Income tax 2021-2022, business expenses, tax. Get ready to get refunds to the max, diving into income tax 2021-2022. Most of this information can be found in Publication 334, Tax Guide for Small Business Tax Year 2021, income tax formula line 1, income, which would have a sub-schedule, basically an income statement with income and expenses. We're focusing here on the expense side of things, expenses basically being deductions, the net then rolling in to line 1 of the income tax formula and page 1 of the form 1040. We see here on the tax return, we would basically have the schedule C, bottom line rolling in to schedule 1, bottom line rolling in to page 1 of the form 1040 line 8. We see here, this is the schedule C, profit or loss from business, basically an income statement. We're now looking at the expenses. The general rule for the expenses are they got to be ordinary and necessary.  We like expenses because they're basically deduction. We want to think about the expenses here specifically related to the business expenses, not other expenses that possibly could be deducted elsewhere, for example, on say like a schedule A when you're thinking about things like taxes. So we're on the taxes. You can deduct on schedule C various federal, state, local and foreign taxes directly attributable to your business. So like with any of the other business deductions, they got to be ordinary and necessary. They got to be linked to the business like with many of the other deductions. That's where some of the confusion comes into place as to one, is it something that's going to be a deductible item just in general, given the nature of the tax and taxes being somewhat confusing in and of themselves. And then two, is the tax something that's going to be deductible just on the schedule C or are we paying taxes that are kind of more general taxes that we might have to allocate, for example, between schedule C and possibly some other place or have some portion deductible on the schedule C. So we've got income taxes. You can deduct on schedule C a state tax on gross income as distinguished from net income directly attributable to your business. So that's kind of a specific type of state income tax, which is designed a little bit differently than the federal income tax. And you will probably be aware of it if you are subject to an income tax on the grocery seats, maybe called a grocery seats tax. You can deduct other state and local income taxes on the schedule A form 1040. If you itemize your deductions, do not deduct federal income tax. So in other words, if we're looking at the income taxes, then we have the federal income taxes. We have the state income taxes. When we think about the federal income taxes, then obviously the schedule C bottom line of the schedule C, basically the net income is rolling into the first page of the form 1040. So therefore we're going to be paying taxes on it income taxes on the schedule C business. But we can't really deduct the federal income taxes because we're using this calculation in order to calculate the federal income tax. If we were able to deduct them, we would have kind of a circle reference. So the federal income tax is basically out. That's the thing we're working on. Then you have the state income taxes. State taxes will differ from place to place. So if you have like a normal kind of state income tax, or if you have a state income tax that is designed or mirroring what we see on the federal side, basically the tax on the net income in your particular state, it's likely you might not be able to deduct that on the schedule C. But rather you possibly might be able to deduct it on the individual side of things on the schedule A if you're able to itemize, if your itemized deductions are greater than the standard deduction. However, if you've got a gross receipts tax, as we see here, you can deduct on schedule C a tax on gross income as distinguished from net income directly attributable to your business on the state side. So then we have the employment taxes. You can deduct the social security, Medicare and food to taxes you paid out of your own funds as an employer. Employment taxes are discussed briefly in chapter one. You can also deduct payments you made as an employer to state unemployment compensation fund or to a state disability benefit fund. Deduct these payments as taxes. Now the thing about employment taxes or the is a it's a little bit confusing to calculate them. So you have to get into the payroll kind of side of things and understand the payroll a bit. It's also a little bit confusing because you have the payroll taxes, which includes social security and Medicare, as well as your self employment taxes, which include social security and Medicare, and they're kind of two different things. So if your schedule C business and you have no employees, then the net income that you will have is still going to be subject to kind of a similar thing as payroll taxes. But they'll be assigned to you. That's kind of like your net income. You'll be assigned self employment tax, which in essence is social security and Medicare that won't be reported on the schedule C. But you'll calculate that on the schedule SE and you can deduct half of it like we talked about in prior presentations. If you have employees, then you're going to deduct their what you pay to them in terms of their wages. And you're also going to have to withhold from them social security and Medicare and possibly state taxes and benefits and so on. And you're going to have to pay social security and Medicare on your side. And that's kind of like you can think about it kind of like a matching system. That's how they imagined it. So you're going to have to pay that social security and Medicare and how that's reported though can be a little confusing because you might then, when you're filling out your schedule C, try to tie in this information to the payroll reports, possibly to the 941s, the quarterly payroll reports, possibly to the W3, which is like a summary of the W2s. When doing that, just note that the payroll taxes that the employees that are the employee portion are going to be reported oftentimes on the income statement has just basically wages under the wages line because the taxes that you withheld from them are actually are actually their payments. So it would be like you gave them the money and then they took that money and gave it to the IRS. But what happened instead is you just kept the money from them and in theory paid the IRS basically on their behalf. And therefore that expense line, you're not going to call taxes on schedule C when it's their taxes, it's just their wages and they had to pay some of their wages to taxes. Then we had our portion that had to be paid over and above that, which we would generally be in another line on the income statement, which would be called the payroll taxes, our portion, social security, Medicare, federal unemployment tax, for example. So you could dive into that more detail in the case. Self-employment tax, you can deduct one half of your self-employment tax. Online 15 of the Schedule 1 form 1040 SE tax is discussed in Chapter 1. So the self-employment tax is different from the payroll taxes, although it's the same kind of thing. But this time we're calculating the social security and Medicare on basically our earnings, the net of the Schedule C as opposed to on the earnings of the employees based on their wages. And we get to deduct that, but we can't deduct it on the Schedule C. Well, we don't get to deduct the whole thing. We get to deduct half of it because what they're trying to do is mirror what happens on a corporation where basically the whole thing where we just discussed if you were an employee, an employer situation, you would get to deduct the portion of your portion of the payroll taxes for the C corporation and you'd get to deduct the employee portion as payroll. So now if you're treating yourself as both the employer and employee with regards to self-employment tax, I should get to deduct the half that is applied to me as the owner. And I can't do that on the Schedule C because that would create a circle reference problem. I could put that now on the Schedule 1 and above the line deduction or deduction for adjusted gross income. Then we have personal property tax. You can deduct on Schedule C any tax imposed by a state or local government on personal property used in your business. So that's going to be the general rule. It's ordinary and necessary. So yeah, deduct it. You can also deduct registration fees for the right to use property within a state or local area. Example, May and Julius Winter drove their car 7,000 business miles out of the total of 10,000 miles. They had to pay $25 for their annual state license tags and $20 for the city registration sticker. They also paid $235 in city personal property tax on the car for a total of $280. They are claiming their actual car expenses because they use the car 70% for business. They can deduct 70% of the $280 or $196 as a business expense. So also note, you have the same kind of issue here with regards to can you take the expense as a business expense? Well, it has to be, and if you're talking about something that is both business and personal, then you can come up with a question of what portion can I deduct on the Schedule C and then is there any other place I might be able to deduct it as well possibly on, say, Schedule A itemized deductions? So we got the real estate taxes. This once again, we come up to that same kind of problem where normally if you're paying taxes on something that's business related and it's not the federal income tax, you would think possibly you would get to take the deduction for it. But you could have situations such as the home where you're paying taxes on it. If you own the home, you'll have property taxes and I work out of my home. So I should get part of the deduction possibly in the business. Then you'd have to do some allocation, part of it being deducted on the business side of things, part of it possibly being then deducted on the Schedule A if you're able to claim the itemized deductions due to them being greater than the standard deduction. So you can deduct on Schedule C the real estate taxes you pay on your business property. Deductible real estate taxes are any state, local or foreign taxes on real estate levied for the general public welfare. The taxing authority must assess these taxes uniformly at a like rate on all real property under its jurisdiction and the proceeds must be for general community or government purposes. So for more information about real estate taxes, you can see Chapter 5 of Publication 535. That chapter explains special rules for deducting the following items, taxes for local benefits such as those for sidewalks, streets, water, mains and sewer lines, real estate taxes when you buy or sell property during the year, real estate taxes. If you use an accrual method of accounting and choose to accrue real estate tax related to a defined period, a rentable over that period. Sales tax. Treat any sales tax you pay on a service