So welcome back to the Career Hacking Village here at DEF CON Safe Mode. We know lots of people are at different stages of their career. And what we wanted to do is make sure that those of you who are midway in your career, maybe later in your career, and you're really starting to get to that point where you need to start building your teams, really taking on a leadership role. How do you do all of this while we're in the pandemic and while we are trying to figure out how to create teams in a remote environment? So I've asked my dear friend, Mike Murray to come back and really share some of his insights on leadership and building teams in the new normal. Mike, take it away. Thanks, Kathleen. Really excited to be here. Always great to be back on a stage at DEF CON. Even in this weird year when we finally have achieved DEF CON being canceled, quote unquote. And none of us get to be in the crazy heat of Las Vegas whether we're at the Rio or the RIV or even back to the Alexis Park. So this is yet another format for DEF CON and I'm pretty excited to be part of it. And I think this has been a really interesting year for all of us. I mean, 2020 just gets more strange as time goes on and we've still got a third of the year left to go, so lots left. And I don't know about you guys, but I am at this point particularly tired across the board, whether it's Zoom fatigue, whether it's fatigue from being locked in our house, fatigue from having our parents and pets and kids and everybody around all the time that you can never get away from, or just fatigue from being unable to socialize with your friends. I mean, I don't know about all of you, but I certainly wish we were in Las Vegas sharing a cocktail and able to walk around and able to hug with abandon like we always have. This is a new year and regardless of how tired we are, things are different. And as Kathleen said, this is a talk A for the people who are building teams, but I also want people out there, especially if you're thinking about joining a team, I hope to present some of the things that I see as where we're going and the way that we're going to have to build our organizations and treat our people as we go forward. But this should also reflect on when you're searching for a job, do the people that you're interviewing with do some of these things and are they doing them well? And is it a place that is forward thinking enough that you'd really want to join to be part of this culture of remoteness, to focus on cultures that have diverse and inclusive workforces and that have figured out how to go from this world where a large part of our interaction style was in person to a world where a large part of our interaction style is like we're doing today, recording a talk over Zoom and presenting it not in the same way we would have in the prior years. Now the good news about being in security, at least according to all the stereotypes, is that we're pretty good at remote. The typical stereotype of the remote hacker sitting in their basement with their headphones on or their hoodie up and I don't know if you can tell but I'm wearing my hoodie today for recording this talk. We have always done particularly well as an industry with having some amount of remote work. The problem with that is we weren't ever really remote. I don't know many people who have had their entire job cycle from first interview to hiring and onboarding to being in a company for a couple of years and never being in person. Every organization I've ever been at, if we were interviewing for even a remote role, we would often fly the person out for the final interview. We would often fly them out and have dinner and have a cocktail and get to know them face to face. Then when they onboarded, the same thing. When I started Scope Security, my company here in New York City, what I would do is every time I hired somebody I would fly them to New York for three days and we'd spend the first three days sitting in a room with a whiteboard talking through everything in the company, talking through the technology, walking through the product and all of that stuff. We would have lunches and we would have breakfasts and we would have dinners and we would have all this face to face interaction. Similarly, I don't know any sales team around this industry that doesn't have at least once a year.  These are all things that have just evaporated in 2020 and let's be clear with Google's recent announcement that they're going to keep all of their people remote until the middle of next year. I fully expect that many of us are going to go at least another year before we are face to face with a lot of our coworkers. Even the roles that we've traditionally thought of as remote are far more remote than they used to be. That's where I think the crux of a lot of the changes come from because we're missing a ton of our ability to form those social relationships. Most of those social bonds are what get us through tough times. I'm going to talk about that a bunch during this presentation. Additionally, and if you spend as much time on Zoom and video conferencing as I do, you know that this is real, Zoom fatigue is a thing. Your mind and your cognitive resources are not designed to sit and stare at a blank screen that's not in three dimensions for eight or 10 hours a day. We are built to be social animals, but that socialness is in-person. Many of us survive on that in-person face-to-face interaction, especially the extroverts in the audience, for getting back the energy that we need to get through our days. Similarly, when you're in that informal or sort of, when you're in that remote context, the staring at a screen over Zoom, you miss out on a lot of information. This is one of the things we'll talk about a lot in the interviewing section of this conversation. When you're doing an interview over Zoom, you miss a ton of influence cues that you would get if you were sitting face-to-face. Body language over video conference is effectively the talking head body language. It's not my full body language. You can't tell what I'm doing with my feet while I'm sitting here presenting to a screen with a microphone in front of my face. You aren't really aware of how much information you get from that until it's gone. Let's talk about how I'm going to split up this talk. I'm going to talk about three things that are really important and difficult in this time. The first one is bringing people aboard. You don't get to fly them out to the office and sit in front of them for a full day in a room with a whiteboard anymore. Because of that, we have to change our interviewing and hiring processes a lot. Similarly, when you're onboarding new employees, you also don't get to fly them to headquarters and have them sit in a room with you. How do we change onboarding to accept this new remote reality? Once people are aboard, how do you keep them mentally healthy?  