Live from New Orleans, it's theCUBE. Covering VeeamON 2017, brought to you by Veeam. We're back, Mario Angers is here. He's the senior manager of systems at the University of British Columbia. Welcome back to theCUBE, good to see you. Thank you, thank you. So how's VeeamON going? So far, so good. Yeah, it's fabulous actually. I love the event because it's not so big that you can't talk to a lot of people and it's small enough that you get to know a lot of different folks. It feels bigger, they're saying the number is 3,000. It feels bigger than that to me, but at the same time it is kind of intimate. Yeah, no, I went to their first event, so certainly this is very different than what it was like. I think their first event was 2014. So yeah, it's very good. So tell us what's going on up at British Columbia. What's hot these days for you? Well, I spoke to this a little bit yesterday during the partner session. So British Columbia is in a bit of a unique position because we have laws that prevent us from storing data outside Canada. So up until recently, we didn't have any of the large service providers. So we had to basically, to some degree reinvent the wheel. So if we wanted to provide or consume cloud, we had to basically build it, which is what the University of British Columbia did a few years ago. And because we're the largest in BC, we were doing it at scale already. So we were approached by an organization inside British Columbia called BCNet, which basically services all the other higher ed, and they asked us if we wanted to provide cloud services to the community. And we've been doing this for almost three years now. As a partner to BCNIT. Yeah, to BCNIT, yeah. So we're basically the service operator. They're the service provider, right? We do everything. They take care of the marketing, the communication. And Mark, could you walk us through what's that stack look like? I actually, I did an interview with the OpenStack Summit with a Massachusetts higher ed cloud that they built that used OpenStack as kind of the underlying piece. Yeah, so we went with, we're a VMware shop. So we went with the cloud director, right? As the front end, basically. But the back end is a combination of Cisco servers, HP servers, NetApp storage, HP storage, data domain for our backup. Of course we use Veeam for our backup software. And then it's basically VMware stack, right? End to end. Okay, great. It was funny. The gentleman that I interviewed actually was the one that created VCD when he was at VMware. So, yeah, I'm just curious, your viewpoint. One of the things we used to say is cloud is not virtualization plus, but if you build a stack, if you can have kind of the orchestration and management pieces. So you feel you have a cloud, what differentiates what you have today versus what you could have built five years ago? Well, I think five years ago it would have been really challenging to provide the services in a self-service capability to our end users, right? So today we can do that, right? We basically, the only involvement we have is we provision a virtual data center for our end user and then it's self-service from there for them, right? We also use NSX, which is also a VMware product, right? So it's self-service end to end. All right, and how has your availability become better with what you have today versus what you had before? Well, I mean, using Veeam, you know, Veeam is a significant partner of ours, right? So we've been a Veeam customer for probably five or six years now on the backup and restore side probably about four years. And I would say it's made our jobs a lot easier, right? So historically our legacy backup system was just to bear and a monster to manage, right? So it required a huge amount of time to not just manage but understand how it was done. You know, with Veeam, they've really simplified that process, right? So, you know, and we have a very large environment and we basically have one guy managing backup, right? So it used to be, okay, well, that's pretty good productivity. So it used to be the conversation around, well, we're meeting our backup within the window. You know, that was sort of the challenge. And now increasingly it's, we want to get as close as, you know, RPO zero as possible for certain apps. You know, not everything is too expensive. And we want a much faster recovery time objective. So can you talk to us, first of all, do you converse in those terms with your line of business and have you been able to affect those metrics? So we're not quite there yet, right? So from a sophistication or a maturity perspective, right? So we still have a bit of a ways to go, right? To get there. You know, however can we now guarantee to our folks that we'll be able to bring workloads back in a, you know, within the service level that we have with our customers? Absolutely, right? So it's, we can provide peace of mind now knowing that if we lose something, you know, we can bring it back very quickly, you know, as it's actually being restored to the production environment. So where do you want to go from it?  You got one person managing all this and you're able to meet those SLAs. What's next? So I would say next for us is, so today we provide what I'll call a managed service around backup, right? So basically the team that I manage is looking after backup for, you know, for all the clients within the service. So our next step is really to provide them the ability to manage that themselves, right? So we're looking to do that over the summer. You know, once we do that, then we want to start partnering with Veeam as well and start looking at their CloudConnect product, right? We've been in discussions for some time now about how we're going to do that. And that's the evolution of that. So, and then building on that, and also we're being also asked to add to the portfolio of services that we provide. And one of those services is disaster recovery as a service. So that's becoming very, very critical to the province. Vancouver is basically like San Francisco or Los Angeles. We live in one of the, you know, biggest fault zone in the world, right? So at some point it will happen, right? So now we've basically provisioned a data center in the middle of the province where it's outside your quake zone. You know, so now we can start providing those services to our community. Mark, could you speak to the relationship of Veeam with the storage arrays that you have? What's the interaction there? So when we went to Veeam, it was really important that the integration, the full integration is there with the storage vendors that we had. So originally we were, you know, primarily in that app shop, right? So when that integration was in place. So when we started looking at moving off of tape and moving on to disk for backup, right? So we basically narrowed the list down to vendors that also fully integrated with Veeam, right? So we chose Data Domain, right? An EMC product, we've been very happy. And just recently we went to RFP and we basically selected a new vendor for virtualization storage. And the same rules apply, right? Full integration needs to be