or on the person or on the purchase or use of property as part of the cost of the service or property. So when you're paying the sales tax, if you're subject to sales tax in the United States, that would be state and local tax, so that'll differ basically on the location. When you're paying the sales tax, then as the purchaser, you usually just put that in the cost of the thing that you are purchasing. You don't really say, I'm going to record the purchase of supplies at $30 and the sales tax I paid at $5 or something like that. You just say, no, I paid $35 for supplies, which includes the sales tax. When you're charging sales tax on the other side, you're selling something, then you're talking about the income side of things and how to treat sales tax on that side. In this case, we're looking at the expense side of things, meaning we're paying for the sales tax. And if it's a business related item and we get to deduct the item, then we're taking the deduction, not as, for example, supplies and sales tax, but rather as just supplies, which includes this part that we paid for sales tax. If the service or the cost or use of the property is a deductible business expense, you can deduct the tax as part of that service or cost. If the property is merchandise bought for resale, the sales tax is part of the cost of the merchandise. So what if it's inventory? Well, still we purchased it as inventory. We're not going to deduct it at the point in time that we purchased it. We're going to put it on the books as inventory, an asset, and then we're going to expense the asset as cost of goods sold when we sell it. We are still going to include the inventory as the amount we kind of capitalize or put on the books as the asset as part of the inventory that we're purchasing. If the property is depreciable, add the sales tax to the basis for the depreciation for information on the basis of property. See publication 551 basis of assets. So if we buy something large, depreciable assets like equipment, and we pay sales tax on it, we're not going to deduct the sales tax. No, we're going to record it as part of the cost of the thing we purchased, the property, plant and equipment like a forklift, like a building or something like that. And it'll be included in the basis. Do not deduct state and local sales tax imposed on the buyer that you must collect and pay over to the state or local government. Do not include these taxes and gross receipts. So now you might think about, well, what about the taxes that I have to pay to the government? So in this case, I'm collecting the sales tax, I sell something, I collect the sales tax, and then I pay it to the government. You might think that when I pay it to the government, I should get a deduction for the sales tax. But the reason that's not generally the case is because we don't really want to record the income related to the receipt. So in other words, if you sold when you sell something and you have to charge sales tax, so if you sold something for $100, and then you had to charge sales tax of $5, you're actually collecting $105. That's a horrible $5105. When you record this on the books, you're going to receive cash, let's say of $105. The other side is going to go to revenue of $100, and then the $5 here isn't going to be included in revenue. Instead, it should go to a liability account because in theory, you are not the one charging that $5. The virus is just making you be the tax collector on that $5, and therefore you put it on the books as a liability, and then when you pay it to the government, you don't record it as an expense, you lower cash, and you lower the liability so that neither the $5 was neither recorded as revenue or as expense. You can imagine a situation that if they forced you to do this, you run it through the income statement by, for example, recording it as revenue at $105, and then when you pay the government, you record the expense of $5, which would net out to the same area of $100 net income. But that's not what we do generally. That's not what the IRS wants to do. The IRS wants to say that you're not the one charging the $5. Therefore, when you charge $100, the $5 goes in as a liability, doesn't hit the income statement. Then when you pay the government, it's just going to reduce the liability. Therefore, you don't get any expense for it because you didn't have to record any income for it either. So we have the excise tax. You can deduct on Schedule C all excise taxes that are ordinary and necessary expenses of carrying on your business. Excise taxes are discussed briefly in Chapter 1. You've got the fuel taxes, taxes on gasoline, diesel fuel, and other motor fuels you use in your business are usually included as part of the cost of the fuel. Do not deduct these taxes as a separate item. So if you've got taxes on the fuel that you're going to be doing in, especially if it's, plus if it's industrial taxes, in addition to the normal taxes on fuels, then, of course, as the general rule would be applied, would be included in the cost of fuel not broken out separately. You may be entitled to a credit or refund for federal excise tax you paid to fuels used for certain purposes. So for more information, you can see publication 510 excise taxes related to that.


Previously we've learned that in order to show that a subset of a group is itself a group that is a subgroup it suffices to show that the subset is closed under multiplication, that it contains the identity, and that it contains all of the inverses for elements in the set. It turns out that we can also rewrite that in yet another way, a potentially simpler way of doing it. In some regard, I kind of feel like this one's a little bit less intuitive, but in terms of checking it's a shorter list, we're going to see that a subset h of g is in fact a subgroup of g if and only if h is not empty, and if the value g times h inverse belongs to h whenever g and h belong to h. So basically what we're trying to say here is a subset will be a subgroup if it's a non empty subset, and it's closed under division, because multiplying by h inverse is multiplying by the reciprocal there. So let's it's an if and only a statement right so there's actually two things we have to do. So let's first argue that if h is a subgroup it has these principles. Well if h is a subgroup it's not empty because it contains the identity, so there's something in there. And then if you take the elements g and h with inside of the subset h, then because it's a subgroup it has inverses. So h inverse will be in there. And so since g and h inverse are in h, then their product will be an h. And as g and h for chosen arbitrarily a subgroup will be closed under division, because it's closed under multiplication and it's closed under inverses. So you saw the three the three actions in play right there right close under inverses close under products closer to the identity that will give you this but it turns out this process is reversible. So suppose that h is not empty. It contains something we don't know that is yet and it's closed under division so where can we go there. Well since it's not empty there's something in there, call it h we don't know what that is necessarily but we know h is in there. Well because h is in there, and it's closed under division right, it'll contain the element h h inverse, but h h inverse is just the identity. Therefore, this set will contain the identity. Oh, that's great. But then what we're going to do is we're going to do the following game. So h is in there e is in there, right. So that means because of this division property, it'll contain the element e h inverse. This will be inside of h as well. But this is just h inverse. All right. And so this set will be closed under inverses as the identity and also be closed under inverses. Oh, two down one to go right we got to show it's closed under multiplication. Well, what we've now done here is we've now shown that it contains e it'll contain h it'll contain h inverse necessarily right. But in fact, to do multiplication like the closure on the multiplication what we have to say is the following if g and h are inside of h so I'm going to stop you right here. It's like the closure principle says if g and h or an h then g times h is an h. Now this is a conditional statement right it's if then right so there's something here and then something here when you prove a conditional statement. One thing that that early proof writers sometimes struggle with is when you prove it when you prove an if and only if statement, you do not have to prove the if part that is we don't have to show that there exists two distinct elements inside the set. For all we know we have the trivial group which only contains the identity. There might not be anything else in there. You don't have to argue that there's multiple elements in there. You don't all you have to do is you have to say if this happens, then this happens. It could be that the if part is completely vacuous. There might be nothing that ever makes the if part true. Don't matter in order to prove a conditional you assume the if, and then you prove that then. So that's what we're going to do as well. So we're going to take two arbitrary elements of h that might not even be any that we only know there's one element they're not there might not be a second element. And after all when you say if G and H are in H, nowhere are we assuming that G and H necessarily are distinct. They could be the same element. Or even if we do assume they're different. What's the big deal right? That's the if part right so take two elements G and H inside of H. Well from what we've already shown, if G and H are in H, then that means H inverse will be an H. And then there's a typo here. Someone's missing their G. Yikes. How embarrassing. Because G and H is an H, H inverse will be an H. And therefore G times H inverse inverse, since you're closed under division, you that'll be an H as well but that's just the element G H itself. So we've now seen that our set here is closed under multiplication and any set that's closed under multiplication contains identities and contains inverses is a subgroup like we've already proven. So this gives you another way of showing that a subgroup that a subset could be a subgroup by showing it's not empty and close under division because basically if you're not empty you have to contain the identity. And when you show something's not empty, you typically just show that the identity is in there. That's the easiest way to do it. And then showing that something's closed under division is basically showing it's closed under multiplication and inverses simultaneously. So I don't want you to think that it's like, oh wow, it's such a short list comparatively. You basically have to show the same things. It's just just kind of squishing two steps into one. And if that seems easy by all means do it. And that's going to bring us to the end of this lecture lecture 10 we'll talk some more about subgroups in the next in the next lecture, of course, take a look at that coming up soon, and I'll see you later. Bye everyone.