But how do you create touch points in your culture and create structures by which you can keep your teams mentally sane? These are the three real phases of the employee lifecycle that are changing so much right now that I want to dig into. With that, we'll start with interviewing and hiring. We'll start with the onboarding process. Whether you're a job seeker who's going through this remote interview process or a hiring manager who's having to figure out how to modify their hiring process, this has been a really tough time.  And I was talking to a recruiter friend of mine who is pretty thoughtful about these things. And I said to him, so do you have any advice for me? It's a big risk to hire a senior person who you've never met face to face. And his insight was, well, Mike, it's pretty simple. You either take the risk or you don't. I said, well, that's not exactly what I was asking. What I was asking for was a way that we can modulate our process such that it becomes less risky. And so with that, I set out on the quest to figure out what we could start to do in our interview processes. Knowing that as we're a growing company, we're probably going to hire 20 people this year and we're never going to meet any of them face to face. So how do we do that in a way that we don't end up hiring the wrong people or breaking our particularly interesting culture? And especially how do we make sure that we are getting the right people in the process and then evaluating them effectively so that we get them through the onboarding process? So with that, one of the things that we really realize is that most of the things that you do in an interview process can have more or less rigor, right?  And I've seen a lot of hiring managers overcome bad interview processes and bad HR processes because they create such a strong interpersonal relationship with the candidate. And in the past, that was enough, right? I could overcome a lot of bad candidate experience within my interview processes by having really great interviews and creating those relationships, especially building in things like taking the candidate out to lunch and things that create that trust interpersonally. But unfortunately, that's all the stuff that's gone away. So what we realized is that rather than focus on our ability to create bonds with candidates, we had to actually add rigor to our process because what usually creates the trust between the candidate and the company that's trying to hire them is the interpersonal relationships with the people. Now you have to replace that by having a really great process. And so refocusing your interview process on making sure that you follow up with candidates in a timely fashion, that candidates are getting the right feedback and the right email and the right steps in the middle of the process, that you have standard questions across each of your sets of interviews so that the interviewers can focus what ability they have on creating the trust across this impoverished medium. We've had to go back and add rigor to our process.  It's one thing, when I was at GE in my past, GE has lots of rigor. They have people to create rigor in the interview process where that's their job, whereas at a small startup you don't have that. So it's been harder for us to do that and I can't say that we necessarily do it that well. But we've been focusing on how do we add rigor to the process because we realize that we can't just rely on our ability to charm the candidate and to have really great interactions with them to create the bonds that we need and the excitement that they need about the company. Similarly, it's forced us to change our interview formats. Most companies I know have an interview process that involves some amount of remote interviewing, whether a phone screen or a phone screen and then a chat with the hiring manager. And then usually you bring the candidate in for one of these marathon four to six to eight hour back-to-back interview days, which is exhausting even when you're sitting in a room with a whiteboard with a bunch of people that come in and out. Over Zoom, it's not just exhausting, it's actually impossible. By the eighth hour of an eight hour back-to-back Zoom day, the candidate's eyes are going to be so glazed over that they can barely form a sentence. And the last half of your interview process is not going to get the information that you want. So what we realized is we had to start breaking it up, whereas you may have had a three-step interview process with the third step being a lot of different conversations. We've now added additional steps to that process. We're also experimenting with adding different media into the process. As an example, we know that we live on Slack. Other organizations live on Teams or Google Meet or Skype or whatever your preferred instant messenger is. We've started adding in attempts at interviews over those different mediums because if a person is going to join our team, they're going to spend a lot of time interacting with us on Slack. It would be terrible to find out that they don't know how to use Slack in their first week, and we want to be able to replicate that experience. Now, you don't want to throw somebody out just because they don't know how to use Slack. Obviously, there's a conversation there and a teaching opportunity, but you have to figure out how to replicate the real life you're going to be in. Real life you're going to be in is not in an office with a whiteboard for at least the next 12 months. What