that in the Stone Age time and at another time there were a lot of people who might have been told of the same but had invented agriculture but the opportunity cost was such a little bit. Until, and this was a point that my friend who was missing in his speech, we had a very long time until a point in which there was a liberty crew experimenting to other, from the gathering, brands that had not previously owned by other tribes so the same would happen then later with other inventions that were just not the right time because the opportunity costs were still too great but it achieved the inventing of the era before people wanted to begin that to be invented I'm not quite sure if I understood what you are driving it the main point that I tried to make is simply that average standards of living did not rise for thousands of years for that they are, there does exist in the meantime overwhelming evidence I think one of the most important books that makes this point is by Gregory Clark, Fair World to Arms who demonstrates I think quite convincingly that you can go back to the very first records that we have of wages being paid and prices for various goods to come to the conclusion that standards of living in Babylonia were not all that much different from what you find in 1600, 1700, 1800 England and then how do we explain the fact that it took such an enormous amount of time to gradually strip ourselves out of this predicament another important thing is the Industrial Revolution did not take place at one specific point in time it is something that occurred in the course of maybe 200 years you could gradually see that mankind improved in this regard so that there is some sort of threshold must have been reached and that economic theory is in and of itself not able to explain the length of this process I think there is nothing wrong with economic theory not explaining this so to speak as I emphasized I'm of course a strong believer that the tools that economic theory offers us in explaining what is required in order to grow are absolutely correct nonetheless the lengths of time that required is inexplicable so to speak unless we find some other mechanism that explains this if this other mechanism is in the course of thousands of years a different kind of man evolved and how that happened the mechanism is economic success is translated into reproductive success so some of these detailed questions or so when the opportunity cost for this to rise or to lower and so forth I'm not trying to answer these types of questions I have a far more fundamental question how can we understand the long run course of human economic history without recognizing that something like an ongoing biological evolutionary process must have been going on and once we recognize that then many phenomena that we know of do make more sense then if we simply ignore this ongoing biological evolutionary process Well the answer is both we must of course continue to attack their legitimizing ideologies and there are many libertarian conservatives who are doing a very good job of that when it comes to labeling members of the ruling class it is necessarily rather difficult because these people are not totally parasitic sometimes they do act within the productive economy and sometimes they act outside the productive economy the English radicals of the early 19th century had a distinction between tax eaters and tax payers and it seems a fairly clear cut distinction until you look at it in the modern context you see I occasionally work as a university lecturer paid by the state to that extent I'm a tax eater I'm also a tax payer now I suppose if I look at my tax return I can say that on balance I'm a tax payer but I'm sure that I receive many other benefits from the state that I don't take into account and so it is very difficult to say in most regards whether somebody is a tax eater or a tax payer and when you look at the wicked Polly Toynbee for those of you who don't know her she is a particularly nauseous left-wing journalist who writes for the Guardian I'm not sure that she gets a penny from the tax payer it all comes from the Guardian but of course the Guardian gets a lot of its revenue from running all those advertisements for aids out for each co-ordinators and walking advisors and parking studies lecturers but it is difficult to pin a label on someone and say you are a member of the ruling class therefore I want to smash him I wish we could do it and in some cases we can but it's not as easy as it seems May I add something to this this is of course one of the great advantages of some Marxists that they could pinpoint who is member of the ruling class and who isn't he who owns the means of production is and he who doesn't isn't with this concept of tax-eaters and tax-payers the libertarians try to accomplish the same sort of simplicity you might be able to figure out who is a tax payer and who is a tax-eater nonetheless this is not a very good concept in order to determine who is member of the ruling class because clearly you would not consider welfare recipients a member of the ruling class you would not consider a plumber working for the state be a member of the ruling class on the other hand we have of course many people who work entirely outside of the domain of the state who clearly are members of the ruling class leading businessmen who can accomplish for instance that legislation is passed that benefits them at the expense of their competitors nonetheless in terms of this tax-eater, tax-payer dichotomy they would have to be labeled as people who are outside of the ruling class and this was one of the reasons why I asked Sean to just present some thoughts on this difficulty that we have and I do not know how we can overcome it and come up with a clear cut statement this guy is an evil guy so he has to be smashed and this one is not we have to just look at every individual case that makes our case more difficult I admit but that's the way it is we are now divided by the constitution trap that we should be suppressed from years ago its current age also has some kind of trap the opium where asked the non-military growth of state is thought of from achieving a new high sort of a new station to develop and I must admit that I'm not quite sure if I got the drift of the question Hunter and gatherers were under Melsusian