Hello, everyone. I'm Laura Noland, Account Director at JSA. We're so happy to welcome all of you to this webinar, Unlocking the Power of Circular Data Centers. I'm honored to introduce you today to Allie Fenn, Chief Innovation Officer at IT Renew. First though, we want to take care of a few housekeeping items. We will open up the webinar at the end for questions. Please type your questions in the chat box directly in the GoToWebinar Organizer, and we'll get to as many as we can today. If you have additional questions, you can email marketing at itrenew.com. We will also send the recording of this webinar to all registered attendees to hope to continue the conversation from there. And with that, I'd like to introduce Allie Fenn. Allie is the Chief Innovation Officer at IT Renew, which provides circular data center services to the hyperscale cloud operators and a suite of recertified open hardware solutions to downstream markets globally. Allie leads strategy for IT Renew's circular data center initiatives including the development of modeling, analytics platforms, and new business and market development. Allie has been building enterprises and cloud technology companies for 20 years now and holds an economics degree from Yale and an EMPA from the London School of Economics. We are very excited to have Allie talk through the paradigm shift of a circular data center economy, the financial and environmental impact at hand, and the opportunity before us all. Allie. Laura, thank you so much for having me and thank you to everybody for joining and for your interest in this topic. I'll just dive right in. So our thesis is that to operationalize a global circular IT hardware industry is both our opportunity as an industry and our imperative as an ecosystem and a community. And to do so, the good news is maximizes both financial opportunity of IT hardware assets and lifetime value of assets and also the sustainability of IT hardware generally. So we've talked in the past, including at the OCP event, open compute event last March in San Jose about the financial value of orchestrating a global circular data center industry. Our analysis shows that there's potentially as much as $50 billion of opportunity that is currently falling through the cracks being left on the table in a more linear model. That value is value that can be recovered by large scale operators and hyperscale operators at data centers. And on the flip side of that, there are there's as much as a $10 billion annual market that is markets that are currently blocked by both budgets and by access that could benefit from circular equipment or recertified equipment. So we know for sure that there's a financial opportunity here to move towards more circular models. What we want to talk about today is really the sustainability opportunity and decarbonization in particular in light of an industry which is growing immensely and operates at scale that's nearly inconceivable. We're going to walk through some new modeling and the goal of that new modeling is to really bring real data and science and math to bear to help us all collectively work towards the evolution to a more circular data center opportunity. And the good news is we think that opportunity is here and now and attainable. So quickly before we go into the analysis and the opportunity for circular data centers, I want to set some context on who is IT renew. We've been in the business of working with hyperscale data center operators, large scale data center operators and doing decommissioning of IT hardware assets since 2003. We provide a suite of services to large scale data center operators. Those include data sanitization and secure data center decommissioning both from a logical erase perspective and a physical operations and removal and remarketing perspective. In order to do that and to turn those valuable assets that we decommission into as much value as possible, we have a suite of products which we sell under the Sesame brand name, which include full rack scale systems as well as other form factors and re-manufactured environments. And those collectively have returned over a billion dollars of value to the ecosystem generally. Now it's important that we work with some of these very large scale operators that those relationships and our position in the industry are really what helps us to be able to then orchestrate the downstream markets and do the product recertification, the product support warranties and delivery into useful and accessible markets downstream. So a little bit of context on circular data centers. Let's talk theoretically first. Linear models across global industries including ours and others assume that we take materials, we build things with those materials, we make assets and then we dispose of those assets at the end of their lifetime. It's a very consumptive kind of a model. In a circular model the theory is regenerative rather than consumptive and the goal is to take as little as we need from the earth and keep assets in their highest value, highest utility value for as long as possible. So maximizing the collective longevity across multiple lifetimes, multiple pathways for those assets and deferring as much of a drain and a need as we have on the environment. So in our instance specifically what that looks like is we used to have, we used to think about decommissioning as sort of a last mile opportunity where we would receive equipment out of large steel data centers and then we would capture as, recover as much value for it typically in the form of components as we could and then recycle the rest of the material. Instead we now think about this whole concept much more holistically from the very design of equipment prior to it even entering its first lifetime in a data center and then we, we orchestrate globally a singular stream of operation, a singular operational stream which then feeds multiple different cascading lifetimes and value recovery opportunities for that equipment. All of them representing incremental value over and above the traditional model of simply harvesting components and, and recycling residual stuff. So that includes reuse in internal environments within a primary data center opportunity. It includes moving that data center equipment into, through a full recertification process and into secondary data center environments. Again minimizing the waste and the energy needed to transform it because it's going data center system to data center system. We think also about then how can we, we remanufacture these higher order elements of compute and storage into non-data center environments but that maintain more value and create more lifetime value and more, more longevity prior to getting into components. And then of course we continue to do the rest of those things that we already did. The idea here is that if we think about optimizing the mix across these flows and keeping things as up into the left as we can, then we recover as much value as we can. And of course that then avoids new manufacturing and it should enhance our sustainability and that's the thesis that we're going to test here today and roll out and, and reveal the results of the new data on. So there is no question that the cloud industry, the technology infrastructure industry, all of the, all of the immense power of the technology industry at large is incredible, right? We are on track to solve some of the world's most complicated problems in ways we've never ever thought of. The potential for positive impact is immense. But the, the sort of less discussed thing is that we also are on a very dangerous trajectory here. I sometimes say that we have sort of a dirty underbelly to the industry. And these are just a couple of stats that, that helped to show. So on the material side, in 2016, we produced globally about just shy of 50 million tons of e-waste. And just to give you some context on that, that's the equivalent of stacking a million 18-wheel trucks back to front, back to front, back to front, all the way from New York to Bangkok and back. So it's an immense amount of material waste that is, is not being given a second lifetime and is going into some version of a waste stream. Similarly, there are people talking about the fact that we may actually run out of the elements that are required for electronic components within the next 40 to 50 years and that we better start doing things like mining the deep sea beds. And I, I propose that that's, that's not the right idea that we need to be instead thinking more proactively and strategically about how we are thinking about life cycle, life cycles of equipment and maximizing those in new and interesting ways. Now on the carbonization side, which is where we're going to really focus today and the, the recent modeling is really focused, you know, again, dangerous trajectory, right? If you think about things like AI and natural language processing models and so forth, this, this one stat talks about the fact that we may see AI consuming 10% of global electricity within the next few years. I actually have heard people at major place cloud providers talking about the fact that that's probably a low estimate. You know, this, this sums up in the stat that basically says currently as a global digital technology industry, we are responsible for about 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions or global warming potential. And there are some estimates that that we're on track to double that to 8% by 2025. Now the importance of that is that well, the rest of the world is arguably hopefully trying to, to, to track towards this two degree global warming target, you know, this basically shows that we're kind of going the wrong direction. And this is again, why we need to be as an industry doing everything we can to be getting out in front of this and saying, hey, let's harness all that positive potential, but let's do it in a way that isn't catastrophic in another, in another regard. Right. So let's look at it hardware specifically. This is from research published by Gartner in August of this year. 65 million servers deployed currently in data centers that have an average of 50 racks or more. So 65 million installed base. The forecast from now to 2023 is that approximately 14 million servers will be sold into those environments over the next four years. So we should, if the math was simple, we should end up at 121 million servers deployed at the end of 2023. But it turns out that it's not quite that simple and that we end up at the end of the period with about 75 million servers deployed in that installed base. So sometime between now and the end of 2023, we're going to have about 50 million servers that get EOL, right. Again, really good reason for us to think about are we doing the best we can possibly do from a sustainability perspective and how are we going to treat that immense amount of waste? So, but let's talk about what we're doing really well. As data center operators globally, we are doing really, really well on PUE, which is the efficiency that we run our data centers at. We're doing really well and continue to drive gains and performance per watt or computational efficiency. We are getting better at utilization. We're getting better at making sure we're not wasting power. We're getting better at power scaling along with that utilization. And we're getting better at cooling and so forth in the data centers. We are also doing a very good job with renewables, which is super important. So this is just a snapshot of headlines. Everybody is working very hard at this just this past week. Google announced another three billion dollars and 10 new renewables project in Europe alone. And it's not just the major hyperscale people, right. This is happening across COLO facility providers and much smaller kind of mid-sized data center providers as well. And this is absolutely critical. We need to continue the march on this front. Nothing that I'm going to tell you today is to have people take their eyes off this ball. In fact, we need to do some success here, right? The question that we're asking is, if we assume success here, then where else do we look? What other knobs do we have given that we have this scary trajectory that we're on? So more specifically, everything we just talked about that we're doing well is really operational phase or run phase energy implications or impact. So often called scope one emissions. This is what we do. Anything from the time a data rack arrives in a data center and gets plugged in to the time it gets unplugged and taken out of that data center. Now, if we think about more holistically the life cycle of equipment, then, you know, we need to contemplate how did that stuff get to the door of the