is their life going to be for the next 12 months? Is it you're going to be drawing things in Lucidchart or Visio Online? Are you going to be collaborating on docs in Google Docs? Are you going to be pair programming? What are those things that are going to reflect that person's day-to-day life once they've joined your company? In that time, how do we create effectively an interview process that replicates that so you can see what the candidate is going to be like in your environment? I've sort of harped on this a little bit and I've hit it pretty hard, but the idea of let's just get the candidate in front of a whiteboard and let's solve problems together started to become really hard. I specifically really love the whiteboard interview. I bring the candidate in, we will start working on a problem. I have five or six that I use depending on what the role is that I'm hiring and let's solve the problem together. I get a sense of the person's interaction style, I get a sense of how they think, how they communicate, when they ask for help, whether they ask for help, all of those things. And all of that sort of evaporates when you can't do it remotely. I don't know if anybody's tried using the whiteboarding feature of Zoom, but I will tell you it is a poor, poor, poor replacement for a real whiteboard. And so what have we done to start focusing on how do you replace the whiteboard? We've started looking at online testing opportunities. I mentioned a second ago real-time collaboration. If I was hiring a user interface person, maybe we co-designed a screen of something in Figma. Figma is effectively like Google Docs for designers where we can basically, it's kind of like PowerPoint remotely, or not PowerPoint, sorry, Photoshop remotely, where you can basically co-comment on and co-design a UX. Maybe we work on a product spec within a Google Drive or the like, or like I said, use Lucidchart or Vizio to create an architecture and comment on it. Things that allow us to do real-time collaboration in the same way we do in a daily meeting. Our architecture meetings often end up with somebody sharing their screen and Lucidchart up on the screen and people drawing things and dragging them around. It's reflective of the real role that they will do, but it's also a good way to replace that whiteboard interview. Similarly, and this is the one that we've found the most valuable over the last six months, is we've added in audition interviews for pretty much everything. Basically, an audition interview from my perspective is you give the candidate a bit of a take-home assignment, something they can do in an hour or two, it doesn't have to be a huge thing, and then they have to come present, and they have to present their thoughts.  Come tell us everything you learn about APT 29 in a couple of hours, or here's a piece of code, tell us about it, or write this piece of code, or spin up this service, and then come tell us what you did, so that you get a good understanding of their communication style, you get a good understanding of their ability to do work, and you get a good understanding of how they're going to interact with you once they're here. And obviously, those auditions balance differently depending on who it is. If it's a sales role, that presentation is the most important thing. If it's a technical role, often the technology and the skills that they're showing is the most important thing, but they still have to be able to present their skills, right? So, across all of these, whether we're adding in initial assessments, whether we're doing collaborative interviewing over collaborative platforms, or we're doing an audition, we've added in all these steps to try and get a sense of how the person will work in the real world the way that we used to with the whiteboard interview. So, let me take a detour for a second, because 2020 has really put a focus on diversity in a way that we haven't seen in prior years, and it's something that has been a focus of mine for a bunch of years, though I very rarely talk about it.  I don't have a whole lot of experience in my own personal history that lends me to be an expert on diversity by any stretch, right? I grew up in a small town Ontario and grew up in Canada and pretty white here. So, I'm not really the person to talk about this, but I will say I've learned a lot about it. And I have a couple of counterintuitive points that I think I wanted to put into this talk because it's important to think about, even if you're not somebody who really reflects diversity, it's incumbent on all of us to get out there and make the change we want to see in the world. And what I realized when I really started studying diversity is a lot of the advice when you look at diversity and inclusion programs and when you get into the HR material and all of that, a lot of it is about showing how you're doing diversity for large companies, right? Publish your metrics and have diversity committees internally and do all of these things that happen at large companies. I was an executive sponsor of the diversity committee when I was at Lookout. I've done the big company diversity thing, but how do you hire a diverse team when you're six people? Because a lot of those things that you read about in the HR manuals don't really apply very effectively when your whole team fits in one Zoom window. And so we've had to realize that the diversity effort for us is less a strategy. It's less a strategic conversation about how we structure the company's program as it is a tactical activity of how do I get the right people to apply and how do we make sure we hire the right people? And so there are a few things that I really wanted to emphasize around that. And by the way, I feel free to hit me up in the Q&A and to email me and send me notes on Twitter and tell me all the things that I'm not doing right here and that I'm getting wrong because like I said, I'm very committed to this, but I'm sure that I'm making mistakes. But the three things that we have learned really quickly as a small company is one of the very first things you can do to increase diversity is to focus on the language and the job ads and the job descriptions in your website. It is