 20 said no we have deployed to develop all of our containers in house Next one we're getting close in your experience. Is it challenging? To ensure containerized applications are free from vulnerabilities What would you say? Removing vulnerabilities from containers Okay, some This was an overwhelming yes in the survey people said it's hard to remove these these Issues from the containers. I was actually I want to fast forward to this this one People said the complexity of these containers the numerous components with dependencies in these containers Was the number one contributing factor for why these vulnerabilities? Were hard to deal with you know others mentioned that it takes a lot of time other some people mentioned manual processes Actually, this one the manual processes one was interesting because more than 50% of the developers who answered said they are removing Slimming hardening their containers via these manual processes and one last question This is this is something that I there's a lot of discussion in industry about this one some people that it's It's a land that's out of reach some others think that it should be enforced But I would like to ask you and get your opinion What are your customers or other end users demanding that your containers have zero? Vulnerabilities, can I see a show of hands customers asking for zero vulnerabilities in their containers? Very few. Okay in the survey It said that 70% of the people said yes People are end users, whether it's other departments in our company or our customers. They're asking for zero vulnerabilities So let's move forward to the resource that we have done So this is more of the hot like hearts core Quantitative analysis part so what we did with this one before I go into the details in the results I would like to give you a quick overview of the methodology So We went into darker hub and pulled the top 165 containers And you might think that's a very small sample size after all in darker hub There are more than 10 million images with more than 320 billion Pool volume right so one hundred and sixty five may seem like a handful But these containers Together are a huge sample size in terms of the pool can't but because they account for more than 30% of the pool volume There are certain containers in the sample size in the sample set that has been pulled by five six seven billion times Okay After we pulled them the latest versions of them they created them into nine different categories and You can see some of them in that Circular dendro ground that maybe it's too small But we have programming languages general purpose categories and the spatial purpose categories like local development infra and in data science type that you know high-level categories and We scan them using standards open source tools. I have some of my favorites that encore. I'm a huge fan I use their darker extension to the sift in the gripe tools for a spam and vulnerability analysis We use the darker slims x-ray tool and the questions that we were trying to answer was that are these containers easy to use Are they efficient and safe and will they cause any issues? When we pushed them to production with our applications Okay, and You've been looking into these regularly scanning them every day looking into a time series analysis How the vulnerabilities are evolving in these in these containers? Regularly, but at that time here were the high-level findings Okay, the first one was that there was this perfect correlation Between the scan times of these containers and their sizes for every 500 megabytes added to the system we were seeing 50 seconds longer scan times and if it is a few Containers being shipped by a developer every now and then that's one thing But we know that scale changes everything Right if I ask you to buy me a pint of ice cream That's one thing if I ask you to buy me 20 million of them by next Monday Without letting anyone of its about melts. It's a different problem. So it's scale these things start mattering The second finding was about the complexity in these containers, okay so there are a few box plugs charts on the right-hand side and We're looking into spatial permissions libraries packages in these containers Let's do a deeper dive in one of them the packages. So you can see on the x-axis here I'm showing programming languages web development all these different categories that we have on the Y-axis you see the number of packages in these different Container categories and you can see that it is not just the Outliers, but even the averages are surprisingly high and if you think about this right, you know in Programming languages category for example the average Package size is about 350 right this number is supposed to be the tip of the iceberg Because there are studies I'm sure you might remember there's this one But there are multiple studies like that. This one is from the Darmstadt University 2019 research where they looked into a specific ecosystem the npm ecosystem and they said the package reach of the top five packages was between a 134 thousand and a hundred and 66,000 Dependencies other packages so a single package. It's one of the top obviously might have a hundred thousand other packages so a container having four hundred packages right each one having thousands in certain cases hundreds of thousands of dependencies you realize that The tip of the iceberg is an iceberg in this case And maybe one note to make here about the packages you might think That I am proposing that we should be removing these packages these tools from these containers I don't think in those terms I think they make the developers lives really easy. It makes it very experimental fun to work with these containers You can test and deploy and build applications in more easier ways with these types of tooling but the problem is that They also represent an attack surface and it implies a need to Automatically remove these things especially if they are redundant to the system Otherwise, they will make it to production Okay So the point that I'm making here is that if we don't make the conscious effort to remove these Unnecessary redundant packages. We will be incurring tech debt down the road First learning was building upon the category this packages category is the vulnerabilities So I'm not going to talk about the vulnerability count right away because you know that and there are security experts I'm sure I have spent a lot of my career in cybersecurity industry myself attack surfaces more than a vulnerability count There are the the root the user's Permissions that we were just talking about right if the user is root that can create a ton of issues We talked about packages that might be a ton of other issues that are important for an attack surface But I'll say this even the average count of vulnerabilities and the outliers obviously were too high was concerning to me in fact You know some of these having 2000 vulnerabilities that I was looking at these and I thought if a DevOps engineer has to ship some of these containers Why should they even start right? So we looked into the severity categories of these vulnerabilities and realized that 20% of the vulnerabilities were belonging to a high or critical severity category My expectation was not more than five and it was 20% in this year and I can't give you numbers, but it grew up it increased Significantly, but you can see that across all categories from web development to programming languages. There are a lot of critical and high severity level High severity vulnerabilities except the base OS one which has you know some vulnerabilities But definitely not the critical and high categories that we had here So focusing on one of those categories the programming languages Right this category seemed to be very much in line with the averages that we were seeing so not necessarily the most vulnerable You know high in terms of package counts and whatnot, but also not Innocent as well. So let me pull a few things and start comparing 2020 to 2021 With respect to the last year. So I pulled go lang node Python Rust I could have pulled many more are these in line with like the things that you work with Is there any