data center, right? So what was mined? What was the material content of all of the stuff that becomes racks of equipment? And then what happens to that same stuff after we take it out of the data center? Those two phases are collectively called scope three emissions or embodied energy. And that's going to be the focus here. Just as a side note, scope two is not part of this analysis. Scope two is actually even further upstream. It's the energy that is required to produce the energy that's involved in running a data center out of scope for this analysis. But we're going to focus on this picture of the life cycle in the data we're going to talk about today and as a way to focus the conversation and understand again what those big knobs might be that we could look to turn next. So more specifically, more granularly, I would say, this becomes the system boundary of the new analysis that we've just rolled out. The process looks like this. You take raw materials from the earth, you take energy from the earth, you create energy, and you move a bunch of ore to pull materials out of the ground in the form of mining, then you process that material, you transport it somewhere, you then create all of the components that go into IT equipment in the form of boards, CPUs, drives, dims, power equipment and so forth, switches, and then of course the metal that goes into servers and racks and so forth. You transport those components again to someplace where they're assembled into their appropriate form factors, and then you transport them finally to this little sliver over here called use, which is the runtime or the operational phase, and then at the end of that lifetime in that data center environment, you transport them again downstream into some sort of recycling process, which typically involves sorting and shredding and then smelting. And of course what we're looking at today is what are the outputs of that process? The outputs happen in the form of emissions and they happen in the form of waste, and this is what we've looked at in the new analysis that we're going to talk through here. So specifically, I've talked about this a bit in terms of the life cycle. This analysis focuses on compute equipment only. Again, this is a very big hairy thorny problem when you think about the fact that in order to do that life cycle modeling, life cycle analysis, I just walked through, you have to get real data and make assumptions about the material content of everything in that rack. So how much gold is on a PCB? How many capacitors? What is the nanometer technology that was used to make a specific IC? It's a very, very granular analysis. So we've focused on compute to make it manageable as a starting point. We've assumed OCP style racks, so very efficient cooling, no doors, that sort of thing, bare bones x86 servers as you see predominantly in cloud data centers. In this specific analysis, because we rolled this, rolled it out in Europe this week, last past week, we focused on an EU data center based in Sweden. We've assumed component manufacturer in China and then rack and server assembly in Eastern Europe. Our methodology was to basically do a comprehensive literature review of all of the academic and industry papers that are out there and data that is out there. And then we consulted actually well in excess of 10 experts across that inclusive life cycle, as well as specifically engaged with ThinkStep, which is sort of the leading consulting agency in this space, and they actually produced the Gabby software that contains the biggest breadth of data that underpins all of this. And then of course, because we've been decommissioning equipment out of these environments, and we handle it all, then we have a lot of our own IT renew data about exactly what the content of these racks is and so forth. Now importantly, this is a version of the Nado model. It is designed to compel, to bring real data and real science and real math to compel the ecosystem to continue to collaborate and work together. And I think it's the beginning, right? We have good confidence in the model, but it is very much a beginning meant to compel further conversation and analysis. So let's look at it. It turns out that if you look at a three-year life cycle of equipment, which is very common in large-scale or hyperscale data centers, this stuff really matters. Specifically, the pre-use phase, everything that goes into manufacturing IT equipment for data center racks takes, has a tremendous impact from a sustainability perspective to the tune of three quarters of the full picture. So what this tells us is that the thesis is reasonable and that if we assume that we are going to succeed on the operational stuff, we're going to continue to make improvements in the grid mix and so forth, then this is a really good spotlight on where we can go next. And the point about circular economy here is if we go back to thinking about multiple lifetimes and cascading of equipment, what we're really talking about is deferring the need for new manufacturing. What we're really saying is can we, can we take that rack and give it to somebody else who doesn't need to build a new one, right? And that in, when we do that, you have the potential to really impact this 76% pre-use phase. So that's the next step in the, in the model here. The model is, the next step in the model is if embodied energy, that pre-use phase, you know, time portion of the time span matters so much, then let's quantify a mini system that is circular that allows us to, to analyze a circular model as compared to the base case. And in this case, we've assumed the base case is that very large data center operators take things and they run them for three years and then they end up live them and throw them into some sort of a downstream decommissioning process and they do the same thing over. So every three years, there's a new server coming online. On the downstream side for much smaller enterprises or smaller scale data center operators, you typically run the, run the equipment for much longer. In this case, we have assumed nine years, which, which is, is very standard also out there in the industry. Now what we've done here, and you can see is we've, we've built out as a time sequence that lets us model how equipment, how the embodied energy works, but also how operational energy works over time as is tied to Moore's law performance. And the only point there is, as new equipment comes on, of course it consumes less energy because we're making continuous games and we don't want to, we need to be able to account for those, that penalty and that increased opportunity over time. What you get is a nine year snapshot that lets us compare circular model to a base case, more linear model. And this data is interesting as well. So if we could enable a second life here in the dark orange, you see that 76% embodied energy and you see the yellow is the effect, the 22% operational phase energy. When I moved to showing the circular model, not surprising, embodied energy decreases significantly. Again, because you've deferred the, the need to manufacture new equipment and you've cascaded equipment into secondary lifetimes. And of course, the operational phase energy does go up a little bit because we're keeping some equipment in circulation a little bit longer. Now, this is super important when you combine those, all of these numbers, what you get is a net CO2E savings, CO2 equivalent savings of 24%. And to put that in context of the gains that people have been making on the operational phase, it's equivalent to getting another 68 or nearly 70% of the base case operational use energy. So in other words, can we squeeze another 68% of PUE? Or should we also be looking at this? It seems like we should be doing both. Now, if you're running a data center, then you, you're going to ask the next question, which is, okay, that sounds great, but to do the right thing from a sustainability perspective, is it going to cost me more? And the answer is, it's not going to cost you more. The TCO of the exact same system is also better by about 24% when you make the same, make logical assumptions about Moore's law depreciation, cost of power, utilization, all of those things. The next question you're going to ask is, yeah, but can I really run this stuff this long? And the answer is you can. Not only do the technology treadmills easily last that long, this stuff is absolutely designed to have a much longer than a three year life cycle. But it turns out from a purely economic life analysis perspective, and you make the same similar assumptions and add facilities, costs, and capex to the puzzle, you absolutely can run this stuff for nine years as well. So last question is, but aren't I going to need more data centers? If I'm running older equipment, then is it going to cost me more? So this piece of the analysis says, if I take 50% of my workloads and use, and use recertified or circular equipment for those 50%, as opposed to doing everything new, then it turns out no. This makes assumptions about growth of the business over a 10 year time horizon. And you can see that starting at 40% pool in your data center, you get at the maximum case in the 10th year to 74% full. In other words, not yet ready to need a new data center. Now, obviously, people's constraints are different. Some people would start at 60% or more full. You can assume that Moore's law is going faster. You can assume that business growth is going faster. In some cases, you'll certainly need, for example, if you start more full, you'll definitely need a new data center before the end of 10 years, but you need it in the same year. Same thing as if your business is growing faster, you need a new data center, but the difference is not material, whether you're using circular, whether you're introducing circular equipment or not. So to do the right thing does not have any material financial impact. In fact, it has a very positive financial impact to the system. I should note that TCO is shared by both the hyperscale portions of the ecosystem or upstream and the downstream recipients of more circular equipment. And just to put it in context a little bit here at scale, these are a couple scenarios I'll go through quickly. Back to my 46 million servers that were going to be EOLed over the next four years. If we assume that 15 million of those are ODM equipment, what if we could take that 15 and make them circular? Well, the impact is that we would save 10 million tons of CO2 equivalents, which since I just presented this in Amsterdam last week, I used an Amsterdam specific analogy for that event, and there were about 800 people in that forum, and the equivalent 10 million tons of CO2E is the same as every person in that room going back and forth for a year from San Francisco to Amsterdam 27 times. It's an immense amount of CO2 equivalents for just doing a portion of the servers that are going to be EOLed. Now, what if we could do the whole thing? Now, obviously evolution over time, but what if we could get to a model where the whole industry is circular? Well, then you get to more like 31 million tons of CO2 equivalents, which is the same as taking nearly 7 million cars off the road for a year globally, very large scale. And on the waste side, also interesting. So in this case, you save nearly a million, you defer nearly a million tons of waste, and that, we talked about trucks before going from New York to Bangkok and back. Again, Amsterdam focused here because of the location of the event, but in this case, you can take trucks, which is nearly 500 trucks, and you can stack them from Amsterdam to Brussels and back and a little bit more. So again, really significant amount of both CO2 equivalent potential and waste potential in moving to and operationalizing a circular IT hardware industry. Now, it may seem daunting. How do we actually do this? What does it look like in action? And the fact is, everything that we're doing is open hardware, open software are essential kind of platforms, but it takes more than that. It takes more investment. It takes really truly saying, hey, we need to think about what it means to enable secondary lives that can be accessible, useful, usable by downstream clients in ways that hyperscale technology has traditionally not been, both for absence of budgets and resources. And that looks like hardware engineering. It looks like enabling an open source software stack that's actively a community effort. It looks like a global operations and logistics footprint that enables time to market as well as support in local markets and so forth and solutions in local markets. And it looks like a market making effort that enables a diversity of markets. Again, because