in place. We need to be able to know that we're going to be able to read the data off of the storage arrays and then move it to the backup, right? So and without that integration, there's no guarantees that we can do that successfully. So Data Domain customer, happy with that is the backup appliance. Yeah. Fast, great data reduction. Didn't the EMC get you in a headlock and like say, you've got to buy a networker and Avamar and really push hard? Oh, they tried, of course. Okay, and so what's wrong to your decision to go with Veeam? The complexity of those solutions, right? So, you know, we're not going to reinvent how we're structured, how we're architected just to put a backup solution in place, right? It's just, and that was really, and if you look at some, a lot of the other big vendors in the marketplace today, that's basically the expectation. Is okay, well, you're built out like this, now you're going to have to do this in order to consume our solution. That just wasn't an option for us. And that, so some people would say, well, I get one throat to choke and that simplifies things. You don't buy that. No, not at all. I think it keeps vendors honest if you have more than one, right? So it gives you some leverage to be able to negotiate, right? You know, and to be quite honest with you, I've yet to find another vendor that provides the level of quality and support that Veeam does, right? So, you know, and they're growing as a company and I expect that things will change to some degree, right? Because that's part of growing. However, so far, the experience that we've had is the same we had four years ago when they were a relatively small company. Can you give an example, like what resonates with you as a customer in terms of that service experience? So I think as a bunch of IT guys, right? We think we know everything, right? So when we originally acquired Veeam, we thought, yeah, yeah, yeah, we get what you're telling us but we know better than you do. So we went ahead and implemented based on what we felt was right. It wasn't right, right? So they didn't come over and say, told you so or, you know, we're not going to help you now because you decided to go this way. No, they provided us with all the support we needed in order to actually change what we had done and there was never any finger pointing or any, right? It was basically, you're a partner, we're going to help you be successful, right? And that's very rare, I think, in the industry today. Yeah, really respecting sort of the fact that you wanted to do it a certain way and we had to learn. Yeah, they did try to talk us out of it but we decided to move in that direction anyway, right? But to me it's like, yeah, it's a fantastic relationship. Anything that you've seen here today or this week, the announcements that was really interesting and exciting to you? I think, yeah, I think a lot of the things that are coming in version 10 are going to allow us to expand on the things that we provide to our customers, right? For example, all the stuff they talk about around availability, right? The primarily disaster recovery stuff, right? Which is such a big thing for us, right? So I think to us this is going to add significant value. Mario, anything, either Veeam or your other vendor ecosystem that you're looking for that would make your life easier? You seem to have a pretty opinionated view of what you need. So to me is, you know, so we're in the business of solving problem, right? So as a vendor, you're not going to help me solve my problem unless you understand what my problem is. You know, so in my experience, I'm not going to say with all vendor but with a lot of vendors in the past couple of years is basically, you know, the caliber of the sales people I feel have changed, right? So it used to be that the sales folks used to be pretty knowledgeable about what they sold. Now it feels like all they're trying to do is make their quarter, right? And it's becoming, as a customer, it is becoming frustrating, right? Because I don't want to be sold to. I want someone that's going to help me solve problems, right, and deliver solutions to my customers, right? So you're, let's get a lot of different storage infrastructure, but NetApp is a primary supplier of yours. It's still very big in our environment. You just had NetApp on with Veeam and they were talking about their relationship. As a customer, how do you find the relationship between Veeam and NetApp? Is there tangible value that you see in that working relationship? How do you interact with those two companies? Oh, of course there's tangible value, right? So we're an enterprise customer, right? So, and as we scaled within our environment, we came into a bottleneck between Veeam and NetApp, right, and you know, all we had to do was basically expose it to both companies and they worked together to resolve the issue, right? And you know, I believe it was version nine, they finally released a fix for it, but you know, that's been the experiences. You know, the work that happens behind the scenes, you know, we're not exposed to that, but it always creates a positive experience for us in the end. We had Dave Russell on earlier from Gartner and he was talking about pricing and licensing and specifically socket-based pricing and he said that that had a big impact in the marketplace from a customer standpoint. What can you share with us about, you know, licensing, pricing, strategies that you employ and maybe advice for other customers? So I think a lot of vendors are starting to try to simplify their licensing, right? Because if you look, you know, I'm not going to pick on anyone specific, but they had, you know, okay, well we're going to sell you a number of VMs and then the storage on top of that and you know, and it's like, okay, that doesn't make sense, right? I don't want a PhD in math to be able to calculate how much I'm going to spend for licensing, right? So give me a model that is easy to manage and I'm going to know exactly what my cost is and have, you know, a very predictable cost going forward, right? So, and I understand Veeam has, you know, has a couple of different models, but they're still very simple, right? So you either subscription or your socket, right? So to me, it's just keep it simple. What's your preference? Right now it's socket. However, I'm not opposed to looking at something different. If it makes sense for my clients, I'm perfectly fine with it. Does that have enough, when you go subscription, does that have an effect? I mean, does your CFO like that? Because it's switching to a radical model or? Or just basically turning capital into operational, right? So, you know, and as long as my base cost doesn't change, right? So I think it's perfectly fine. So from a capital budget standpoint, it's got to be neutral and you go from there. Excellent. All right, Mario, thanks for coming on theCUBE. Great, great insights, as always. Appreciate it. Yeah, thank you for having me. You're very welcome. All right, keep it right there, but we'll be back with our next guest. This is theCUBE, Stu Miniman, Dave Vellante. We'll be right back.