conditions again and again and again it was not only until the point came when absolutely no land was available anymore it happened hundreds of thousands of times at various locations that Melsusian conditions arose why did nobody ever invent agriculture and animal husbandry as a way out of it and instead it was always people migrating to different places that again we cannot explain unless we have another explanatory dimension that is a growth of intelligence so it's not only that the pressure so to speak to invent a solution to Melsusian trap only arises once the entire globe is settled by hunters and gatherers but it has happened of course before the entire globe was settled by hunters and gatherers thousands and thousands of times before and every time a decision had to be made hunters and gatherers from what we know worked three or four hours per day so they had plenty of time to think of anything they wanted but they didn't again I'm not quite sure if I answered your question but even if I didn't I hope it still made some sense of what I said apart from that and if I could elaborate a question at the end of your state in which people are more intelligent the very time references, the desirable personality policies of self constraints of control and all that and this is a real problem I think this implies that the genetic quality of the populations in the developed world is deteriorating with respect to the disability and visitors that an authoritarian state could deal with its problem through print of this kind was set out by data and the solution is to breathe from the more desirable if they're reinforced by the state or through visitors to the authoritarian state such as for example contemporary China might quote some of the policies into effect but anyway with minor modifications it is a difficult problem I think for the military to deal with this problem two parts of the answer the first one is simply we have to see the effects as they are this is just a positive statement is it really the case that there were eugenic effects at work before and disgenic effects are at work right now I think many libertarians are entirely blind to the fact that these effects exist I'm rather convinced that the facts do exist the second question is what are we about to do it what can we do about it and the libertarian answer would be because the state has to be eliminated as far as possible welfare state policies have to be eliminated as much as possible and then it is of course up to each individual household so to speak to balance the number of people that they themselves breathe with the resources that they are capable of producing and then let the market do its work if I could make a comment on that which amounts to a question to hands I must say that your explanation of the industrial revolution is the first entirely convincing explanation I've seen all of the others appear to leave something out whereas what yours does is to explain in a very satisfactory way why it happened when it happened however what you're describing may not be an upward swing it may be a very very long cycle and the cycle has not yet over it may be a very pessimistic theory in fact you may be another mouthless we reach a certain point in which a combination of circumstances allows an economic take-off once that happens you have the beginnings of government expansion which brings this genetic effect which brings the upward swing to a halt and for the rest of human history we just bump along at a rather flat level perhaps I agree that might well be a possibility and actually I thought I indicated that I consider this a very real possibility and of course a very real danger so to speak that we are have reached to speak the peak of the development and there will be a decline from now on So I think it's a really positive thing to start A, is it well at any time you can ever say that you do some public good and indeed they are very very large and they are not as coherent or as easily identified in the classes as everyone else most of the ruling class is going to be in our state they provide people with new state income the two games of England are quite happy their housing performances are pretty steady these are all kinds of things there will be higher aesthetic quality even though some of these are pretty low capacity moreover the ruling classes in the past they protected their people against armed invaders and there are a few vassals in the state who have some military obligations and are available to the airsoft team the other point that you made is that it is to be a small, coherent ruling class everyone believes that but the past is not quite as small to suggest to a lot of people who are dependent on the ruling class and usually share their sort of consciousness moreover if you look at the American media it is very very small relative to the total population you can pick up in New York Times you can go to the New York Conservatives you can see what is right in the beginning from actual data you can see new crystals or something else and so forth there is a weekend with everybody people who have seen MTV and these popular shows and so on every week you see them you can see Mike Maxman you can see the CBS and so forth so we are talking about at least in terms of the media a relatively small number of people at least we identify them therefore would you anyway modify how the current rule of the class is different in fact there may be much more global access I agree with you that there is a ruling class but where I disagree is that I am not quite sure what the common defining characteristic of this thing is regarding the benefits of past ruling classes I think Henry VIII's musical compositions should be seen more as positive externalities modern ruling classes do operate consistently within the productive economy in ways that past ruling classes usually didn't that being said there may well be certain benefits even to the ruling class that we have at the moment we spend a lot of time as conservators and libertarians complaining about the wicked things being done to us by our ruling class the Henry class, the new conservators the liberals call them what you will but these people did not proceed to see out the limits of exploitation they do leave us with a lot of what we produce so they don't often take us off