you think about some things are data center form factors. Some things are not data center form factors. We need to do the engineering and also the market making to enable this circular model to take hold and to be successful. Last point I want to make here is it's really about also adopting a changed mindset across the ecosystem that this is not just about services and products and financial value, but it is a really a shared ethos that we want to drive forward together because it does benefit and require the participation of everybody. Now the good news is it's happening today. We rolled out a lot of technology at the event last week and the sesame product line is IT renews version of what recertified circular equipment looks like. It is truly a first of its kind recertified open compute and storage portfolio of solutions. No compromise. Performance optimized for all modern workloads, whether that's Kubernetes, AI, whether that's hyperconverged infrastructure, fully warrantied and supported. Again, this speaks to the ability to make open ODM style hardware that's only been really accessible by the hyperscale community, really useful and usable for the broader ecosystem of data center operators who don't have those extensive stables of thousands and thousands of engineers. Importantly, it's also new form factors. Not only can you get racks, but you can also repurpose this stuff into edge environments. There's a little image here shown of a developer system that helps people get on ramped into broader rack scale deployments, and the quality is as good as new. Again, just to hit on something I talked about before, it's really uniquely enabled by our relationships and our position in the industry of working with doing all the data center decommissioning for the hyperscale community and larger scale operators that gives us the ability to bring a solution, a line of solutions, market commerce can rely on at scale consistently and get the same thing for whatever their needs are as they continue to grow over time. Lastly, really disruptive economics is what catalyzes the opportunity for these downstream markets. I talked before about the TCO benefit to the system being 24% moving to circular, but the TCO to a downstream buyer on a purely equipment basis is actually far in excess of that because then you're not just comparing, hey, what's the opportunity of deferring new manufacturing, but instead you're actually comparing the opportunity to procure circular recertified equipment with the opportunity to procure traditional proprietary much more expensive kinds of equipment. There's an opportunity to bring really disruptive economics to unlock some of these currently blocked markets with really transformational TCO. Good news is it's happening. Lastly, just to close, I mentioned some of the financial opportunities at the beginning. This really is our shared opportunity and our imperative given the growth and the scale and the immense trajectory that we're on as a collective industry. We think again, there's a $50 billion opportunity for paper scalars to recover value. That is motivation for them to work with companies like IT Renew to help enable a circular industry and help enable the downstream markets. On the flip side, there's this $10 billion a year market that is currently estimated to be blocked by both budgets and access and that could benefit from and could be catalyzed by recertified or circular equipment. Again, shared interest in success and in connecting the dots. We have the Sesame product line that creates that connective tissue and enables us to actually implement this now. Then we have the TCO and the NetCO2e savings of coincidentally 24% each when moving to a more circular model. Finally, the last point I would make is half of the world is still not online. The UN has a sustainability goal, one of the 17, which is about universal access with the benefits of that obviously being both humane and personal as well as for global economic growth and so forth. Yet there is forecast about $100 billion gap in IT infrastructure funding that is holding us back potentially from achieving that goal of universal access. My hope and my thesis also is that if we can bring this recertified equipment, bring circular equipment into markets globally with very disruptive economics, with transformational TCO, if we could help unblock and free progress towards this 52% getting on the remaining 50% of people getting online, then that would be a great humanitarian sort of aspect to the story in addition to what hopefully you're beginning to see as really interesting financial and sustainability opportunities. With that, I thank you and hope this is of interest. Thank you so much, Ali. Thank you so much for sharing your insights today. We really appreciate it. Just as a reminder, we are now going to open it up for questions. Please type your questions in the chat box to the GoToWebinar organizer and we'll get to as many of them as we can today. If you do have additional questions, you can also email marketing at itrenew.com. Okay, let's take a look at some of the questions. Ali, we have one that has come in. The question to you is, what has been your response so far about participation in the circular global IT ecosystem? Yeah, great question. I'm very happy to say that the response has been unanimously positive. I think we have definitely seen very large-scale data center operators who are motivated by both the financial and sustainability implications of us helping them architect and affect a more circular model. We see them engaging with us much earlier on in their product life cycles from the point of design, which is really encouraging. We definitely are seeing a lot of industry interest. It's frankly driven by financial reasons. Also, in some places in the world, especially in Europe, driven by regulatory reasons, but also social and cultural reasons and CSR reasons. We have been seeing, as we've been sort of out in the market talking about this for the past six or nine months, we've been seeing a lot of interest with the reveal of the data in the past week. I've seen that jump up in the sense that it helps people to really put data and math behind taking action, which I think is a great thing. We have another question here, Allie. The next question is, how does an infrastructure buyer begin the process of becoming part of a circular data economy? I think it depends a little bit on kind of where you sit in the ecosystem. The first thing I would say, and obviously selfishly, is if you are an infrastructure provider, then you are running IT equipment and you should be asking yourself the question of whether to use circular equipment, recertified equipment, and proven equipment, but still proven and no compromise equipment, is the right thing and is viable for your workloads, for your environment, and so forth. And if you ask that question, I think the answer is yes, for at least some portion of those workloads, but I think that's really the start is to ask. Now, if you're also already running a bunch of infrastructure, then similarly you should be saying, hey, am I decommissioning things in the most thoughtful and strategic way? What timelines am I decommissioning things on? How does thinking about circular data centers and different kind of decommissioning strategies affect my opportunity to recover more value and feed the other downstream markets? So I think the right answer is just to start asking questions about kind of how do you fit in this, right? And anybody who's running infrastructure should be asking both those sides of the question. Okay. We do have another question, Allie, from the group. Let me pull this over. You did talk about Sesame and some of IT Renew's suite of products and services to help orchestrate and drive the innovation behind a circular data economy. Can you talk a little bit more about the technology available to support the transition to get to that circular data phase? Yeah. I think the most, the key piece is that if we think about in the world that we live in, all the hyperscale and large scale data center operators moved to first white box and then open kind of ODM equipment aggressively over the past several years. But they are uniquely able to use it and to deploy it and run it and so forth in a way to design it and to use it and run it in ways that the rest of the world is not able to do. So the technology that has to come to bear to kind of make that same equipment viable and interesting and useful and valuable to lots of other types of deployment environments is it's got to be packaged into solutions that matter. So it has to be tested with common kinds of environments. I mentioned Kubernetes, I mentioned hyperconverged AI and so forth. It has to come with the ability to be supported and warrantied because again those environments don't have the breadth and depth of resources and it has to be able to be supportable. So one of the things that's a really interesting innovation here is that you see things in the industry on the open source firmware front specifically Linux boot and open BMC which enabled this stuff to get out of kind of proprietary firmware and be supported, reflashed and secure kind of going forward. So those are innovations that obviously IT renew is participating in but they're also very actively ecosystem initiatives. So for example the open compute foundation rolled out an announcement this week that's driven by their open systems firmware group which requires that by 2021 to be open compute certified you have to provide your firmware in open source and that's a huge advantage because that helps us all be able to say it's truly no compromise. You don't have to give up support or so forth to be able to to use this stuff going forward. So it's really kind of a combined effort of hardware recertification, remanufacture, refreshing with open systems firmware initiatives that let us be able to bring you know kind of complete solutions to market that can be viable for people outside of the largest environment. Ali you also talked about reversing destructive trends that the industry is seeing at this time great information and groundbreaking data that you showed to support the evolution of a global circular IT system. So from your vantage point where do you see in the next 5, 10 even 15 years where the circular data economy will go and evolve into? I think you know I think it's gonna I think it's gonna take off candidly. I think the economics and the viability of solutions are going to be pretty hard to resist. I think that it is going to enable unlocking of lots of other markets but I think it's not going to be just about equipment. I think it's actually going to be we're going to see a lot of innovation on kind of business models and fully closed loops and reverse logistics and so forth that that enable us all to to orchestrate like a truly circular model with with as little leakage as possible in very significant ways and candidly we're seeing especially in Europe we're seeing regulation that is absolutely going to compel that in addition to the fact that I think just socially we're seeing a lot more conviction in trying to trying to make sure that as an industry we're not you know collectively kind of trashing the planet as we go because we're trying to do good things but that stuff just in the same way that renewables and the power usage of these data centers came to the forefront about a decade ago and everybody rallied to get behind things like PUE and everybody radically changed the way things the way things are done. We're totally thought things like cooling and locations of data centers and hydro and all this stuff so I think we're going to see kind of a wholesale evolution of the way that people you know think about the industry and optimization of hey sometimes I need super fast refresh rates of new equipment and sometimes I don't and I'm going to be have I'll have this this this very fluid and dynamic flow of equipment that is you know that has closed loops architected into its business model as well as the technology. Wonderful thank you so much for sharing out I really appreciate it taking time to answer our questions today we are out of time though at this point we want to thank you so much for everybody who attended and participating with your questions if we didn't get a chance to respond to your questions directly don't worry we will email responses to you so we will get back to you and follow up. If you'd like to reach out to Allie directly you can do so you can email her at allie.fen at itrenew.com her email address is on your screen. On behalf of Allie Fen and myself thank you so much for joining and have a great day. Thank you so much.