Well, you're back with Zoe Alexandra from People's Dispatch. I'm Vijay Prashad. We are doing our fourth live on the Israeli war on Gaza. Today is the 31st of October. This war has been going on now for three weeks. You know, Zoe, it's always hard to talk about this as a war because it's so asymmetrical. And yet, of course, we don't have vocabulary to talk about it in any other way. People are saying genocide, people are saying other things. It's not entirely a one-way street because the Palestinian factions have been resisting. I'm going to come back to that in a second. UNICEF released a very important statement, said that Gaza is becoming a living hell. That's UNICEF's language, saying that Gaza is becoming a graveyard for thousands of children. Very hard to keep up with the numbers that are coming of the dead. The Ministry of Health says 8,525 Palestinians killed. That's a lot of people killed in three weeks of them. And this is the part where UNICEF sprays a graveyard for thousands of children. It makes sense 3,542 children dead. What hasn't been talked about is that they're over 21,000 injured. There are 2,000 people missing, of them 1,100 children. A lot of children impacted because Gaza is a very young place. If you traveled to Gaza, you would have seen in Khan Yunus, in Beit Jalon, in Gaza City, in Rafa City. Lots of kids everywhere. And it's kids who are bearing the brunt of this. Just hours ago in Jabalia refugee camp and Al-Shayt refugee camp, both of them in Gaza's north. Vicious airstrikes, tank fire and so on. Between 100 and 400 people killed. Indonesian hospital reports 50 dead bodies brought in from Jabalia. Now, the Israelis are saying, we told you to leave. Of course, the access roads to the south had been bombed. Very difficult for people to up and leave. They worry, they are scared. Many of them have taken refuge in the anti rooms of hospitals and so on. They simply don't know where they can go. So the strike on Jabalia, vicious strike up to 400 dead so far. We don't know what the breakdown is likely. And here, Zoe, if the ratios stand, likely 200 of them children, likely, perhaps more, hard to say. Israeli tanks now have entered the north of Gaza Strip. They are in the Karama area, north of Gaza City. Tanks have also come in the central region. They have been seen at Saladin Street, which is the access, the road that divides north and south Gaza. What it looks like is that the Israeli tanks have entered the north and the south to encircle the northern part of Gaza. Netanyahu himself said in the last 24 hours, Israel has struck what he called 300 targets. Several of them residential homes in Jabalia camp. Pretty ghastly situation. UN agencies report that Gaza is now at 5% of water. If you think the only way children are going to die in Gaza from the bombing, from the aerial bombardment and tanks, you have another thing coming. They're going to start dying of dehydration, of malnutrition and so on. UN agencies report some of their storehouses for food have been ransacked by hungry people. Look, I've traveled in Gaza. I know that this is not a place of danger. You can walk around anywhere. This is not a place where you fear theft. There's an extraordinary low theft rate. On the other hand, desperate people breaking into UN storehouses to eat a graveyard for thousands of children living hell. You're in Washington DC now in anticipation of the November 4th protest. We're going to talk about that later, Zoe. But of course, the United States government providing a kind of defensive shield, an iron dome of its own around the Israeli government, not allowing a ceasefire, even talk of a ceasefire. It's not only the US, we should say, in Britain, for instance, another major power, both Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister and Kier Stammer, leader of the Labour Party, against the idea of a ceasefire. Something so important as a ceasefire off the table for these people. What's happening in Washington? Why is everybody seemingly against a ceasefire in the US political class? Well, we spoke about this on the last show. There's this insane kind of cognitive dissidents where you have a complete refusal of politicians in Washington to actually make a call for a ceasefire. There's a group of about 18 members of Congress led by Cory Bush, who is a representative from the St. Louis area, calling for a ceasefire resolution. Again, this has received almost no support in the House of Representatives. And in the Senate, even members of the Senate who have had maybe more respectable positions, maybe more left positions in the past, spoken out about the bombings in prior moments, have essentially refused.  Again, this is not a ceasefire. This is having a pause so that humanitarian aid, which is currently blocked, can be let in. So that on one hand, and it's this resolution, which is led by, again, Cory Bush, Rashida Tlaib, Andre Carson, Dele Ramirez. It's interesting because Cory Bush actually comes out of the protest movement in Ferguson, Missouri. And if people remember that this was a huge uprising following the murder of Mike Brown by Ferguson police. And it was a moment where activists in the United States were rising up and were facing a lot of police repression. And I think a lot of people remember that there was this kind of beautiful solidarity where Palestinian activists were seeing this repression of black activists, of BLM activists on the streets in Ferguson and giving them tips on how to deal with tear gas. And so it's no surprise, I think, that someone like Cory Bush in this moment would really push for this. And what's sad is that more progressive legislators are not joining her. And that they continue, I mean, a really, really atrocious clip of Hillary Clinton saying that, how could we call for a ceasefire? If a ceasefire means capitulating to Hamas and it means essentially kneeling to Hamas. And this is just ridiculous, completely unfounded. And we see that the call for the ceasefire has majority support. Not only of people across the globe in Africa and in West Asia, but also people in the United States. Again, as we spoke about last episode on Saturday, hundreds of Jews were occupying the Grand Central train station calling for a ceasefire. People have been on the streets every day saying this is an essential demand. We cannot let this genocidal violence against people in Gaza continue. Yet US politicians say that this is a complete out of the question. And it's also such a historical reading of what's happening. They're saying that there can be no ceasefire until the hostages are released. And it's a complete, of course, intentional misreading of the situation because from the start, Hamas has said we will release the hostages when the 10,000 now Palestinian prisoners are released. And even the families of the hostages have demanded that the Israeli government actually have some sense and actually think about the well-being and the lives of their family members who are being held hostage. And they say, this is the only sensible solution. We're not talking about a situation. Again, as the Secretary General of the United Nations says, we're not talking about a situation in a vacuum. We're talking about a conflict that has very, very clear roots and that there's very clear demands on the table and this position of the US and Israel to just completely ignore that and say we have to continue an essential annihilation of a population is truly criminal. And I think what you're saying is exactly right, that the support that the US has provided to Israel, not only in the billions of dollars of military aid, but also this shield against any sort of united political action, whether it be in the UN Security Council or whether it be by its own Congress actually taking action. And I think it's really interesting because it's common to say that standing against Israel is political suicide. And I think that US politicians have to think really deeply about what does it mean about their constituents going out every day facing rain, facing arrest, demanding a ceasefire, and they're turning their backs on them. So I think that who is the political suicide for their donors or their constituents? It's a very important question of political leadership. To go back to the Palestinian scenario around Palestine, other political leaders are struggling with what to do. In the United States, the political leadership has decided no ceasefire. We're going to allow Israel, as James Kirby said, no red lines. They can do anything they want. They want to kill 400-plus people in Jabalia.  