really amazing across security and across the job descriptions in our industry how many of those have language that is very exclusive. And I mean it excludes people. How many of them focus on a very particular sort of standard narrative that doesn't include other cultures, that doesn't include other life experiences, other genders, etc. And so you can do a lot just by looking at all of your job descriptions and all of your website and asking yourself, would somebody who's not like me want this job? And I think that that's something that very few of us as hiring managers were taught to do when we were writing the job description. Second, the farther to the front of your interview process you can put questions about diversity, the more you are going to signal to candidates that it matters. If you go through your whole interview process and never ask a manager candidate what they've done to increase diversity in their previous organizations, they're going to get hired never thinking about whether or not they're going to build a diverse team in your organization. So the closer you can get that to the front of your interview process and I'll talk more about this in a second, the more you're going to signal to the candidates that, A, this is important enough for you to talk about right up front, but it's also going to allow you to select people who have answers around building diverse organizations that match the culture that you want to build. And finally, look at your pipeline. And I'll talk about this more in a second, but one of the most eye-opening things that you can do is if you have a candidate tracking system that's tracking the interview pipeline that you have, look at it and look at each stage. If 90% of the people that get in-person interviews or 95%, I've been in places where 100% of the people who get in-person interviews are white dudes, well guess what your team's going to end up as?  If your pipeline is 90% diverse candidates, you're going to end up with a diverse team whether you like it or not, right? Who ends up in your interview process is who you end up hiring, period full stop. And so if the beginning of your pipeline does not look diverse, the ends really not going to. So with that, I have two pieces of more technical advice. One is my absolute favorite new question. This question is the question that has moved to the front of our interview process. And if I could actually put this on LinkedIn and make it a qualifying question, I would. I don't claim credit for this. I was talking to the folks over at Gap Jumpers talk about a really neat organization. Gap Jumpers is a group of folks that are doing some really interesting work around diversity and specifically diversity in the hiring process. And one of their founders gave me this one. What actions have you taken or wish you'd taken to advocate for and support diverse and inclusive cultures and teams in your previous roles? And by asking that question up front, and by the way, the answer is not always going to going to be great one. Especially if you're asking this of a junior engineer, they might not have a good answer. But do they have things they wish they could do? Do they have things that they wanted to do? Do they have things they've seen done well? This starts a conversation that helps you to understand who the people you're interviewing are around this. And it really helps you to identify people who are going to support the culture you're building, but also that are going to be allies for you as you grow. And so we've started asking this very, very close to the front of our interview questions, our interview questions and panels. Like I said, if I could, I would put it in the qualifying questions to even apply right next to, right next to are you authorized to work in this country? This would be a question I would ask right up front. Because by asking this, we are signaling like, hey, by the way, when you get here, you're going to be expected to do this. And so I don't know if you realize that all of these things that I've just put forward are ultimately the same thing. I've actually created all of these ideas around a single idea. And it comes from Richard Thaler's work around default choice. I was talking to a friend of mine who runs HR at a Bay Area startup. And she said, my fundamental job is to make it so that right now, the default choice for most of our engineering managers is to hire a white male. My job is to make the default choice to hire, not that. Because we know that if I pull a pool of 100 engineers in the Bay Area, there's going to be a lot of white males in that random sample. If I can force us away from the default choice that is currently the default choice, and create a new default choice to create a new way of operating, then we're going to get the decisions we want similarly to the way that with Thaler's work around 401Ks. If the default choice is not to enroll in a 401K, something like 65% of people don't enroll in a 401K. If you make the default choice that they're defaulted to a 401K and they have to enroll in a 401K, or they can opt out, something like 65% of the people enroll in a 401K. By setting the default choice, which is what all of these functions that I've just talked about are doing, they are creating a situation where diversity is the default choice, we're able to actually modify the behavior of people in our organizations. I think if we thought about how do we modify the default choice more effectively, we would end up with a better outcome in many of our cases.  