Hi, I'm Mark from the Systems Integration Facility. In this video, I'd like to show you how to use WMT, the Systems Web Modeling Tool. If you're unfamiliar with WMT, it's a web-based application that allows users to build and run coupled surface dynamics models on a supercomputer. WMT can be accessed at this URL, systems.colorado.edu.wmt. Note that we use HTTP secure to protect your login. Alright, let's take a look at WMT. WMT always starts here as a sign-in screen. To use WMT, you'll need to create a login using an email and a password of your choice. I'll sign in now. Note that WMT remembers your email address, and if this is your first time using WMT, you'll be asked to repeat your password. Once you've signed in, you'll see the main screen of WMT. The main screen is divided into two panels, the model panel and the parameters panel. The model panel is where a stand-alone or a coupled model can be created. The panel provides a set of buttons that can be used to open, save, and run models, as well as a tree structure, which can be used to design a model. Though initially blank, the parameters panel is where the parameters and model components displayed in the model panel can be viewed and edited. Let's use WMT to build a coupled model. I'll start by selecting the driver for the model in the model panel. This box is what we call the root of the model tree. From the available components, I'll select CEM, the coastline evolution model. CEM is now the driver for this model. Note that the parameters panel now contains information, the parameters for this model. We'll come back to them in a moment. If I select CEM, you can see that I can show parameters, which I'm already doing. I can also get information about this component model. I get an overview. If you'd like, you can also click the link to go to the Model Help page on the system's website. I could also delete the model. That's not bad. I can always add it back. Let's visit some of the parameters of CEM. I'll keep the run time, so that's 10 years. Let's make a smaller domain size. And output files every 100 days. There. Now you can see in the model tree that CEM exposes two usage ports. These ports can be filled by another model that provides these outputs. Let's choose first to fill the Waves port. There's currently only one model in WMT that fills this port. It's called Waves. If I select it, I can show its parameters. Now shown in the parameters panel. I could also get information on it or delete it. Next, let's fill the River port. Currently, Evulsion is the only component that satisfies this, so I'll select it. Note that Evulsion fills CEM's River port. But it also exposes two ports of its own. Discharge, and this is Elevation. So Evulsion provides the River port for CEM, which in turn provides the Elevation port for Evulsion. This represents a two-way model coupling. In WMT, this behavior is represented with an alias component. You can see a little symbol here. So the CEM component at the root of the tree and the CEM component that provides elevation for Evulsion are in fact the same instance. If you'd like to learn more about model coupling, please visit the system's website. So let's look at Evulsion's parameters and modify them to match those of CEM. I want to change the number of rows, the number of columns, grid point of the inflow, and rows and columns. This will be at the midpoint, and then again the output. Let's finish by filling the Discharge component for Evulsion. Here I could choose Hydrotrend or River. I'll choose the River service component. Again, if I wanted to get information on it, show its parameters. At this point, the design of the model is complete. Let's next label and save the model. Prior to saving a model, it's useful to label or tag the model with descriptive keywords. These keywords can be used to search for the model at a later time. The labeling system in WMT is designed to mimic the system used in Gmail. To add labels, select More, Manage Labels. Note that a label has been created with my username and there's also a label selected for the driver of the model. By way of example, I'll select the Test label, which is Public and therefore available to all users. I'll also create my own Private label and call it Tutorial. Last, I'll choose to make this model Public by selecting the Public label. This way, anyone who uses WMT can access this model. Now let's save the model by selecting the Save button. You can give the model a name. I'll choose to call this WMT Video Example. When I save it, note that the model is saved to the WMT database server, not to your local machine. This means that you can access save models from any web-accessible computer. For example, I've created this model here at my office. I could go home and open the same model from my home computer or from my iPad, for example. Now to show how labels work with saved models, I'll delete this driver component. Now I'll try to open the model I just created. You can see that there's already quite a few models that are saved in the WMT database. So let's filter the results that are returned by looking for a label, like maybe the Test label, for example. So you can see that by selecting that label, I've got a filtered set of results, which is much easier to see. In fact, note that labels are conjunctive. If I'd filtered on both tests and say tutorial, I would have got a very restricted list of models. So let's open that. You can see it's my model. Alright, so now let's run the model and get some results. Before I run this model, a few points. First, a model needs to be saved before it can be run. Second, you must be online in order to submit a job. However, you don't have to stay online and wait for the results. And third, you'll need sign-in credentials for the supercomputer on which you're running your simulation. If, for example, you don't have a sign-in for the system supercomputer, please see the system's website for information on obtaining a sign-in. Okay, to run this model, select the Run Model button. You'll be prompted for your sign-in to the system supercomputer beach. I'll sign in. Note that your sign-in for the supercomputer may be different from your sign-in from WMT. Okay, so I'll sign in. I'll hit Run. If your job is submitted successfully, you'll see a success dialogue like this. You can select the View Run Status button to see how your model run is doing. Alright, so this part of WMT is still under development. I'm going to need to refresh in order to see how it's doing. Okay, so recall it's going to run for 3,650 days. Alright, so I could keep hitting refresh to see what happens. But I think that's going to take a little bit of time. It takes about 10 minutes maybe for this particular model to run on beach. So what I'll do is take a look at the example that I created earlier. So you can see that you can download the results as a TAR-GZ bundle. And this will be available on your computer. So in summary, with WMT a user can select a component model from a list to run in standalone mode. You can also build a coupled model for multiple components organized as nodes of a tree structure. You can view and edit the parameters for these component models. You can save the models that you create to a server where they can be accessed on any computer connected to the web. You can share models that you created with others in the community. You can also run a model by connecting to a remote high-performance computing cluster where the system software stack is installed. Alright, thanks for watching. Don't forget the URL for WMT as well as the URLs for the WMT help and WMT tutorial. Alright, buh-bye.