and piece us into police stations and so where Marxist would say there is the ruling class brothers let us rise up and smash it let us smash them into production we do need to bear in mind that just because a ruling class exists and just because it is doing bad things does not mean that we should on all occasions seek to overthrow it but we need to consider what would replace it if we could be reasonably sure that overthrowing a ruling class would lead to a significantly better state of affairs from our own point of view yes we should become revolutionaries if on the other hand replacing the existing ruling class would bring us something much worse then there is an argument for putting up with these people bad as they are now at the moment our ruling classes are becoming so awful in what they're doing and in the tendencies of their setting that I think there is a very good argument for even the most conservative of us to become revolutionary but again unlike the Marxists I think our class theory is it doesn't have the same diplomatic ring about it workers of the world unite you have nothing to lose with your chains we're not even quite sure who the ruling class is I have two questions about the ruling class I think they're great questions the first one is you know that a society considers something anything without a that makes it a parasite that supports itself and provides what they want to do the people who write and read comic books are not parasites and this is a fundamental tendency of Washington economics value is objective it can be measured by some objectives why an expert says people should want to spend their money on it people make comic books are not parasites because they support themselves by providing other people what they're willing to pay for and they're benefiting from that and providing happiness for their diverse business people who write and act and read and do so far are not parasites they are providing the buy for people who are willing to buy it and once they have entitlements in addition it's not up to a very point to say people shouldn't spend money on an item of comic books people shouldn't spend their time buying it that is totally anecdotal to be honest is the principle that providing and reading are which people can read it's something people want and need and therefore they're not having some they're moving they're exercising and moving because it does seem that they're providing something that people want but a third point I do believe I say people shouldn't want that in comic books maybe people just need an ideology and that's what they want what you say touches on what Hans was saying but let me deal with the parasite aspect I agree that when members of the ruling class operate within the productive economy they are more or less not parasitic those are their productive activities which is part of what makes the whole analysis so difficult but coming back to the question coming back to the point you made about how every society has had a ruling class now that is significant we can talk about legitimising ideologies we can talk about hegemony false consciousness and we can use that to explain any one particular ruling class but every society that has ever existed every settled society that has ever existed has had a ruling class and it may put ordinary people in much the same position as certain bassid wives you often see these prophetic creatures who've been beaten up by their drunk and disgusting husbands and there are people of these women get away from those disgusting men and then six months later they're in an equally abusive relationship that may be what the human race is like with regards to ruling classes you can explain the exploitation of any one class by using all these fancy terms but the fact that people have always had a ruling class may indicate that would it be uncharitable to say stupid I want to make a comment and I do not think it is correct to say that every society had a ruling class every society this leads me to make a distinction what the meaning of ruling class is every society has so to speak rulers every society has people who exercise authority every society has leaders whose word counts for more than other peoples what we mean by a ruling class however is something different from just simply having people who exercise authority what we mean by ruling class is people who have acquired means in illegitimate ways people have established monopolies people who have stolen the property of other individuals and then draw income from positions that were acquired in an illegitimate way in a way that involves the infringement of private property rights so in this sense of course it is incorrect to say that a ruling class has existed as long as mankind exists rulers have existed as long as mankind exists authorities have existed as long as mankind exists but it is not necessarily the case that these rulers have acquired their means their property in an illegitimate way they can have also acquired that in a completely legitimate way and then exercise their authority based on that position we will not do five questions we will do one more question than I want to say and then remarks and then we should retire one more question next in the other half of it correctly so this might be an argument to speak of what a ruling class of different ruling classes not least let's protect maybe in our church to not be served as a close to marxist terminology so this is my first question what do you think this might get you out of some difficulty in this problem we only have a second is are you sure that you find themselves or are they maybe defined by the rules themselves because the law of making this has made them delegate some tasks the ruling classes and the power of the ruling classes is certainly as the rule that it happened I think both your questions come under one heading what you're asking again is the question that I asked but didn't really satisfactorily answer should we talk about a ruling class or should we talk about a cluster of mutually hostile groups who all to some extent have influence with the state I think that we can talk about a single ruling class but there are considerable difficulties in my mind before I can give a clear view of that I think that should end this discussion I don't want to add anything to it I agree