So for open development and he has 20 minutes to share with us what he is working on and then we have 10 minutes for questions Yeah, so I leave you with John Good afternoon, right, okay, it works fabulous, okay, I'm going to talk about Some work in progress some work in progress that sadly at the moment consists largely of questions And it's work of mine and colleagues in what is called the global south About what is called development? so a lot of this you can read or Insert the quotation marks around development especially around development And it's work I do as part of the Circa program, which I'll explain with money from IDRC, which I'll explain Briefly, and there's quite a bit of backtracking here. So as I say It's talking about ICT for D or ICT D Which very very loosely means ICT as you know it and hopefully the broadest possible sense for development in the sense of problematically international development development in the global south and the organization Circa, which I think is strengthening internet research capacity Alliance Was instrumental I guess in articulating and theorizing around the business of ICT for D and as I say it was it's it takes place or is organized through the Nanyang Technical University in Singapore but funded by IDRC Which interestingly is apparently a crown agency. So it's kind of an independent agency Funded amongst other people by DFID Located in Canada, but with a large measure of Autonomy and unlike maybe comparable bodies, and I've just chosen DFID and USA ID adopts a more scholarly and critical Approach to international development, which probably in part accounts for its funding being reduced over the years And there's an intersection if you like between that conversation and a different one going on at DFID almost in these months about what ICT for D and ICT in education might mean and it does have a bearing on some of my remarks later DFID are very keen to talk about ed tech Educational technology and have a real difficulty shifting from that phrase to a different one an alternative one Which might mean technology for education There is a kind of institutional focus as opposed to a societal focus if you like that they're struggling with And I'll come back to that briefly Okay, so Without going into too much of the background of ICT D It strikes me there are three or four problems around it as kind of currently enacted and developed over the last Seven ten years clearly one of them is what is development? And and we could have symposia. Well, no, we have had symposia on just that question, but my The particular questions I'm all problems. I want to draw attention to are there is often seen in fairly materialistic or economic terms Quantified as something like GDP per capita, you know development is happening if that particular metric goes up And it's also often seen as a kind of a universal linear trajectory We are all on the same path. We might be on different parts of that same path We're all going to get there eventually and if you like there's kind of a modernist overtone to it all And you see words cropping up like leapfrogging And catching up, you know those words come from this particular viewpoint of development I Think also there is a problem with the ICT for D community that it has a fairly narrow conception in practice about what education might be And the phrase service delivery crops up and so it sees it the role of ICT in education as Being kind of dumb pipes through which education gets pushed or dumb repositories in which it is stored and I guess also For economic types of reason or employment related reasons There's a strong emphasis on the global knowledge economy Catching up with that joining in with that and the role of education in supporting that And then maybe obviously there's an enormous Power in terms of resource and prestige around various agencies ministries donors and foundations Which pushes a particular agenda kind of by default and kind of understandably Around scale and transferability and acceptability and sustainability So that has a kind of I don't know homogenizing Effect it also has I think the effect of as I've said here leading these things together leading to a fairly a Vision of education or a practice of education ran route largely around the transmission of anglophone Content possibly from American publishers through American technologies I'm all to have said I think there was a the whole thing is muddied by a very dysfunctional relationship between Policy makers and researchers which doesn't help Okay, so that's oh, and this is this kinds of illustrates the Very jaundice view of Education maybe luckily or unlucky leave might not be able to read this the guy at the top is saying oh my what deplorable conditions These kids children have no computers. I have to do something and then a year later We have someone at a keyboard saying one more game one more game mister. I need an upgrade Just click it you frigging newbie I can make a fortune taking my shirt off on a webcam and so on So I see T for D is quite problematic. I think the role of the circuit program in the first two Iterations has been to attempt to having created in a sense. I see T for D to insert some Critical theorizing around it and I think it struggled because the resources have gone down And it's also been hampered by a mission around early researcher development So it's trying to do too many things at once on a decreasing resource and in building theory It's been trying to build it's been trying to join if you like too few dots But Getting nearer to the point about open Circa three has been attempting to define and Support and map what open development Might be and it's done so by adopting a thematic approach rather than looking at health or education or governance looking for cross-cutting themes and Doing this by asking some international experts to work on one or other of those International themes