Brandon, how are you? Good. Good morning. How are you, Dan? Not too bad.  What do you prefer? Pop's probably the easiest, but it's really up to you, man, whatever's easier. Thanks for volunteering to fuzzle the day. Glad to help. Yeah, I see that you have a video way ahead of the game, you've already set up everything in the meeting notes. Yeah, I got a lot of help, I think. Should have done more there, but... I just popped in the link to the meeting notes as well for people to sign up. Obviously some time for folks to jump in and all that fun stuff, right? Yep. And also get scribed if anyone wants to jump in with that as well. Thanks. Well, we can start the meeting. Matt Jarvis is here. The man, the myth. Good to see you, Matt. Thanks for that. Hi, everyone. Can you hear me? Yep. Oh, thank you. That's great. I love your background, by the way, John. Amazing background. Yeah. First time, Julie Nuis. Welcome. Thanks.  Brandon, you want to start in a couple more minutes? Give people like five minutes? Yeah, we can probably wait another one or two more minutes then. Okay. No worries. Any volunteers for scribes? Should I wait until more people join? That's fine. I think it would just fill up whenever. We realized after a while. So just, just like kind of just taking a couple of notes here and there is good enough since we have. We are actually able to pull off the recordings. And I think there was an issue where we were discussing how to kind of make that available as well. It's a very manual process right now. Kind of like how it's done with the YouTube videos is that we don't have anyone to do it. Yeah. I'm just, I was thinking in the context of meeting notes, right? Like, is somebody taking, anyway, no, no worries. All right, it looks, looks like we have critical mass. Hello, everyone. I'm Dan Papandre. I'll be the facilitator for the six security meeting for December nine today. Just a reminder, the meeting is being recorded and posted to YouTube shortly after your participant patient in these meetings is an agreement to abide by the six security code of conduct, which will be found in the repo. Now that I got the housekeeping out of the way, let's start the magic. So in terms of our proposed agenda today. First on the docket here is to discuss replacement of exclusionary language in favor of inclusive language. Very important topic. And the six security repo looks like Andres Vega. You're the point of contact for us. If you would like to kind of discuss with the group. Thanks. I think, I think before, actually, sorry. Before we jump to that, I think that's kind of the question. I think there were mentioned a couple of new folks. So we can do. Oh, I apologize. I wasn't on the agenda. No worries. Go ahead. Yep. So let's do a round of who's new to the meeting and just want to welcome you to six security. We were right into business all. Yeah, very efficient. John consults you for contact with the accurate sub in the container scene for a while, getting more active in CNCS. Awesome. Welcome John. I'm John here at Johnny from Toronto, Canada. I'm actually the manager for most secure computing. So we're basically a security consulting firm and currently with some focus as a cloud. Applications. Mostly on the Kubernetes. Thanks. Awesome. Anybody else. Cornering the market on John's new members and John's today, which is good. Awesome. Yeah. If John's you can, you can add kind of. I'm not sure if the link is still there. I'll paste it again in the meeting notes. If you add the name and kind of where you're from. It also gives a good way for people in the meeting to kind of sync up if they have something interesting to talk about with you or a couple of interests. Sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, no worries. No worries. I literally just reading from the script. Over to you again, we can discuss the, the first topic on the agenda as we saw there. So Andreas, if you, if you'd like to comment on it, I'd love to hear about it. So we did. So with the group. Yeah. As I dialed it into the zoom today, you were saying, wait for people to join in all that fun stuff. And I was like, wait, since when did this call became fun? I'm not sure. I did fun once in my life. It was terrible. It was not for me. I decided never again. But, well, now that we have pop here, things might change. I'll reconsider that. So that is true. The title is self-explanatory. I think this is actually large of the broader concerted, like initiative from CNCF. Just, we don't need to like, take it up all under like the big umbrella, but like individual projects can like self-start and start making changes there. Obviously. There, there is so long low hanging fruit. There's things that are maybe sprinkled on, on text all across the repo that we can start to take up on. Obviously moving from master to main is, is more of a change. Well, I think Brandon, you'd looked into some of the deaf tooling built around whether like, what be the level of impact that making this move might change. So we might, might want to evaluate that. I've had a busy day in the last, well, busy two days since opening the, the issue. So I haven't quite caught up on the latest conversation. I saw a quick mention of lending. So, yeah. Yeah, I think there's, I think there's a new PR that's open. Let me find that it is. Example of PR fall 72. John Hill Hill, Hill Gus has opened it. It looks pretty good. And I think kind of that may be kind of good place, but it as well. Let me link that in the pull request. So yeah, I think that could be a good way to kind of just scan the, scan the repo, just make sure that those, those words are highlighted and then we can, you know, reflect them every time there's a new PR and things like that. Right. Yeah. Then the other part of it is just like consciousness and stuff, awareness of like what language we use during this discussions. So just call it to action, keep it in mind. I think we understand the importance of fostering an inclusive environment. Just in the interest of the broader community. And having like plural thought. And this discussion is making sure that everyone feels safe and encouraged to be part of the group. So that's that. I don't know. We need to talk a lot about it. Maybe have thoughts. Either. So, so there's one thought I have in that the, if you all haven't seen the cube contact by select Oregon in terms of inclusive naming, maybe that is a good kind of start to understand like what, you know, what that's there. So I'll put this in chat. I thought it was very well done. And she, I think was on, I believe the group with, I think Stephen Augustus and some folks from IBM and red hat that kind of put together that kind of naming. So it might be, I just put, I'll put that in chat right now. So if you all want to take a look at that, just to kind of understand the grounding, obviously, and why it's a very important topic. I saw you raise up your hand. Did you want to say something? I just had a question. All on board full speed ahead to chew. But do we want to like formally recognize the inclusive naming.org is kind of the standard bear. Is there, I'm thinking about, you know, putting something in the repo so that people moving forward who are new. Discover it rather than trip over it. Sure. Great idea. Rock and roll. I was just just reading the PR. So it looks like if I'm understanding the PR, right, that there is some low hanging fruit in the docs that need, could be addressed fairly easily, right? Is that am I understanding that right? That there are things that need addressing that are already in the repo. Are you talking about the issue I filed or? Yeah, in the issue. Yeah. Yes, there are instances. I came across particularly assessments as the area been involved the most where self assessments describe the architecture and properties of a project. There's mentions of white list, black list, et cetera, et cetera. So there's assessments and checked in at the assessment sub directory once completed. So yeah, those were some of the instances. So I think address. I think you created this as a proposal. So you'll be willing to kind of. Head up this, this effort. I think we can, we can make this a kind of official project and track it on the project file as well. Okay. Chase had a muted. I think you want to say something else. And I love working, working with Chase every chance I get. So. I was going to ask, and it's totally cool either way, but for rolling things, right? Like the repo and content makes sense for a point in time artifact like an assessment. If we do replace our language swapping. I have a small wonder if maybe it doesn't change semantics of certain language. It's possible that that's totally. Not a real concern before kind of historic artifacts. I'm not totally sure if the right thing to do is to go back and change them to place. Or if that's the best thing is to move forward with that language kind of negotiated in real time with, with the other entities. That was my only thought. That's fair. I see, I see that as a valid argument. We should evaluate that and just balance. I could see either way. I just wanted to mention it. I'm not sure if that's a good consideration. So I'm going to interrupt and get on a hobby horse. If we can tolerate a slight sidebar. Here's the, I'll keep it to a minute. You know how we normally think of metadata sitting here and data is over here. And that there's huge amounts of data and it's moving in streams. There is a rethinking of this, that the metadata is the bigger part and that that goes with the data. And then there's a reclassification of things like gender and other designations that at a later point in time become either problematic or just rearchitected as in the case of gender. So the metadata frameworks need to go with the data. That's kind of the messaging. And we're trying, we're wrestling with this as an enterprise wide data protection scheme. And so I thought I'd bring that up here as it really, it can change the way we think about things like access permissions and the tagging that goes with that. So, yeah, no worries. I was just, everyone okay with this for us to move on to the next topic. No other thoughts on this. All right. Next up, the venerable Brandon Lum talking about discussing the security security landscape. Again, I read from scripts everyone. I'm a trained monkey. That's what I do. Thanks Bob. So we were chatting about this security landscape. Somewhere earlier in the year. The idea was kind of looking at the original security landscape where, you know, there's a bunch of categories. Actually, let me, let me just share my screen. I think it may be easier to show that example of it. Screen. This one. Cool. So if we go, this was kind of, this is kind of like the first landscape that we did. Right. So we had these things for categories. And then if you go into categories, we just basically say this is identity access control, privacy, provision name, blah, blah, blah. Unfortunately, we created this and we realized there were two kind of big issues. One of it was, it wasn't very useful. It's just like defining key of things here and there.  