with what you said so it is now up to me only to say a few things first of all I want to thank you very much that you attended this conference I hope you enjoyed it my purpose with this conference over the years to create the best, the most educational the most entertaining the most enlightening and also the most fun conference that exists anywhere if there is someone who didn't like the conference he shouldn't come again if you did like the conference please tell your friends about it to most propaganda that this will become a more and more exclusive type conference I do not want to have the conference bigger but I want to be a conference that will be clamorous to get to and the final announcement that I want to make is next year the conference will take place again most likely one week later so at the very end of May maybe a few days into June so if you like the conference please mark your calendar accordingly in due time the exact announcement of the exact dates will appear on our website now let's have fun again


What's up everybody, Jensen here for jasperyskazebrace.com. 223, Panini, Immaculate Baseball, eight box Kazebrace, number four just sold out. Here we go, guys. And actually, let me fix the focus since I had to restart everything. I forgot I had to re-fix the focus. It's already at 60, actually. There you go, guys, actually. Last one, we'll do just and get it in the parts. There's seven cases total, right? You two? You already took all of them. You have all yours already? So whatever's in the back, you can take it. Sure, I don't know. I hope that's always a good sign. Might be a good case. All right, we got a one-on-one patch, Scott Rowling for the St. Louis Cardinals. And man, St. Louis Cardinals just be hitting in all of our cases here. Ed with the Cardinals. We got Miguel Blayez, which is the top prospect there for the Boston Red Sox. That's two out of 25. Nice one there for the Sox, going to Ryan. We got Owen White for Texas, clearly. Patch autographs to 99. Whoa, what is coming up here? One of one, Kevin Parada. That even looks used, doesn't it? Looks a little dirty. Nike Swoosh, Cleat Brand Logos for the Metz. Mark, there you go, man. Congrats, that looks a little dirty to me. And hey, you get the longest trail so you go over here. There you go. Nice, the cards are never gonna be perfect. Very nice. All right, we got Jimmy Rollins, one out of five for the Phillies. Phillies, that's going to Nick Martino. Reed Perez, to 49. To 35, Washington, going to Walter. Got a patch autograph of Kay Doughty. One out of two, nice one there for Toronto. Blue Jays, going to Chateau. Zach Geloff, nice triple relic there. For the A's, Brian Kay. We got a Jordan Walker, three out of five. Three color patches on the left and the right side. That's for St. Louis, Cardinals going ahead. And then we have a Yu Lee, out of 55. Philadelphia Phillies, when Nick. Last one is a redemption. It is a Prospects patch autograph, Sal Frillic, for the Milwaukee Brewers, going to Justin Martin. He must have talked to you, she had a 10, one out of 10. And a Pico Armstrong for the Cubbies, out of 99. Pubs going ahead, Yoshida, Red Sox, Ryan. All right, we got Rainne Dung-Kong, for the Dodgers, out of 99. Whoa, what is this coming up? Patch, Jason Dominguez, three out of three. Looks like Yankee logo. Man, that looks beautiful. Yankee's going to Matt Smith. Then we got Alan Tremel, to 10, for Detroit. Then we got Detroit, Al Kaline, to 38, prior for Chicago. Looks like piece of the glove, for Minnesota. Twins, Mark, there you go, man. Jackson Sharia, to 25, autograph to 99. Marcel Mayer, Prospects patch autographs, that is another one for the Red Sox, and Ryan. I know Tris, gotta get Trinelli, man. We're due, we're due for Nelly. All right, halfway through guys. Bean, nice three color patches. We got a Kyle Manzardo, to 48. Tampa Bay, going to Francis. Then we have a Michael Bush, to 10. How thick this one is, Jesus. Four to 10, that's for the Dodgers, going to DY. I'm not even gonna try to put that in a slider box. Art in, top loader. Carlson Fisch, for the Chicago, White Sox. Ruffella, for Boston. Out of 49, Ryan. All right, next what we have here, is a Prospects patch autographs, Red, Jordan Walker. Man, Carlson's just great, man. Jesus, nice. And Red should be like a parallel out of like 49, probably. Looks like, yeah, 49, playing out of his mind. Alcaraz just has no answer right now. Yeah, dude, Red sends, which Cardinals just hit him right now, man. Well, there's a redemption right at the top, Prospects patch autographs, Mick LaBelle. Which is gonna be for the Phillies, to 99. All for Cincinnati, he's a good Prospect too. Little star right there, we got three boxes left. Let's heat up, heat up. Tristan with the Reds. We got Gavin Williams, for Cleveland, out of 99. Duel Relics, Shabilly Williams and Joe Girardi, both in Chicago, out of 10. And we got a Gavin Stone for the Dodgers, out of 35. And Robin, yeah, nice to 15, 11 out of 15 there. Milwaukee Brewers, it's been a Justin. Two more boxes, guys. Autographs, Hollow Silver is out of 25. Robert Hassel is a Washington national. Why the redemption at the top? Kind of weird. Michael Bush to 15, for the Dodgers, DUI. Joey Weimer, to 99. That's from Milwaukee. A printing plate patch. Joe Morgan, one of one for Cincinnati. There you go, man. You got Tyler Solderstrom, out of 48. Brian Kay. And last one here is a Sal Frelick to 49. Nice break from Milwaukee in this one too, Justin. Spock's Mojo, here we go. Again, pick a teams five, six and seven. We're posted a little bit earlier today. Both, or all three of them are at 13, 16 and 16, guys. If you guys want to run another one of these back tonight. Angel Martinez for Cleveland. George Valera, out of 49. Alone for the Guardians and DUI. We have Rafaela for Boston. Piece of the glove to 49. Boston, having a good break too, Ryan. And last one here is a three out of five Drew Jones. Okay, thank you, man. That's going to go to Arizona and Justin with the Diamondbacks. And it looks like that was it actually. So there you go, guys. Very, very nice stuff popping out of here. We have a lot of really thick cards. Oh, you see, I have that one-on-one jet. We have the one-on-one there. Just a lot of really nice stuff, guys. Thank you guys so much again. Pick a team number five in the store, JaspysCasebreak.com.