You want to bomb, you know, go back and bomb Khan Yunus. Go back and bomb Khan Yunus. 2014, the Israelis entered Gaza in force.  By the way, 65 Israeli soldiers killed. Already Hamas has said and other Palestinian factions have said they've taken out a couple of tanks. They are fighting them here and there. It's not easy to actually battle when you've got bombing happening from overhead, but apparently they are fighting in certain places in the north against the advance of Israeli tanks. But in the regional scenario, what can one expect? The government of Iran. Now, the United States has been saying Iranian proxies are doing this, Iranian proxies. The government of Iran has said we don't want a war. 72 US battleships are sitting in the eastern Mediterranean directly threatening Iran. Iran has said we directly don't want to enter this conflict. Interesting statement. The foreign minister of Lebanon has said we don't want to enter this conflict. He said that even Hezbollah doesn't want to enter the conflict. He doesn't want to get back to Hezbollah in a second. But you've got Lebanon, you've got Iran, you've got other leaders saying we don't want this to extend. We want a ceasefire. On the other hand, so far silence from Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah hasn't spoken. I've said this before, when Nasrallah speaks, Nasrallah is going to declare war. Therefore, he's holding his horses. I must say, it's getting hard for the Hezbollah fighters, all 100,000 of them. Very hard for them to sit and watch what's happening in Gaza. It's very difficult for the factions in Syria to sit back and watch what's happening. And certainly it's been difficult for the rebels in Yemen, the so-called Houthi rebels, Al-Ansar, Al-Din rebels. Very hard for them to sit back. All of these places you've seen rocket fire towards Israel from Yemen, from Syria, from Lebanon. Israel has a very sophisticated missile defense system, the Iron Dome, yes, but also the Arrow system. And both the Iron Dome and Arrow have been able to defend against the rocket attacks from Yemen, from Lebanon and so on. In Lebanon, Amnesty International reports that Israel has used white phosphorus in the border regions against Hezbollah targets. Now, what's happening? There is no declaration from Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah. No declaration has come from the militia groups in Syria. No declaration has come from Ansar Al-Din in Yemen. These are fighters in the ranks who just cannot be held back, who are so angry and frustrated. They are firing their rockets. I think my opinion, without any chain of command telling them to do so. And so Israel is right now retaliating against a non-war. There is no war declared from these regional entities. But as the killings increase, I don't know if Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah can control his people. He is going to be under pressure to push the green light and let them let go the 100,000 fighters firing sophisticated rockets. Much more sophisticated, Hezbollah says, than they had in 2006 at Tel Aviv, at other places in the north of Israel. It's going to be impossible for the factions in Syria to hold fast if Hezbollah goes. They will go too. The Syrians will then advance towards the Golan Heights. If the Syrians move, the Yemenis are going to certainly put a lot of pressure on their allies inside Jordan and so on. I mean, the danger of spillover right now is very high. And what is provoking the spillover? It's not recklessness from Tehran. Tehran is saying, we don't want this. It's not even recklessness from Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah. He's not spoiling for a fight with Israel. They are prepared for it, but he's not spoiling for it. This is being provoked by the Israeli actions inside Gaza. That is the principle provocation. I mean, the fact that Israel has decided to strike places in South Lebanon using white phosphorus. It's almost as if the Israelis are provoking Hezbollah to come at them because they feel that with 72 U.S. warships sitting off the coast of the Levant, United States will pummel South Lebanon, pummel Beirut. I'm not sure if this is exactly in the calculations of Hezbollah, but I can see why they are holding fast. Meanwhile, of course, the West Bank, it's its own fire, Zoe. What's happening in the West Bank? Well, yes, it's definitely important to remember that violence has also been escalating against Palestinians in the West Bank. Over 100 people have been killed since October 7th. And as we reminded in our last live stream, this year was already the most deadly for Palestinians in the West Bank. It's Jerusalem and Gaza in terms of the number of people that have been killed by Israeli forces. And what's interesting to point out is that actually the violence that people are seeing across the West Bank is not only from occupation forces, but also from settlers. And there's been a huge spike in attacks. Over 2000 have been injured. And additionally, as we mentioned before, the sort of selective arrest campaigns have been really on the rise. Again, over 1100 people have been detained in the West Bank since October 7th. And within the prisons themselves, there have been reports of extremely atrocious conditions. Two prisoners have actually been killed or died, as we said, as we talked about last week with the past tense. In these conditions, there have been reports of them being deprived of food, being deprived of water, of blankets, of basic conditions in these prisons. And it's interesting, it's always important to bring it back to the prisons because this is the key demand. As we said, people are being unjustly held under their thousands being held under the administrative detention ordinance, which essentially means Israel can keep you in prison almost and definitely keep renewing the administrative detention order, which means you're not formally charged with anything. You have no way to a trial. Many of your basic rights are violated. This is really crucial. And there's also been an increase in the Israeli forces raids in terms of its intensity. So we've seen over the past year, these raids where they come in with the troops, take people out of their houses at night. However, we've seen this past week, tanks rolling in to the Janine refugee camp. We saw tanks destroying an entire neighborhood in the Janine refugee camp. We've seen airstrikes. So this is a serious escalation. Again, I mean, it's hard to even list out how many levels and layers of international law are being violated in this situation. We know that there have been calls for Israel to be brought before the ICC. We also know that these are constantly blocked by the US, but we have seen Spanish politicians. We've seen the House in Sierra Ramaphosa calling for this. But we have to keep our eyes on the West Bank because this is there with the settler attacks under the protection of these Israeli forces. This is seriously worrying. People are continuing to go out on the streets in Ramallah. There have been numerous national strikes that have been taking place even in Janine where the attacks have been extremely fierce on an almost nightly basis. People are still protesting, standing with their brothers and sisters in Gaza, standing with the other part of Palestine which they long to be reunited with. They long to be united with, meanwhile, of course, aid not getting into Palestine at all. Very interesting, important for people to know. Through the Rafa crossing, which bridges the border between Egypt and Palestine, that's the only crossing where trucks are allowed to go across. 