How does it really fit into the ecosystem and things like that? Right. These concepts, like alone, are useful to be defined, but they're not really useful in terms of talking about it in the ecosystem. The other thing that we had here was, you know, there was a lot of back and forth on what exactly these things meant. And so the idea was that we would kind of create a security landscape version two, which really provided a view of the security landscape through different processes or like different components of the ecosystem. So we had this issue, security landscape iteration two, that we kind of started out a little bit and the idea was like we wanted to be able to say, okay, here's like a couple of processes that, a couple of, you know, larger topics that you'll be involved with in looking at the security ecosystem of your organization or your deployments. And for example, one that we started looking at was, okay, building a cognitive application. Here are the steps that you kind of need to do. And then for each individual one, like if you hover over it, they'll talk about the trends. You talk about the prevention and mitigation. And also if you click more details, you know, there may be some information about what projects you can use or what are the relevant projects which touch this. And the idea here is that, you know, we would have these multiple processes and we could also show like how these topics will link to each other. For example, if you're building a cognitive application, part of it is like signing the content to ensure the integrity. But at the same time, you know, when you're setting up the infrastructure, you need to ensure that you are able to verify that, that signature as well. So the idea was to kind of give a high-level overview on how these things interact with each other and also provide a point of specific projects. Now around like I think it was me or something, we also started again on the white paper effort and we found that there was kind of like an overlap between these two things where both of them were kind of trying to define like high-level topics and break down cognitive security. So what we said then was that maybe let's use the cloud native security white paper to kind of form what are the big topics around that we should look at. And then the landscape is going to be scoped down really to how do we map the concepts of the cloud native security white paper to actual projects and products. So you see it almost as like a quick start. Like what I mean by quick start is, you know, like the white paper should be in my humble opinion, should be like this pretty exhaustive, you know, data of like all of these pieces. And then somebody who's new to any project in general in terms of security should be able to look at this and quickly discern, okay, here's what I need to do for, you know, whatever it might be in the landscape, right? Is that kind of a thought process as to why, you know? Yeah, exactly. And kind of the way we were seeing the cloud native security white paper and for those that were involved with the process you saw that were things like we took off all the projects and examples and said that, okay, this will link to the landscape. So the idea is that the white paper will be updated and every single section would be clickable where it could link you to the appropriate part of the landscape. So if you're going through and said, okay, work with integrity and you click on what are the things in the landscape, it'll bring you to the landscape with a certain filter that shows you visually what are the projects that you have to look at and what are the kind of other components that it's linked to as well. Brandon, one observation is appropriate. Or another way for feedback at the end. Cool. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Last. So. People have different entry points regardless. They're, they're newer or otherwise. And when you look at it at a landscape is dislike. Vast land of things.  You talk about dependencies and relationships of this different projects. And it's like, you know, you might intersect or it's like you're coming in because you've been working on an OPA and just realize there's all these other products that you could potentially integrate or interoperate with. Like what are the things that OPA works with that you might want to look next or FACO or spiffy, whatever your entry point is, or if you're new or relatively new, you must have some background and systems. So based on what your vantage point, what are the immediate things of relevance instead of looking at like, oh, well, these are the 50 or 60 or 70 security projects. Yeah. Exactly. So, um, I think the idea is to have initially what's a graph. Um, I think it'll be ideal if we could kind of have that same representation. So you would look at, for example, if you click something in the white paper, you would look at dependency management, right? So you look at this and then you could, um, let's say it involves some projects, um, for dependency management and those projects also appear in other parts of the ecosystem, right? So then it would be relevant to look at, start looking at those parts of the ecosystem to kind of see. Um, so for example, dependency verification, maybe link to supply chain. So then, you know, someone could kind of start looking at supply chain, like how do these things relate to each other? Um, or, you know, they could also take that approach that you said, but they, you know, just zoom out a little bit, see what are the adjacent connected, connected topics and then look at those as well. Is anyone familiar with, um, what Cheryl Hums doing in terms of the tech radar? So she's basically like taking the landscape projects out there and saying, okay, CICD for instance, right? And it was like, what is the, what the, what, what the, um, the community or the folks using it and users were saying where, where the projects would be ideal. Also is to include a link to that in this document as well. So then, well, because eventually she's, I believe they're doing a security specific one of this. And that would be ideal because then it's the actual projects that are, let our, you know, the folks are actually using out there, like, you know, the opas or the world of Falcos and all the others. Right. Yeah, that's interesting. I think I have already seen that on the radar yet. So let me, I may go pink Cheryl, see what's what's up over there. Yep. Yeah. I know when I talked to her, like that was on the docket, but I think they went to, they went for it with CICD. They didn't observability. And I think security was one that like, again, everybody on this call would have some amazing feedback to, you know, all right. So could be helpful for Cheryl as well. Yeah, for sure. Thanks for bringing that up. One thing I've heard from end users and like perspective end users is they've used the CNCF trail map as the blueprint for implementation projects. So they get that list and yes, we're going to bring Kubernetes and this other like peripheral things to it. And maybe that takes nine months to a year. And at that point is like, okay, what should we look next? And then this, they discovered this radar. So they discover something else. And at that point in time, like all this afterthoughts become like another like lengthy planning and deployment effort as opposed to like bringing earlier and like to their teams and in their projects to say, Hey, we have a greenfield deployment. We need to plan all the security things ahead.  Yeah, I think one of the potential things that we're looking at also is kind of recommendations to the CNCF of what are some other projects that we think would be good to be part of the CNCF as well as also recommendations on, you know, if we took the security white paper and then we looked at the different projects and we saw a couple categories that didn't have any open source projects, for example, then we would recommend the CNCF that, you know, we should, they should kind of say that we need more of these projects or there needs to be more open source projects into this. Right. And once you have those in like water the knobs, you should turn on. Yeah, great. Having having a specific shelf where like just like running there, but actually not like set up. It's not great for actually consume. Exactly. So there's like a default set of whatever like that's recommended, like that would be ideal. I mean, but obviously I think the first thing is to create that foundational like the house, right? Like, because, you know, people, if you, if you get two in the weeds, then people just look at the document like what, you know, like, that's, that's my take on it. Yeah, it has to be a progression, right? It's like, yeah, you couch to secure and like people talk about secure by default is this panacea and like, if you make it super restrictive, well, for one of you, if you publish this, this thing with all this recommended practices, people are going to be like, what? Like where do I even start? But if then if we ship like this controls and restrictive mode without explaining the why, people are just going to like bypass them as opposed to like, hey, you're doing this stuff. That's not ideal. Actually consider running it like the restrictive way or the secure way. Right. Like phase one audit detection phase two, you know, actual controls and, you know, post-mortem instead of response. No, it's, it's completely totally understand that that's awesome. Hey, Brandon, one question comparing the white paper with the landscape you shared and comparing that with CNCF landscape. I wonder if we may end up creating some sort of a mapping because I see like different categories in CNCF landscape. And if we compare it with white paper, we have those four workflow phases, right? Develop, distribute, deploy, auto and runtime. So I wonder whether that would create a confusion or should we kind of baseline to one or the other? Because otherwise if we have to map CNCF project to one of those four phases and then map it back to a category, it might create a lot of confusion. Yeah, I think that's definitely a thing we have to look at. But I think we're going to see this as kind of like independent of the cognitive security landscape. Sorry, the cognitive landscape, the overall one. I think they kind of serve different purposes. Okay. Yeah, I think we are kind of looking at it more in terms of we want to be able to provide some practical usage. Whereas I think the cloud native security, the cloud native. CNCF landscape is about providing and high level overview and kind of provide and like, I almost want to say like a skull cut for. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. As you can figure, as you just realized, right? I think the name being the same, the landscape. That's a good point. That's a good point. Because if those are different, then maybe it's something else should be called something. So that people who are coming out without any context might not confuse these two things which maybe are unrelated. That's a really good point. Yeah. Maybe we should come up with a new name. As we were talking about with assessments because. Yeah. By definition, those are the assessments. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. That's a good point. I think, I think we can. So, so we have kind of issue open. It's in the agenda. I'll let me paste it in the chat as well. If you're interested in kind of. Talking about this, you know, being involved with this, just comment on the issue. We have kind of, I think mainly we're looking at, you know, how are we going to present this information, the content of what the information is going to be. We can get help from the CNCF design team to kind of help do up some mockups and things like that. Yeah. So if you're interested, if you have a couple of comments on this, I think. We are looking to kind of start focusing up on this again. Once the. In January. So after the holiday season. All right. Brandon, are you all set? Yep. All right. I'm going to give the floor to our, to the, to everyone here. Anybody have any open things for discussion. If you're reading on, on that issue, the process orientation looks really good. Like what's the context of what you're doing depending on that. These are the things you want to look at. When the previous person talked about mappings, it came, it came to mind, well, how about we think about outcomes? If you're after confidentiality, these are the things that you should be engineering together. If you're looking at MTLS together, these are like three projects you can piece together to accomplish that sort of thing. So yeah, sort of to jump back into the previous topic, but just follow up. Make it hard for a facilitator to keep control of this meeting, Andreas. I'm telling you, man. You know, keep me on my toes. Definitely.  I'll put you on the hot seat, my man. Have fun. All righty. Again, everybody okay at this point, anybody have any other thoughts before we, I guess, finish the meeting? Hey, Pop, one question. I was wondering what everyone is thinking. So many of us worked on the CNC security white paper. I think it's been now two, three weeks since it was published. So what I was wondering is, is there a way we could come up with to sort of do a retrospective with, while getting feedback from the community in terms of what they probably would have liked in the paper, what could have been better. And that will kind of give us ideas into the next version when, whenever we publish that. Can you create an issue on this and then tag, tag myself and Emily. I think that this is something like the chess can go up to CNCF and get them to get us feedback for. Okay. Okay. Sure. I do that. Thanks. And with that, we bring our six security meeting for a close everyone. Thank you all for joining. Awesome. I did it. I did it. Yay. Thanks so much. You say folks. Great job. Thanks everyone. Bye.