So, let us compare the centralized and decentralized systems as a kind of quickly as a kind of policy. So, this is a typical sovereign statement planned which is actually highly demanding on investments, you need much capital to come into that, it demands land, you need a lot of land because it is the aeration that is kind of happening there. And it also needs management capacity, you know it needs kind of trained and educated kind of manpower to kind of you know run it. And even if you have all this it is an end of the pipe solution, anybody wants to comment on that word, it is an end of the pipe solution, yeah so that is why you need trained knowledge, I am not critiquing, I am telling what are the demands of that system. So, the point is you know what is the end of the pipe solution, yeah so that means you know the entire waste has to come to one point, yes it is not you know because you are kind of centralizing it. So, the calculations tell that 70 percent of the cost is for connecting sewers, it is not for the planned. And I will tell you tomorrow the kind of you know what are the kind of dangers of that also you know the planned versus the sewer kind of an issue. So, the point is that so you are not acknowledging the pollution, the more the pollution the merrier because you have pumping stations anyway it will reach the last point. So you do not have an awareness about pollution when you have a end of the pipe solution, you think that you know everything can be brought here it can be treated. So, nobody takes responsibility of their own pollution because they think that flush and forget. So this is it, it is very convenient, you can flush and forget that is the one issue. And it is transported long distances, treated well, it has improved the public health in European towns, capital energy and skilled intensive, but it is available by national and overseas funding. And you have you may get ready made consultants also, so if you are international financial institutions funding it, you have ready made consultants who will come and give you the plan of this also. So it is that way it is very attractive to an urban local body if you get that. And then it is perceived to be the ideal solution globally. So that means you know it is attractive for politicians if he brings in a super treatment plan, it is very good for contractors who will build it and then it is very good for the engineers who will facilitate that, isn't it? So everybody loves a good STP, nobody will be against that, whoever will be taking the decisions. But there are disadvantages, one is that you know your technology choice and related decisions are always made at the national level or at the state level, it is never learned at the kind of a local level. Now with decentralization it is slowly picking up like you know urban local bodies also can be taken, it is very costly and it can lead the governments to indebtedness which also I will be mentioning tomorrow. All these issues we will be kind of you know discussing tomorrow, so I am not going into that. What could be the kind of problems in at the level of governance of a centralized you know solution. Then we have something called the emergent solutions which you know I did not actually mention in our European experience, what is happened is that you know this mainstream solutions that became very costly. So in Europe and US what is happening is that you know they are trying to recycle these waste also, recycle it into agriculture, recycle it into other you know non-human kinds of uses and things like that. So there is a kind of there is a neo centralized solutions which actually address the problem of recycling. And then the last point is that you know there are emergent decentralized solutions which actually tells that you do not have to take the you know waste anywhere, can you do it at the point itself, treating at the point itself. So it is called the on-site sanitation systems OSS. So these are, so what are the advantages of this? One is you know it prioritized treatment where it is created, like septic tank is an example of you know an on-site sanitation system. If you have a good septic tank then you do not need to kind of take it to anywhere else. Like if you segregate your solid waste there itself, can the organic be treated in your own home and can the plastics be kind of taken to somewhere and you know kind of get recycled also you know. So you do not have to have big systems to kind of do that. So some systems use kind of you know kind of use a lot of you know there are the two things that you have to kind of now familiarize it. One is grey water, one type of water is grey water, grey water is water from bathroom, kitchen all those kinds of things and black water is water that is coming out of the toilet. So in a centralized system you need a cocktail, you kind of get it all together because you need a lot of water because your carriage is through water carriage, the technology is a water carriage technology. So you need a lot of water, so there is a lot of wastage of water also when you bring these systems together. So can you kind of you know treat them separately is one question. So if black water is treated in a very good septic tank and if grey water is treated you know it does not mean much treatment actually. It needs a kind of settling and some kind of you know filtration and then it can be openly kind of go into the, so this actually kind of if you separate the flows you know it can actually make the treatment much more easier and less costly also. And it can be designed for small scale so it can be flexible and it can be contextually adapted systems and you know actually in the NUSP, National Urban Sanitation Policy for the first time government actually promotes these kinds of systems and there is you know so there is a lot of you know and then there is a systems approach also where the flow from one stream can actually kind of get into another stream also like you know the like what he was telling about you know the FSTP if it treated well it can go into agriculture and you know so those kinds of possibilities are also there you know you are solid waste if it gets into you know biogas your fuel consumption you know your CNG consumption also can come down. So it is no longer a waste it becomes a resource. So those are the possibilities that we are talking about in emergent solutions you know why I am telling this is you know it is also something to do with the period that we are living in also you know in the 50s and 60s it was a lot of optimism with the industrial revolution everything has to be big and everything has to be expensive and you know Ford is kind of production technologies also you know where Ford discovered that you know there can be big production systems there could be big kind of you know what you call where centralized systems can be there labor can be you know given a middle class kind of a you know status all this but over a period of time those production systems have crumpled now it is all very decentralized systems a car is produced a tire is produced somewhere you know your gear is produced somewhere and then