We've made offer letters, they've quit their jobs, they're about to start. This is the point where I'd be normally buying plane tickets and having people come show up and I'd be giving them their laptop face-to-face on the first day. Unfortunately, that's not exactly the world we live in anymore. We don't, you know, no longer do we get to do the fly the person here, sit them in a room for five days and indoctrinate them for 40 hours and have cocktails with them after that and take them out to dinner every night. That doesn't get to be how we do this anymore because we're not able to do it in person. And because of the challenge of Zoom fatigue and the challenge of basically sitting someone in front of a video conference for eight hours at a time, we have to realize that onboarding has to change. Onboarding can no longer be a monolithic entity where you start talking at 9 o'clock on Monday and you stop talking at 5 o'clock on Monday and the person has set up their benefits and their laptop and all of that. Because of this new world, we have to realize that you have to break it up. That means you have to change formats, you have to have multiple media, some things can be in documents, some things can be e-mail, some things can be over Slack. Zoom is still important, you still will use Zoom, but often we can do things like videos or one-on-one mentorship or breakout rooms or just go read this book even to replace that monolithic put-a-person-in-a-room situation. Otherwise, you're just going to end up with exhausted people who haven't learned anything. Ditto logistics start to get hard for onboarding. One of the things that we've realized and I have people in the U.S. and I have people in Canada, it was really easy when I flew them here to New York to hand them all a laptop that we had bought from the store in advance and pre-configured. Now I have to figure out how to get those laptops configured and to their house. Something that should be simple logistically starts to become difficult. How do you buy lunch for everybody on their first day? Do I get their home address and have somebody send them postmates? How do we even do something that simple? How do we have a happy hour on their first day? How do you socially onboard these people? These are all things we've never really had to worry about. The default action has always been, we'll just fly them here, we'll stick them in a room and we're all good. The default has changed. Now we have to be thoughtful about not just the logistical part of the onboarding, not just how do I teach them where JIRA is and how do I make sure that their laptop connects to VPN, but also how do we socially integrate them into the team?  I still have relationships with people I onboarded with at Lookout and people I onboarded with at GE even though they weren't on my team. We have traditionally used that onboarding process because as the meeting breaks up and people go get coffee in the kitchen, they start a natural conversation. These are things that don't happen over Zoom. As part of the onboarding of your employees, you have to sit and think about what do I do to socially integrate them normally? Do we take them out to lunch? Do we do happy hours? Do we play games? What is the thing that we normally do to socially onboard people? And then how can I create that same thing knowing that the mediums that we have don't enable that? So for example, I'm a big fan of happy hours. I love taking the team out to happy hour. The best part about it is you can have big group conversations, but you also end up with a lot of one-on-one conversations. The problem with Zoom, for example, and frankly any of them, I use Zoom as shorthand, right? It could be teams. It could be Google Meet. It could be Hangouts. It could be anything. But the problem with it is what you have in a video conference interactions is very different than what you have in an in-person organization because even if you have a lunch meeting, we have 10 people on Zoom. We all have lunch. If we had those 10 people around the table, we would talk as a large group for a while. Somebody would present. Somebody would talk. And then you'd see all of these splinter conversations that would happen. And those splinter conversations are often where the most important relationships are formed. You know, we're sitting around the table and I start having a small side conversation with the person next to me or the person right across to me. And the people next to me are doing the same thing. Those conversations can't happen over video conference. And nobody has yet created the Zoom equivalent that allows me to be sitting in a large group meeting and have a side conversation with some other person on Zoom without effectively talking over the speaker at the meeting. And so you have to be really thoughtful about how do we create those things. You know, if we normally do happy hour, it's great that we do remote hap- or like a Zoom happy hour. But how do we create the opportunity for all those people to have side conversations? And so in, you know, one of the things that I've been forcing people to do is have a ton more one-on-ones, especially with new people. You know, have one-on-ones with your new staff. You know, every day for the first month. That's actually something I've been doing is as I've been bringing some people aboard on my staff, I'm literally the first 30 days I meet with them every day for 30 minutes. That's a lot of time, but it replicates a lot of the conversations we would have had naturally as a side conversation in a meeting that we don't get to have anymore. And similarly, you have to be able to do that with your team. You have to be able to think about what are those social interactions? What do they look like when they're done well? And how do I hold my organization accountable for doing that with the new person when they come aboard? And by the way, this feels forced. This feels really uncomfortable to basically force everyone to have, you know, five one-on-ones a week with people where they normally wouldn't have. But you're replacing the informal hallway conversation. You're replacing their ability to just sort of stand up in their cube and ask over the cube wall. You're trying to create a situation where we replace those social interactions that happen organically within the office with an actual forced interaction. I too know it feels forced and not organic, but it's kind of what we got, right? We don't have the ability to do the things we've always done. And similarly, and so you sort of get the transition, right? We're doing those things to onboard people, but a lot of those same activities go into maintaining the health of the team and the health of the culture. Because you don't anymore have the random sitting down next to each other at lunch opportunity that we used to have. You know, one of my favorite