150 trucks have gone across. It used to be 500 trucks a day to basically supply the Ghazan province of Palestine, 500 trucks a day. That's power over the past three weeks, only 150 trucks. And by the way, it's not easy. First, the Israelis are insisting, all trucks have to go to Nitzana. Nitzana is an Israeli crossing which is closed. So they get to Nitzana, 50 kilometers south of the Rafa crossing. They are unloaded at Nitzana. The Israelis check everything in the truck. Then they repackage the truck and send it 50 kilometers north to Rafa. At Rafa, those trucks are not allowed to enter. They have to be unloaded. They have to be loaded on to Palestinian trucks, and then they are allowed to go into Rafa city. So imagine, when people say, well, trucks are entering, the details are important here.  But in fact, they are blocking trucks, still blocking electricity. And as I said earlier, only 5% of Gaza's water needs are being fulfilled. And a lot of that is through tanks and so on, not through the delivery of fresh water. In fact, it's in a medieval siege of a higher kind. But this bizarre Nitzana to Rafa thing that they are doing is extraordinary. And it bears a notice by the international population. Now the Europeans, 27 of them have called for a humanitarian pause. I don't even know what a humanitarian pause is. I don't know why they can't get the word ceasefire out of their mouths, you know, ceasefire. It's a much swifter word than humanitarian pause. Don't get it. But they are thinking, ah, let's send a boat with humanitarian aid to Gaza. Just a minute, Macron, just a minute, Rishi Sunak and the rest of you. A boat, where are you going to land the boat? The only port in Gaza that's semi functional is in Gaza City. That's the only port and Gaza City is the epicenter of the Israeli attack. So you're going to get the Israelis to stop that attack while you send a ship with humanitarian aid. Good God, I mean the level of naivete or duplicity coming out of European capitals. I mean actually betting on duplicity. In other words, they know very well that it's highly unlikely that the Israeli government is going to stop the bombardment of Gaza City to permit a ship to enter. They know it's not going to happen because they know it's not going to happen. It's quite easy for them to say we would like this to happen because it's not going to happen. So they sound like they are being concerned about the situation in what the United Nations Children's Agency called a living hell. Also called a graveyard for thousands of children. You know, that's what UNICEF, that's their phrase. Well, it's okay now the Europeans say we want to prevent this living hell, make it something less than that. I don't think so. If you were serious, you would insist on a ceasefire, which they are not insisting upon and you would insist on having the checking if there needs to be Israeli checking. Although I don't see why there needs to be Israeli checking at the Rafa crossing. If they need to be checking, have it at Rafa.  All of it is designed in a way to prevent aid from entering. All talk of humanitarian aid is a mirage right now. It's not serious. The world is angry, Zoe, on November 4th looks like millions of people, tens of millions of people will be on streets around the world. Tell us a little bit about that. Yes, I think it's going to be an extremely historic day. There are mobilizations planned in dozens of cities and dozens of capitals from across the world. We saw last weekend there were half a million people in the streets of London. In, as we just said in the beginning, I'm in Washington DC right now where there's expected to be the largest march for Palestine in US history here. I mean, there's dozens and dozens of buses coming from cities from across the country, even people coming from Puerto Rico to join. So this is in DC, this is going to be a truly historic day. People have been mobilizing, again, in North Africa and West Asia. I spoke to the youth coordinator of the Youth Front against normalization to understand really what's driving, again, these protests. This shared understanding that Zionism is the hands of imperialism in the region. They're going to be on the streets. We've seen massive, massive demonstrations in Rabat, in Tunis, in Cairo even defying the kind of de facto ban on people taking to the streets. It's really incredible to see this outpouring. And again, I think it can't be understated the historic moment that we're in right now. Despite the fact, as you've said, politicians seem reluctant to even utter the word ceasefire. It seems like it's too clunky for them to say or too difficult. The people of the world are saying it and they're saying it every single day on the streets, in conversations, on social media. This is definitely the moment. And so there will be this big day of action. The International People's Assembly is calling for this, many, many other networks of people's movements, of trade unions. We also saw today, for example, trade unions in Belgium refusing to move arm shipments. I think that the tide is rising across sectors of society. And it's going to become, if it isn't already, a political blunder for politicians to not listen. And I think that there is this realization that not standing with the millions will cost. Right now, maybe they will continue to get the political benefits and privileges, economic privileges they get from not speaking out. But I think sooner rather than later that people of the world are going to see that these people who are not listening to them are not really representing them at all. To come back on that point as we wind up, so far, death toll from Gaza, 8,525, 2,000 missing of them, 1,100 children. Fresh reports coming out of Jabalia refugee camp where apartment buildings have been struck. One person I spoke with said 50 members of a friend's family were wiped out in that attack on Jabalia. Jabalia is a very densely populated place. It's not easy to tell people in a place like that to just leave and go somewhere else. It's likely everybody knew that there would be large numbers of people who just couldn't go anywhere. They didn't go anywhere. They were struck and entire families wiped out. Lineages are being disappeared in this war in Gaza. Names of Palestinian families are being obliterated. No way to remember them, but in memory. Let's see if the world community on November 4th Zoe is able to put pressure at least to call for if nothing else a ceasefire. See you later. Thanks a lot.