it is flexible production and so labor is informalized you know so that is the way you know the production systems are moving also. So that is the first problem with you know the kind of not industrial technologies post industrial technologies are emerging second environment in the old production system environment was not a major kind of an issue so with the environment awareness we are interested in sustainability and the third element is affordability here the state or the industry or somebody has to really invest and in the in the other one we can have more affordable technology so affordability and sustainability becomes two major you know kind of pillars of your thinking my generation did not have to think about it but your generation definitely has to think about these issues also when we talk about development so and that becomes this you know then this decentralized systems become much more attractive than you know whatever we are talking about. So these systems are mostly individual units and scaling up needs more institutional innovations you know which we will be talking about later there are only a few service providers so how do you kind of train others that is that is a challenge that we have and then you know this is also septic smart is a very interesting thing you know 2016-17 I spent one year in University of Berkeley so the week I went there that is a septic smart week in September in US because they found that you know they cannot afford these kinds of big systems for example there was a you know a professor who actually calculated in the next five years how much investment do you need to kind of you know rehabilitate your systems your big systems you know it is actually 3.6 trillion dollars you need you need 3.6 trillion dollars to kind of make your water and sanitation systems better why you have invested your technology you are locked in your technology to that and we have locked in only 16 percent in India 33 percent in class 1 and 2 cities we found if you take the entire Indian scenario we have only 16 percent of those kinds of things that means we have 84 percent more scope to get into sustainability sustainability and affordability that means we can leapfrog to sustainability towel chatham in Malayalam we can leapfrog to sustainability we do not have to go through the kind of problems that they are facing you know like industrial agriculture it is actually facing a lot of problems green revolution agriculture industrial agriculture is facing a lot of problems and people are painstakingly coming to organic agriculture by subsidies and things like that our agriculture is mostly organic so why should we go there and then come back you know so that is one thing that your generation should be thinking about also you know my generation did not have the kind of possibility to think like that because we have only one kind of a thinking which we were taught you can actually think about sustainability and affordability which will give you totally different solutions so you can leapfrog into sustainability where the Americans will take hundred more years to kind of do that so we do not have to become us in the next hundred years and think another hundred years to get into sustainability because by the time they are already into thinking about sustainability you understand so that is where these possibilities are there these kinds of technologies but it needs many other things you know you need local capacity building you need local institution building you need a lot of behavioral changes and cooperation you need local regulation compliance you know so all this we will be talking about in the Aleppo case how we are trying to address these issues to make it work it is not as easy as the other one if you need an STP here tomorrow ADB or you know JICA will give you a funding consultants will come from Delhi plan it all for you but here you do not have money you do not have the technology ready by technology you do not have any consultants and you and but you have local materials and all to kind of build that you know so how do we kind of proceed that is the question that we are going to ask so this is the exercise which also we do not need to do now but list out the you know list out the advantages and disadvantages of centralized and decentralized approaches to sanitation second have you seen any decentralized interventions in neighborhood or anywhere who is planning sanitation in your town I think the last question can be very interesting question who is planning sanitation in your town municipality municipality anybody else municipality is planning panchayat is planning group C even idea who is planning sanitation exactly yeah development authority you are a planner town planners yes today plan is the question what infrastructure what infrastructure but then why are these water body so unclean if we are doing planning so we will talk about this tomorrow what is the kind of policy and governance that are there and what are the kind of limitations of that so keep these questions in mind and you know kind of work on it yeah I think you know we will be doing this in a major way tomorrow but quickly to tell you there are certain global discourses you know like SDG you know like sustainable development goals and things like that which comes through government of India international financial institutions there's a state public utility like kerala water authority or board you know so that those are responsible and now according to the current thinking the whole thing should be done by the urban local body which is actually a heavy burden to them they don't have the capacity whereas this public utility like kerala water authority have engineers but they don't have the mandate to do it in a new decentralized panjayatiraj you know nagar palika kind of a context then the problem is that you know this funding actually comes to an SPV special purpose vehicle through consultants and things get problematic that we'll discuss tomorrow so the scope of this is that you know we are asking the question can local academic institutions and NGOs and all help the municipality to plan it that's the challenge that we are asking so this will detail in detail we'll kind of discuss it tomorrow


Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. Covering VMworld 2017, brought to you by VMware and its ecosystem partner. Hey, welcome back everyone. We are live here in Las Vegas for VMworld 2017. We are on the floor, I'm John Furrier with theCUBE with Dave Vellante, our next guest is Juan Vega, Director, Ready Solutions Product Manager for Dell EMC. Welcome to theCUBE. Thank you for my first time, really looking forward to it. Okay, first, what's ready solutions mean? So ready solutions are literally a bunch of services that we apply to infrastructure to help build confidence, convenience, and a better customer experience for folks who are consuming a do-it-yourself, who want to take a do-it-yourself approach to converge systems or SDDS. So I got the button that says nodeorama. What is that? Nodeorama. Well, we're launching a bunch of nodes this year, right? We have a lot of nodes that we're putting out there for a variety of workloads, including vSAN, right? And with vSAN, we're introducing 14G technologies. This show, we just launched it recently, and we're bringing lots of new performance technologies in that 14G space that'll help a bunch with software-defined storage. No, Nodeorama. John likes developer, he thought it was NodeJS or something, he's getting excited. So Juan, I wonder if you could talk to something that we've been addressing all week here on theCUBE. You see in VMware's results a lot of momentum, doesn't look like it's a one-quarter. I mean, three-quarters of growth appears to be some momentum. The AWS deal sort of clarified for customers the cloud strategy, and I think the other piece that we've been talking about is the reality that customers have that they're not able to reform their business and stick it in the cloud. They're really trying to take the cloud model and bring it to their data, and in order to do that, they need simplification. So first of all, do you buy that, and what are you guys doing to facilitate that? I absolutely buy it. I mean, if I look at Dell EMC's capabilities across the spectrum, right, there's a broad variety of services that we can offer a customer to help them adopt that technology, right? We would call it sort of absorbing their tech debt as it were, and we can do that from very basic, do-it-yourself hardware infrastructure, right? All the way up through, you talked to Colin earlier today, we talked about VxRail and VxRack, where we're actually providing sort of lifecycle management for those environments. Already nodes and ready bundles sit between those two. There's a little bit more service, a little bit more confidence, a little bit more convenience, a little faster time to value, right, on that infrastructure, without really moving the customer to an environment where we manage it for them. Okay, and so, why do you need to do that? You know, I thought VMware was so simple, push a button and go, talk about sort of how you're closing that gap. It can be simple, and once you're in the virtualization layer, it absolutely is simple, but there's a relationship between the virtualization layer and the hardware that has to be maintained. So, why is there an HCL, right? Why do we have that? Because there's a known relationship between that software and that hardware that enables that virtualization. We're making that easier and easier for customers all the time. And virtualization does not equate to cloud? Of course. And so, how do you look at cloud, and how do you sort of, I don't want to get into what you define as cloud, but at what point do customers say yes, this is a viable alternative for me to attack my IT labor problem, for me to tick the box with my management, that I'm cutting costs, et cetera. What are those attributes that you are driving toward, that you see customers demanding today? Well, I see that space evolving, right? And the part that we're focusing on, ready nodes, is really focused on that software defined storage component. So, as that piece of the puzzle evolves, right? We're trying to remove complexity in that environment, right? Go back to that ability to confidently present you with a hardware solution that is absolutely adapted for that software environment. Make it faster time to value so that it's showing up preconfigured with services that help you enable that environment more quickly, right? And then, should something need to be done downstream, say a drive fails or whatever, right? We can provide a better support experience by contextualizing that hardware in that environment. So, it's a space for customers who are still very much doing it themselves, very much building their own environment, right? In the software defined storage space. But we're providing a set of services that increase that confidence for them, right? Make it more convenient, give them a better experience. It's interesting, you know, this is our 8th PM world. Dave and I have been here since 2010. It's been a great run. Thank you everyone for watching the queue. We love coming every year. But it's been interesting watching the journey. Software defined data center, the hype of what, five years ago? Maybe four years ago. But now it's reality, NSX is in there, Crown Jewel, crowd native coming over the top. vSAN has been like this rising star. ServerSAN from Wikibon has crushed it on the research side. But I got to ask you, now we're hearing customers deploy new use cases under digital transformation that merge software stacks with hardware stacks. What is the biggest challenge that customers have? Because they want more vSAN. Yes. How are you guys helping customers get more vSAN? And what are some of the key challenges that you guys solve? Well, I think there's a couple things that we're doing. First of all, we're enabling a very broad set of hardware, including cutting edge technologies. They're helping them improve the performance, improve the reliability of their implementations in this space. So today we're looking at six different hardware platforms with about 15 different configurations on the HCL. And we're expanding that this month significantly. All of those can be delivered on the hardware side. All of those can be delivered in a way that they fit seamlessly into a data center environment that's deploying software-defined storage. So I think helping them simplify that is really how we're trying to make this more of a reality. And Dell has always brought strong operationalization to any customer we work with. So I got to ask you on the software side, again, software's eating the world. Wikibon's true private cloud report really validating a lot of the success that vSAN's having. Sure. I mean, all the actions on premise, transforming the cloud operating model, which is to be more agile. What is the key software piece of it? Because now you got DevOps, the cloud native side, saying, hey, infrastructure is code. I want you to run invisible. The ops guy's saying, wait a minute, when you got hardware stacks, you got software stacks, they got to come together. Absolutely. So our open manage enterprise solution is our software connection for helping manage that hardware in the vSAN vCenter environment. And it allows them to actually move all of the controls for updating and managing that system into one pane of glass, which is their vSAN vCenter pane of glass. And so we're really trying to help drive that automation and enable that capability for the do-it-yourself customer. Now if a customer wants to have significantly less tech debt, then we're happy to talk to them about VxRail and VxRack where we start adding more management software capabilities to help drive an even better experience. One more thing, you mentioned tech debt, because I want to get that on the table. Real issue is technology debt, meaning trying to move faster, take some shortcuts, or move the needle too fast. What are some of the technical debts that customers are getting into? And what's good technical debt and what's bad technical debt? Oh, that's a tough question. I think that in terms of bad technical debt, let's start there, right? Anything