things when I've been in previous jobs is just to walk into the kitchen with food and see who's sitting at what table and go sit at whatever table and have whatever conversation I have that day with whoever's talking, right? And I'm an introvert, by the way, but that's how you create really strong relationships within an organization. Well, how do we do that same thing in this world? And I think there's a couple of things that we have to be very cognizant of. First off, and you know, it's the old, this meeting could have been an email idea, we have to be really ruthless about information format and information delivery. If I know that I'm in an office and I have basically unlimited face-to-face time without exhaustion, which as an introvert, I don't. I only have a certain amount of time I can be face-to-face before I have to put on headphones and not talk to anybody. But in general, even me as an introvert, when I'm in a room full of people, I can be pretty good and know I can have as many conversations as I want and I'm not going to be exhausted. In this new world, the hours we spend on video conference are a finite resource. So if I schedule a whole ton of meetings that could have easily been an email or a Slack, suddenly I'm eating up time that I could have used for a more important face-to-face meeting with those meetings. So in order to keep our culture strong and in order to keep our ability to have those social conversations and to have those in-person conversations when they're needed, we have to start being ruthless about saving our time face-to-face for the things that matter and finding a way not to do that. So I've been doing a ton more with Google Docs. I've been writing long emails again where I've gotten away traditionally from writing long emails to my team. That was a very 2008 sort of strategy. I've started doing more longer emails, longer documents, a ton more on Slack because I realized that I have to save up the Zoom face-to-faces for things that require that, and especially, especially for the social connection. Now, if you read the story, you know, there have been studies over the years about the amount of time people spend at work not working. And they're always presented in the traditional, like if you read the Harvard Business Review or any of those sorts of things, they're presented as like people wasting time. I've never believed that the time at work not working is people wasting time because fundamentally, the social bonds that you create on your teams, they're not as important, they're not important in good times. Don't get me wrong, I love being friends with all my team. I love loving the people I work with is really important. I spend a ton of time with the people I work with. But what the social bonds that you create in good times actually do for you that is most important is when things break down, when stress is happening, when you're in the middle of incident response, when the whole product goes down and nobody can figure out why, when a customer calls you and is unhappy and you have to figure out a solution right then, those are the times when you don't have time to build goodwill in that. And everyone's at a high stress level, everyone's on edge.  And so the time that you spend building social bonds in non-work interaction, conversations as you walk down the hall, conversations in the kitchen, let's go get coffee next door, all of those little things put in the bank, goodwill and trust and ultimately psychological safety that saves you when things go wrong. And this is exactly what we're missing right now. This is exactly what we're failing to get. When work becomes effectively transactional because our zooms don't allow us to have those social times, we've basically set up a situation where it doesn't affect us on the normal days. It doesn't affect us badly that we barely know our coworkers when everything's fine, right? On the every iteration split, sprint planning, everything's great. But when things go wrong and people haven't built that trust, that's when things break down. And so in this new time as leaders, but also each person, we need to think about how do we create that non-work interaction for our teams and replicate it intentionally. And it goes back to what I was saying about onboarding. You should be thinking, if you have a team of people, you should be thinking for each of those people, what social relationships are going to matter most when things hit the fan, right? If it's a team of developers, it could be another developer. It could be a QA person. It could be a member of the customer support team. And then you have to sit down with that person and force them to create opportunities to create those social bonds. And one of the easiest ways to do that is just to force them to have 30-minute one-on-ones with that person every week or every two weeks or every month. And yes, it is forced. It is not organic. It is going to feel weird and uncomfortable. And it's especially going to feel weird and uncomfortable for you because you should be doing it for yourself, too. What other people in your organization are important for you to be having those social bonds with when things go wrong? Who are you going to need to rely on? And so who are you going to need to build trust with in advance? And so we need to start forcing ourselves to put ourselves in a situation to have those conversations. Have a one-on-one with that person. Say it's your QA person. Put a one-on-one on the calendar and just talk about your families. Talk about what happened that weekend.  