If you have got 7 million Californians who took this position, 70 judges, as you pointed out, and this long history that you have described, why in this case did you present but one witness on the subject? One witness. And I think it fair to say that his testimony was equivocal in some respects. Blackstone, your honor, said that there are two great relations in private life. First that of husband and wife. I don't mean to be flipped, but Blackstone didn't testify. Kingsley Davis didn't testify. What testimony in this case supports the proposition? But, your honor, you don't have to have evidence for this from these authorities. This is in the cases themselves. I don't have to have evidence. You don't have to have evidence of this point if one court after another. Mr. Blankenhorn, one of the instructions that the court gives to the jury when an expert witness testifies is to consider the witness's background, training, and all the other evidence in the case. And that other evidence includes the demeanor of the witness. So I would urge you to pay close attention to Mr. Boyce's questions and to answer them directly, succinctly. So bear that in mind. Yes, sir, I will. That's yes, no, or I don't know. I know the answer. I cannot answer you correctly if the only words I'm allowed to choose from is yes or no. I can give you my answer in a very brief sentence. If you know the answer, why don't you share it with us? Well, I would be happy to, but he's only permitting me to give yes and no. I cannot do that and be accurate. He is giving you three choices. Yes, no, I don't know. But I do know. I do know the answer. Then is it yes or is it no? Your honor, I can answer the question, but I cannot give an accurate answer if the only two choices I have are yes and no. If you give me a sentence, I can answer it. One sentence is all I'm asking for. All right, let's take a sentence. One sentence. Can you ask me the question again, please?


preference between the diggitone and the diggitone. The answer is don't make me choose. I love them both for different reasons. No, just don't make me choose.  Practically I would give up the diggitone and keep the diggitone if I can only have one, but emotionally I would give up the diggitone and keep the diggitone. I think I get zone out creative joy from the diggitone that I do from the diggitone, but if I can only have one to make music practically it would have to be the diggitone, but don't make me choose. Please don't make me choose. Anyway, this gives you a different sound. It's making that sound, it's rings, specs, gets some clarity. Everything's all happening with the microcosm. It's in mosaic mode, so it's doing quite a lot. Thanks for hanging out tonight everyone. Ideas and videos that I have time to make, but coming off on the channel that I put out, unless something goes weird, we should be having a let's build a pad excited to start showing off on the channel. I think it's the big sleeper 2020. It's massively overlooked because it is just fantastic. Really excited to start exploring that on the channel, features on that as well around the same sort of time. The other video I really want to do is a one step challenge on the OPZ where I make a track where I'm only allowed to use one step to one step sequence which sounds mad and it is, but for a good reason and I want to show something off. I think the OPZ's big strong suits. Thanks for being super chill in the chat. I haven't been watching the chat too much but I noticed there was a long conversation about Bowie and I'm


Good morning, Hank. It's Tuesday. So a week from today marks a huge moment of progress for human health as the patent on the drug bedaquiline expires, allowing less expensive generic versions to be produced that can cure far more people living with multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis. Wait, what's that? Oh, well that's unfortunate. What will actually happen next Tuesday is that the company Johnson & Johnson will begin enforcing a secondary patent, thus denying access to bedaquiline to around six million people over the next four years. And that's where we come in, Nerdfighteria, because I really think that if we can understand this problem together and make a compelling case to Johnson & Johnson that they are pursuing a bad business strategy, we can save a lot of lives. But first, some history. Tuberculosis is the world's deadliest infectious disease. It killed about 30,000 people last week, which is especially horrifying given that it is usually curable, generally with a cocktail of drugs given daily over four months. A drug-resistant TB that isn't cured by that cocktail is a growing problem. So between the 1940s and the 1960s, we developed and synthesized eight different classes of drugs that could treat tuberculosis. And then between the 1960s and the end of the 20th century, no new drugs were developed to treat tuberculosis for the simple reason that we stopped investing money in TB treatments because it was no longer a problem in rich countries. Now for the record, if we continue this strategy of global health caring about infectious disease only when it affects rich countries, we will continue to see more and more drug resistance until eventually a strain of disease emerges that we can't cure, which will spread globally and cause a pandemic, which will affect rich countries. And that's one reason to end TB now. Another reason is that all human lives are equally valuable and it's completely unacceptable that this year 1.6 million people will die of a curable disease. Right, so we had these lost decades where we didn't discover any new TB treatments, but then the incentives changed. Government started to invest much more in research and even in like funding trials, making it more interesting to pharmaceutical companies, and eventually Johnson & Johnson developed a new drug called Badakuline. Now most of the money that went into researching and discovering Badakuline came from the public, it came from governments, but Johnson & Johnson did take some risks, did invest some money, full credit, and that's why in 2003 they got to file a patent for the drug compound Badakuline. Then in 2007 they filed a secondary patent for Badakuline with this added fumarate salt. Now one expert recently explained this to me as filing a patent for a pen cap that goes with your pen, like a pen cap makes your pen work better and last longer, but it's not the pen. And indeed Johnson & Johnson always knew that they were going to have to develop a pen cap for their pen. They waited until 2007 precisely so that they could extend the length of their patent. So Badakuline becomes available to the public and it has saved hundreds of thousands of lives. Like a couple months ago I was in Sierra Leone and spoke with two young women who were dying of tuberculosis who were on their deathbed. When they received this new cocktail of drugs containing Badakuline they quickly recovered.  