that is going to be sort of routine spread across lots of different customers within a base that could be offloaded to a service provider who can provide that sort of scale is bad technical debt. So things like driver updates, managing your HCL, paying attention to how to go about replacing a hard drive in a server that's gone down in a node. Those are sort of bad technical debt. You shouldn't be wasting your resources that are focused on your business outcomes on that sort of technical debt. And even at our most basic level, the ready node, we're starting to provide that level of service to the customer. And I think we advance that even more as we get into our rails and racks. In terms of good technical debt, yet to be determined, but I would suspect that a lot of that has to do with developing the code. You can pay back. Right, that you can pay back as I still do. We don't want to hang on too much debt and can't pay it back, you'll be bankrupt. And that's the sort of code that's directly tied to your environment, right? So for example, all of the AI infrastructure that they were building in the keynote today for the pizza company, right? That's a good example of I'm developing code that's intellectual property for my business. That's good technical debt.  Excuse me, I can pet a little bit. Yeah, that you could use to pay off the investments that you've made.  I mean, you've got, John talked about the server sand, something we published years ago. And basically, you're disrupting an install base that you guys own, right? Sounds like a story I heard a long time ago when virtualization first came on the scene. Oh, we're going to be running out of servers. That didn't happen. We're selling more servers than we ever have. Well, so yeah, not that you'll stop selling, but you've got this massive install base, and you're essentially, we're appropriate migrating that install base to a new way. I wonder if you could talk about that dynamic and what those customer conversations are like. Well, I think it's important to us to be a trusted advisor to our customers. It's always been Dell's sort of way of doing business, right? We roll up our sleeves and we get to work with you. So as this transition is happening to the industry, I think it's up to us to provide those kind of, feet on the street services that make it easier for customers to absorb and deal with that transition, right? And again, I know I sound like the broken record here, but it's about helping them have confidence that as they move into this transition, they're not having to deal with all the vagaries of mismatched hardware and software and capabilities. It's about being able to get faster time to value because we did some of the basic steps like pre-configuring that system, so it's just ready to go, right? And what about workloads? How do you see those evolving? So one piece is simplification and attacking the IT labor problem with non-differentiated patching and other stuff, the bad technical debt, as you guys were talking about. What about workloads? What are you seeing emerge in terms of the types of workloads that have an affinity to these types of systems? Well, I think, you know, we heard Chad talk earlier about how the network was becoming sort of the bottleneck, right? And I think that we're seeing more and more storage workloads with affinity for storage moving into the cloud space, right, into the converged space as that technology begins to evolve. And we're seeing things like the new NVMe drives in our 14G servers, right? We have 6x the capacity that we had before, which means applications, workloads that have a storage affinity are able to actually start moving into this more, I know you don't want to use the word virtualized, but this is more software defined space, right? All right, bottom line for customers, ready node. You guys are doing some good stuff. These stands hot. Gelsinger said, the world's going to get much faster. Today's the slowest day of your life going forward. Or something along those lines, just implying that it's going to get pretty crazy. Peter Burris, head of research for wikibomb.com, said the whole computer industry's been turned upside down. It's going to be landing on the table and it's going to re-sort itself out. When you deal with customers, how, what's that conversation like? Because they're scrambling to lock down their true private cloud on premise. They see hybrid cloud as that pathway, the multi-cloud. That's their end state, but right now they got to take care of business at home. That's like clean up their own house in IT. What are some of those conversations when this, that kind of disruption, chaos, complexity? Sure. I think everyone's looking for a little bit more of that confidence, right? In the whole relationship with their, with their supply chain. We're doing it. Our customers are doing it. And every time we have that conversation with them, it basically boils down to what can you do for me that is going to make it easier for me to deal with this transition? How can I trust that what I've- So ease of use is a big thing. I'm sorry? Ease of use? Pretty big deal. Not just ease of use, but trust that I'll be supported downstream. So a ready node builds that, for example, into its value proposition. We want to make sure that you understand that downstream, we know what you're using it for, and we're able to help you in that context. And that's a real key example of how I think we help build that trust with our customers. Michael Dell, final question for you, you talked about, final question for you is that Michael Dell was mentioning technology synergies between Dell technologies across the portfolio, including VMware. So the question for you is what are some of the synergies that you guys are getting with VMware? Has that put it to motion? Sure, there are several, actually. We've done a lot of our development work in the VxRail space around management in conjunction with VMware. I think that the evolution of the software defined space is being driven by them, and we're happy to participate in it in every way we can. So I think there's a lot of development and tech support opportunities that we're finding in that relationship. So positive outcomes, you guys are having a good time. Certainly VMware is doing great. Good to see Pat Gelsinger on the up slope in terms of stock prices of over 104. As of yesterday, I don't even check what it was today, but certainly clarity in the community, clarity in the ecosystem, clarity in the product, cloud and IoT edge. I mean, the wave slide is pretty much baked at this point. Yep, and I'm excited to see Dell EMC having a presence across that whole breadth. Yeah, Dave was commenting, it seems like that the new Dell technologies is much more sanity now in the community. It's all sorted out. Looking good, congratulations. Thank you. Thank you very much. Juan Vega, director, ready solutions with Dell EMC. He's the product manager, he's the product czar. Thanks for spending the time. It's theCUBE coverage live here at VMworld 2017, day two of three days of wall-to-wall coverage. We'll be right back with more after this short break.