Because it's not wasting time. It's your ability to put those things in the bank that will save you when things go wrong. And it's not about Zoom happy hours or game nights. Don't get me wrong. I love those. But it's about creating those bonds of trust with those people that you're going to need later on. So in conclusion, and just, you know, sort of putting a bow on it. The fatigue that we're all feeling from isolation and from social change and from COVID and from everything are real. And yet we don't get to kind of put it back in the bottle. The world's not going back to the way it was anytime soon. You know, there may be pieces and pockets and parts. But as a whole, we're going to live remotely for a while. We're going to learn to have remote teams for a while. If you believe some people, we're going to have remote teams forever, right? And so it's going to change how we hire. It's going to change how we onboard people and make them part of our team. And it's going to change how we keep them part of our team. And the sooner we start adapting to that and the sooner we start creating these new habits, the less they're going to feel weird, the less they're going to feel forced. And the sooner we're going to be able to create an opportunity to build a great culture in this world. And so we have to be intentional. We have to be intentional about creating the quality of information, especially in the interview process, right? If you know that you're only going to get from here up on somebody, you've got to find a way to get more information about them that you would normally get from their body language through other means, through either additional questions, additional time, additional interactions, however you want to do it. Similarly, we have to replace the ability to interact in ways that deliver information, right? We used to onboard by just sticking people in a room. Now we have to go multimedia. Now we have to come up with multiple channels and do a whole bunch of different things. And finally, we have to figure out how to be intentional about creating the social bonds that hold our team together, right? I talked a lot at B-Sides last year about how to build great cultures. This is culture building, right? How do you build a culture in this new time is something we're all going to have to figure out together. And I hope that next year and the year after at B-Sides, DEF CON, Black Hat, et cetera, there's a lot of people that have better ideas than me because I'm obviously talking about this as I'm figuring it out, right? We're building the race car as we're driving the race. And I hope that a lot of other people who come up with a lot of better ideas that I can learn from as well. So with that, thank you so much. I hope we're having, you know, good Q&A and feel free to email me, hit me on Twitter, hit me on LinkedIn, however you want to find me. I'm around. This is stuff I love to talk about. So find me and let's chat about this. Let's chat about medical cybersecurity because I love to talk about that too. Obviously, the scope logo on the CT scanner there. But yeah, anybody wants to hit me up, please feel free. Mike, thank you. As always, love hearing your perspective and how you inspire people to be better leaders, be better managers and overall be better people. And it was so great when you announced last year at B-Sides Las Vegas, the beginning of scope security. So that was fabulous. Thank you for that. And I know we're having some really great conversations going on in the Q&A. Please do follow up with Mike, definitely interested in always hearing people's perspective and having a great dialogue. Remember that we have career coaching and resume review going on. And look forward to seeing everyone at our next presentation. Thanks so much.


Before we are taught anything, we know there is more, and this is the case when considering the Great Pyramid. There is very little doubt left that what we are witnessing at the Giza Plateau is in fact a masterpiece that was created by a civilization that is no longer present here on the earth. Not only is the Great Pyramid the biggest anomaly in our understanding of the past, it is also the greatest wonder present on the planet today and one in which we completely do not understand. When this thing was first excavated in the 9th century, nothing was found inside. No treasure, no burial artifacts, nothing. It was bare. Abandoned long ago and completely sealed, possibly to contain radiation if it was a power plant before the flood. For something to be sitting in plain sight with no documentation, no hieroglyphics, no apparent purpose as to why it is there is mind blowing. Not only was the undertaking of such an industrious feat of engineering impossible for ancient man, but it would appear that it also lacks any fundamental value towards the society that is said to have created it. For us to be told that King Khufu ordered the construction of this thing for it to be built in such a way that it was never replicated. And for us to then believe this is the case against all the odds is astonishing. When you consider they would have to have had a constant construction line right around the clock for 25 years, which involved transporting and laying one mega block every two minutes and that was transported 400 miles from Ashwan. That is around 30 massive stone blocks per hour or 720-30 ton blocks per day. It's impossible. They tried to use the said method with one of these blocks and the stone capsized the boat as soon as the crane released the load. So how did they do this 720 times a day? Anyway, this is what they are categorically telling us to be true. It's a joke. Today we are going to talk about two inscriptions found at the Great Pyramid, so wait till you hear this. Let us tell you something. For the level of sophistication we see at Giza, and in particular the Great Pyramid, you would need a society that were highly advanced in mathematics. You would need to understand the Earth's landmass and our position in the solar system. The secrets contained at Giza are literally out of this world and although there are no directives or explanations at the Great Pyramid, there could be secrets contained in its measurements for humanity's advancements. An example of this being the placing of the structure on the Earth. The coordinates for the Great Pyramid are the same digits for how fast you would need to travel to be traveling at the speed of light. The alignment of this thing at this very location on this planet is no doubt deliberate and there simply must be advanced secrets to our future hidden in advanced disciplines of teaching that we are yet to discover. Consider the original grand entrance to the wonder. Could it be that the structure we see today is in fact the outer jacket of a much more ancient structure? Now