That's the power of this drug, but while the price of it has dropped over the last decade it is still way too expensive for many communities like a study by MSF indicated that if generics were allowed to be produced globally the price of Badakuline would drop by 67% from $1.50 a pill to 50 cents per pill. And that should be happening next Tuesday because the original 2003 patent for Badakuline expires on July 18, 2023. But unfortunately in many countries Johnson & Johnson is using that secondary patent on the pen cap to extend their exclusivity for four more years. During those four years experts estimate that up to 6 million people who would have access to Badakuline in a world of generics won't be able to afford it and most of those people will die. So if it sounds like I'm angry that's because I'm angry. But I think we can make change here. Thanks to lawsuits filed by TB survivors led by two extraordinary young women courts have decided that the pen cap is not adequate innovation and so they have not granted the patent which means that there are right now generic manufacturers ready to go making Badakuline. Unfortunately they won't be able to distribute those generic medications to many countries with a high TB burden including Sierra Leone. And that's where I'm hoping we come in because we need to explain to Johnson & Johnson that this is a bad decision. Like Johnson & Johnson is not some evil monolith it's a company made out of people and I genuinely believe that most of those people want their work to make the world better. I mean J&J's corporate credo begins we believe our first responsibility is to the patients and I want them to live up to that credo. So there are links in the video info below and an append comment to contact Johnson & Johnson and let them know that you find this attempt to evergreen their patent reprehensible and completely out of line with their credo. There are also links to J&J's social media tag them share the news that Badakuline's patent should be expiring saving so many lives but instead is being immorally evergreened by Johnson & Johnson. Tell your friends about this injustice tell your family tell the internet because the only reason Johnson & Johnson executives think they can get away with this is that they think we aren't paying attention in the part of the world where they sell most of their products their band-aids their Tylenol their Listerine and if you work at Johnson & Johnson or know someone who does let the company and the executives know about your opposition to the extension of this patent. Tell your bosses tell your CEO as I said before Badakuline has done so much good and a big part of that good is because of the work that researchers and other people working at J&J put into it but the time has come for this drug funded primarily by the public to be returned to the public as a public good and to the executives of Johnson & Johnson from one CEO to another I just want to make a direct plea this is a bad business decision. A company's reputation is extremely valuable and denying Badakuline to six million people over the next four years will be very bad for your reputation. There are a lot of people who pay a little bit extra for your Neosporin than generic Neosporin because they trust it and this decision is undermining that trust. Harming those brands is bad business and when you attempt to evergreen a patent even though you know the decision will cost hundreds of thousands of human lives over the next four years you're tarnishing your corporate reputation. I'll quote it back to you our first responsibility is to the patients I hope you will embrace that promise and until you do we will pressure you to live up to your credo. So let's get to work bringing about a world where people no longer die every day for want of Badakuline. Links below. Hank I will see you on Friday


Why do you want to make a lot of money? over the years, I have been doing business and marketing coaching since 2009 and I have coached a lot of people who've come to me and say George show me how to make a lot of money and Oftentimes it doesn't feel appropriate for me to ask them why and so we just go and do the how to do it authentically and ethically but today I want to Reflect on that question publicly Why do you want to make a lot of money? Whether it's a million dollars a year ten million dollars a year, whatever it is I Chances are it's because you know somebody or you respect somebody who makes a lot of money And so you think well if they can do it then I can do it too and look at all the good that I would be able to Do with with all this money. I could fully support my family. I'll have a eternal sense of security I will have the freedom to go to festivals and have spiritual Services and all the services that helped me become a better person and be able to donate lots of money to charity And when that's all sounds great The thing is you can have all of those things without a lot of money Right without making lots of money and that's the first kind of Misunderstanding a lot of people have If you are creative you can have those things now Without waiting until you're making lots of money. Just look at the digital nomad movement Okay, just Google it digital nomad movement Lots of people are not spending very much money to be able to travel have great experiences And doing what they love. Okay, but the the more important part of it is that You don't none of us know whether or not we'll be able to make lots of money Because making lots of money requires The right kind of structures in your life and by structures I mean everything from societal structure to your family structure to your genetic structure Okay, and you may or may not have The right structures to make lots of money I don't know that's the point is none of us know whether nor whether anybody can make lots of money because Plenty of people who have been smart and hard-working have tried making lots of money and they haven't been able to and At the same time lots of people who are not smart and not hard-working have made lots of money Even though they didn't expect to So it's not it's not how hard you work and how smart you work There's something else going on here There's something about destiny or something about the structures that you cannot control societal structures life structures, etc so and and one more point on this money-making thing I I believe if you're watching this video you probably Would might consider yourself a spiritual person or you believe that spirituality is important and if you study the world's great spiritual traditions Every single one of them is suspicious about money Now I don't think any of them say you must be poor Okay, but what they do say is whether you are rich or poor The point is not to focus on making money And the point is not to focus on a particular financial goal in a particular time frame to be able to work this many hours a week the goal is to pursue spiritual growth First and foremost regardless of how much or how little money you make and if you pursue spiritual growth Then you're fulfilling the purpose of life anyway regardless and the other the one more thing I'll say about this is The goal to make lots of money in particular time frame whatever is It's kind of like It's kind of like a Teenager who says I just want to play video games all day and eat cookies and pizza all day. That's the best life That's the kind of life that I aspire to and the wise parent is looking at that and go wow you are Gravely misunderstood about the richness of life and what that's all there is to offer you the wise parent wants the child to go through certain experiences to be able to develop courage to be able to develop wisdom and and good communication skills to develop humility develop character basically And I think that's what the same same thing that the universe wants for us Is or god the universe wants us to develop character As the metric of success Rather than oh now i'm making this much money and working this many hours So I can give this much to charity and have this many freedom experiences The problem with pursuing the money and the experiences and the number of hours you're working is that you sacrifice things and