other programming languages that you would love to see in such a comparison? For example, or are these interesting enough? Good Okay, so if you look into it that guy I am just showcasing the number of vulnerabilities year over year so 2021 versus 2022 between go lang node Rust and Python as I said as you can see the only one that seemed to have improved slightly is No, not slightly. It seems it seems substantial. The other ones Python has increased by about 50 percent Rust increased by about 50 percent go lang increased by 20 percent So all of them have more vulnerabilities and it is not as if we haven't seen certain Incidents CVE's resolved from the system. So for each and every one of them We have seen that certain CVE's were being removed, but there were more CVE's three four five times more in this subset three times more Getting added into the system. So our remediation rate is much slower than The one that our detection detection rate for for these containers This is looking into the severity levels of that one and I would like us to focus on I hope you can see the details here But what we have is it's the same order what we have is go lang and node on top 2022 this time you're looking into the percentages of these Vulnerabilities that we have seen and you can see for example, we said node has less This year so look into the 2020 one vulnerability distribution for node and you will see that there are a lot of low and negligible category Vulnerabilities and if you look at this year the high and critical level of Vulnerabilities has tripled. So in a year, yes node made progress in terms of removing a ton of the vulnerabilities But then we also added three times more high and critical vulnerabilities, which you know puts a shadow on to the improvement that we made others Others were already you said they have seen more vulnerabilities some result, but a lot more has been added and When you look into a you know, Python for example the percentages of these critical high Incidents medium incidents. They are also Much higher than compared to last year So the main conclusion that I can give you a deeper dive later on when we publish that report but the main conclusion that I had here was that even when you look into specific categories with very strong communities sometimes If a container that has a strong enterprise behind them We do not see a lot of improvements, especially for this category Programming languages in general. I can say that we are no more secure than we were in 2021 and this is in the aftermath of multiple security incidents last year and An intense focus on software supply chain security. Now. I'm hopeful As an industry We will be making the right decisions and the conversations have started And I do think that this container landscape is providing a ton of opportunities to the Developers in terms of scale, but you can see that it is also presenting certain risks Was there a question? Okay, and we will be doing more and deeper research hopefully leading to actionable research But I Feel like we need to start thinking a lot more about how to improve as an industry What do we want as an industry, right? Our customers want zero vulnerabilities or get close to that dreamland our developers want to enjoy and Enjoy coding not to be overwhelmed by infrastructure They should not need a PhD in infrastructure and understand every little detail all the complexities of these containers But we also want to push production ready containers to production So to be able to do that for us at slim we think you should know what's inside your containers and push only What's needed to production? We believe in automation through intelligent optimization and we are seeking to solve this problem for all of the world's Containers and there are other teams with different approaches and they're relentless and brilliant and they are putting They're losing their sleep over these problems and because of that. I'm very hopeful about the future I'm hopeful, but I'm concerned. I think this is troubling that you know after this much conversation the Direction is not heading in the right direction But again, I do think that the more we talk about these especially with these Decision intelligence points these analytical Insight we will be making better Improvements so with that. Thank you so much for listening to me. I would love to hear more of your comments Online on Twitter on LinkedIn. Let's connect and continue the conversation Thank you so much for your time and looking forward to connect in the conference. Can you take one question? Yes? I think we have time Thank you That's a great point so Not all vulnerabilities are created equal and some of them might not be even exploitable I definitely agree with this like I have seen certain vulnerabilities certain packages Being in different paths in a container for example, right the same package can be Represented in the same container in 40 different pathways and the same package might have like several different packages have the same CVE's That said that same CVE in a different package in a different runtime Represent a whole different risk level so even that even the same CVE even the same package Might have a different security rating in a container itself. So it's a very nuanced detailed problem but Try selling that idea to a government a Department of events in any government saying hey, you know what we have 1000 vulnerabilities here But we don't think it's exploitable you we might not think it's exploitable But we know that they are there it's uncomfortable and there might be in the future certain issues So I know I have a feeling that customers governments will be demanding more of this But we need to have a nuanced understanding of what matters and especially we need to understand What's the highest priority so that we can make some progress right if you go into a container as a DevOps engineer and see 2000 vulnerabilities 40% high and critical Where do you even start like which ones should I start removing and it is not the one container that you need to work with in a Company there are you know in our survey We asked questions about the scale that can be 400 4,000 400,000 containers in an environment right and everything is changing all the time So if there is a living organism so to be able to do that at scale Becomes a huge issue without prioritization saying I'm going to have zero vulnerabilities period I don't think you can make any anything work for you, but that's a great question Can I take one more question maybe no one okay any other questions Go ahead So the question is we have seen 20% in the previous report Critical and high category vulnerabilities in these containers. How did we go about scanning and finding them labeling them? Yeah, depending on which scanner you use you get different results. Oh my god I have pulled my hair so many nights just like trying to figure that question out. I'm so glad that you asked so many different so There are certain scanners that don't even Reveal certain CV is some others do You know some people say like you know over counting things just like Looking at the CV and the same package different path as a different incident count Which I think shows the effort is an occurrence, but it's not necessarily a unique CVE so these scanners need to be standardized Hopefully we will do that soon because I have again spent so much time to understand compare these We have used we are putting that into our slim AI platform so that you can easily dip these vulnerability scanners But you can see those this can be huge so same container might have you know 1000 vulnerabilities in one and 2500 in another and they are both correct and sometimes you need to take a step back and understand But you don't have the time to do this because we just talked about the scale issue, right? We need to standardize these for sure I think I understand how each and every scanner works from a design perspective So I used gripe 3 v in several tools like all the things that that you know the usual suspects I understand they are design principles, but they are very different from each other and it's a headache. That's my answer I guess thank you