there are no hieroglyphics with the exception of a cartouche with Khufu seal on it. This single piece of documentary evidence is why they say it was built by Pharaoh to house Pharaoh after death and guess what? This is widely accepted to be an elaborate hoax set in place by Richard Weiss. The inscription which incredibly reads the gang of Khufu was found in 1837 by Sir Richard Weiss, a British soldier and adventurer who used gunpowder to blast his way into the inner chambers of the Great Pyramid. At the time it was believed to have been left there by the pyramid's builders. Sir Richard's critics asserted the cartouche was a forgery by the rough and ready adventurer in order to justify yet more evidence in his treasure hunting schemes. A professor of ancient Egyptian civilization at Cairo University, Ahmad said, says there is now plenty of evidence to support the age of the cartouche and it's not from the reign of Pharaoh Khufu. Professor said says the cartouche contains the king's short name and not the full official version as is used during a Pharaoh's reign. So you see, the Great Pyramid was wrongly credited as being a tomb. In fact, no mummified remains have ever been found at any pyramid at all. Nowhere does it say these elaborate structures are tombs and in fact we even have the place where kings and queens were entombed at the valley of the kings. So why are they still telling us this to be true when it is categorically dreamed up? The fact of the matter is they don't know what the Great Pyramid is, nobody knows. The only clear option shared by researchers is that it is an industrious wonder, the true age of which could be staggering and maybe even beyond our comprehension. Now what if we were to tell you that in 2006 a group of German researchers accessed and defaced Weiss's cartouche. They took the samples back to Dresden in Germany where tests were carried out on the dating of the red paint of the cartouche. The results? You guessed it guys. It dated to the 19th century and is more than likely an elaborate hoax by Richard Weiss. The German researchers were prosecuted by both the German and Egyptian authorities for uncovering this truth and there is actively a block to withhold this information. Egypt set up a heritage task force to counter the claims accusing the Germans of defacing a world monument. Throughout the main entrance of the Great Pyramid, four massive relieving stones divert the immense weight piled above the entry passage. Linear geometric patterns formed by joints in the stonework reference the Paleo sanskrit glyphs, karras karras meaning workings workings while the triangular cavity below the giant blocks corresponds to the glyph for upama meaning the highest. These bold geometric architectural features together present a votive passage that was used at aligned sacred sites throughout the world to signify the deep infrasonic resonance of the pyramid structures that powered the global civilization. The glyphs embedded in the Great Pyramids entry facade read, workings of the highest, the only ancient inscription found. It is probably credible to note of the fact that the Great Pyramid niche inscription bears a close resemblance to glyphs embossed on metal debris from the 1947 Roswell, New Mexico via monodisk crash and also the Rendlesham forest incident. The Roswell debris texts were first translated in 2007 by applying the Schindelman cipher. It would seem that this decipher has disappeared from publication since the author's death. What does this type of inscription mean? There is little doubt that the world was connected in ways we don't understand today in the past. We see similarities in building techniques that can only be explained if there was contact between cultures in the past and indeed they very well may have all been connected prior to the Great Flood. For example, could it be possible that the ancient Hindus had a part to play in the construction at Giza, using their viamana to transfer the huge blocks? This is just as feasible as any other theory out there and adds weight to the argument that there was advanced technology in this region in the very distant past. Indian history is dating back to the time of the gods, just like the Egyptians does, and equally has tales that are so unbelievable that they are simply classed as myths so maybe there is some argument at least to such a theory. Indeed such a global civilization could be referencing an Atlantean culture. Maybe guys, just maybe. The feeling that everything was once connected is strong. We can theorize on how the water separated the lands and contact was lost. Today we are left with the debris of the ancients and the clear picture that on this earth in the ancient past there was an advanced civilization that were capable of incredible feats of engineering that is almost beyond comprehension. The question then must be this, why are we actively being lied to as a civilization?  The builders of the pyramids were not fools. They have left clear cut proof that can't be destroyed and guess what? We are no longer ignoring this either. We will leave it at that for the moment guys, you can let us know what you think of these texts in the Great Pyramid because any ideas you may have towards it are probably closer to the truth compared to what they are teaching us today. We may not have the answers, but at least we do have the questions. Comments below and as always, thank you for watching.


This course is our fifth of our sixth course for Project Stadia. This is on incident management. So all the training they've had prior to this, we've had training in, you know, obviously risk assessment, of crowd management, evacuations, crisis communications. This is the course that's important if something would happen. We're going to get into on this course once the incident occurs. What about information sharing? You know, what about the risk assessment? We'll be looking at building up a command center. We'll be looking at the, what do we call, our event action plan. And inside the event evacuation plan, there's our incident plan. So this is a very important course for all of our students because of the nature of something should happen. That's why we're here.