people Along the way including your own spirituality oftentimes So why do you want to make a lot of money? Because you actually want the things behind the money you want the freedom, which is actually a mental and spiritual state You want the sense of security, which is actually about being part of a stable community Which doesn't require much money You want pride you want fulfillment, which is really all spiritual stuff Which doesn't require lots of money You want the ability to to to help certain causes, which doesn't require money either It's if you talk to master fundraisers, okay People who people who donate a lot of money to the charity They say what's actually more valuable than having money? Donate the charity is the ability to communicate and organize people to support that cause That's much more important than having money to donate the charity So why do you want a lot of money? Oh Maybe that's not the right question then Maybe the question is how can you pursue your life's purpose? With joyful productivity every day regardless of whether you're meant to make lots of money or not Because again, we don't know you might or you might not But the point is pursue the right thing I hope this is helpful and until the next video. I wish you well


The easiest types of differential equations to solve are those known as separable differential equations. To solve this type of differential equation, it helps to remember we can write the first derivative of y with respect to x as dy over dx. Now in general, a first-order differential equation can be written in the form dy over dx equals something. But now suppose dy over dx is equal to f of x times g of y, where here f is a function of x only, and g is a function of y only. And here the variables x and y can be separated, and so we say we have a separable differential equation. So for example, let's take a look at this and determine whether it's a separable differential equation. And so the thing we note is that we have dy over dx equals something, and our something can be factored. And note here, if we take f of x equals x and g of y equals y squared plus 1, we can write our differential equation in the form function of x times function of y. And so this is a separable differential equation. Or it could take a different differential equation. Now the first thing we might want to do is get this into standard form. In other words, we want to solve for the highest-order derivative, which is just the first derivative here. So let's rearrange things and solve for dy dx. And so the question we got to ask is, can we write our derivative as a product? So let's factor. And while we can factor this, there appears to be no way to write this as a product of a function of x with a function of y. And so this is not a separable differential equation. So why does this matter? Suppose we have a separable differential equation. In other words, we can write the derivative as a product of a function of x with a function of y. Now you should have been told in calculus that dy over dx is not a fraction. And so we can't break this up into a dy part and a dx part. Except you are probably also told it's sometimes helpful to view dy over dx as a fraction, where dy is our numerator and dx is our denominator. If we do that, we might consider taking the following steps. First of all, let's get rid of this denominator by multiplying both sides by dx. And then simplifying, dy over dx is not a fraction. So that legal disclaimer out of the way will pretend it's a fraction. And let's get our g of y term over here to the left hand side. And the thing to recognize here is that the reason that we call these separable differential equations is that we can rewrite them in a form where we have separated the variables. So over here on the left, we only have y and dy. And here on the right, we only have x and dx. Since each side only contains its differential variable, both sides can be anti-differentiated. So we'll anti-differentiate both sides, which allows us to solve the differential equation. So let's try to solve the differential equation dy over dx equals 5y. So the idea here is we want to separate the variables. All the x variables on one side, all the y variables on the other, and the constants, who cares? They'll end up on one side or the other, and we don't really worry about them. So from our differential equation, we'll multiply both sides by dx. And again, dy over dx is not a fraction, but it's sometimes helpful to view it as a fraction. We can simplify. And we have a y over on the right hand side, so we want to get that over onto the left. And so separating the variables gives us the equation 1 over y dy equals 5 dx. And so now we can anti-differentiate both sides. And at this point, it's useful to remember that the differential variable is controlling. So here on the left hand side, our differential variable is y. The only variable we're allowed to have on the left hand side is y, and we have it. On the right hand side, our differential variable is x, so the only variable we're allowed to have on the right hand side is x. And we have that as well. And so now we can proceed to anti-differentiate. So we'll find the anti-derivatives. And remember, we get constants of anti-differentiation every time we find an anti-derivative. And since our goal is to find y, let's go ahead and solve this equation for y. So we'll do a little bit of algebra. And we get y equals to some horrifying mess. However, we can simplify this a little bit further. Remember that c1 and c2 are constants of anti-differentiation, but they are constant. And so that means e to the power c2 is a constant. e to the power c1 is also a constant. And so their quotient, e to the power c2 over e to the power c1, well, that's just some constant, which we'll call c. This leads to an important idea when dealing with differential equations. Ordinarily, we must include a constant of anti-differentiation in any anti-derivative. But rather than apply the algebra to the constant all the way to the end, we can rely on the following principle. Any algebra or arithmetic done to a constant produces a constant. And what this means is that so long as we're not differentiating or anti-differentiating, all of our constants can be collapsed as we go. And in particular, when we're dealing with separable differential equations, the two constants we would ordinarily get from our initial anti-derivative can be combined into a single constant, which we traditionally put with the x function. So let's solve this differential equation. So let's separate the variables. We'll try to rewrite our equation, so all of our y terms are with the dy, and all of the x terms are with the dx. So again, a good first step here is we'll multiply both sides by dx. This y is with the dx, but we really want it to be with the dy, so we'll divide both sides by y. x squared is with the dy, but we want it to be with the dx, so we'll divide both sides by x squared. And simplify. So my variables are separated. Now I can anti-differentiate. So let's anti-differentiate both sides. So over on the left, we'll get log y, and there is a constant, but we'll let it be absorbed by the anti-derivative on the right. On the right we get... And let's solve this equation for y. Do a little algebra. And e to power c is some constant, which we'll just call c. And while we don't ordinarily like using the same variable between two different things, in some sense this c doesn't exist. It's just a placeholder that allows us to get to the general solution. y equals c times e to power minus 1 over x.