so Dorothy a client or Andy Deardon in this country for example Followed by empirical work by local meaning in the global south Emerging researchers, so it's still to some extent saddled by this capacity building Remit which confuses things really This just to just to keep me real This is my friend Leonard Warae Olo who on my first trip to Africa all those years ago Said something like if open is such a good idea. Why don't you all use it? And I've still haven't actually figured out what the answer to that is Having bought into Microsoft and then Apple Okay, so this is my attempt to define open development It's not the strict canonical one from IDRC But I think it's about the ideals and principles and practices and techniques of open being applied to Or adopted in the global south for the purposes of development And this outlines a slide from Circa showing what we were doing interdisciplinary conceptual framework followed by Emerging researchers in the global south doing some empirical work And this is us all in a winery in South Africa theorizing frantically and This is probably something you've seen recycled and redrawn Throughout the course of today attempting just to Diagram what open might look like in a development context. I can't make much sense of it These in the course of that workshop in South Africa. These are some of the quotes that came out of it I'm not sure if you can read them, but for example rich Ling Is struck by the fact that open as he says seems to attract libertarians and communists One end and at the other which he regards as curious if nothing else Oh Laurent elder talks about the open being a growing theme in a in a broader conversation about ICT and ICT for D Which is true. It seems to be where ICT is moving And I think I've managed to quote myself In attempting to support open development do we end up supporting something which merely privileges the privileged Okay, and so what came out of that workshop for me is Does Open do no harm. Are we sure that it's actually a positive good and unconditionally a positive good? I'm not sure that education or technology or so. I don't see why open should be And actually whose interest is it serving and again? I don't necessarily think or assume. That's the poor downtrodden and oppressed and In subsequent meetings in Seattle, for example, we talked about other aspects of this as we attempted to map out the The issues and the topics One was in looking at our institutions. Was there a kind of paradox between If you know open learning and close management, you know or working in in web 2.0 kind of ways in web 1.0 kinds of institutions, you know working in flat ways where it came to Teaching and learning and working in very hierarchic ways as employees, for example I Wonder if open is for example a Trojan horse Especially sorry in work in the Middle East where I kind of struggle to separate talking to other people in Palestine separate modernization from Westernization does open have the same Contamination as it were a master's thesis from a Dutch student about 10 years ago called OER Knowledge Colonialization which in the context of subsequent events in South Africa example talking about Decolonizing the Academy has an interesting modern Resonance and I suppose does International development in my case provoke questions about if you like domestic Developments does what we are trying to do with people in the global south actually have a resonance Give us ideas about how we might be working with people in the global north And for my thinking as it were What I was struck by as one of the researchers in this early phase Is this set of questions around open versus free and I realized now I've put opening quotes And I should have put free in quotes because clearly if I'm talking about I don't know Google or Dropbox or or YouTube, I'm not talking about free. I'm talking about quote-unquote Free, but I was concerned about these questions for example, but does open privilege institutions at the expense of individuals It is open something that has now been co-opted to support the business models of our universities and colleges Does it does it privilege formal rather than informal learning or maybe? Teach our driven learning as opposed to learn our driven learning pedagogy versus her to go key maybe And I suppose I wonder when I see the some of the education systems in the global south Privileging I don't know the national language or the people in the capital Is there a chance that open is privileging these? institutions groups Interests in the center at the expense of those that are marginal or nomadic or indigenous at the periphery So I don't know the answer to these Rich Ling and I Have been entrusted with the theme of trust and how that works in or might work in open development and The empirical work, which is just starting will happen in a NGO looking at how people understand and report Contracts procurement defects in the roads in Chennai And this is kind of part of the problem with Circa it was very difficult to find something that addressed some cross-cutting themes In our case education and something else And originally there's something else would have been the health services just that we didn't get any proposals about the health services You know there seemed to be a nice resonance Relationship balance between education delivery and health delivery But it turned out to be very difficult to get any of the proposals that would kind of fit into this framework that we had in mind So we've done the theoretical bit which kind of pulls in the questions. I've mentioned and Recognize there's a vast literature of all of this of the of the role of trust and We're now thinking through in relation to trust in learning and trust in openness and trust in open learning And clearly it kind of plays out in The learner's relationship to the content the the relationships between Learners amongst themselves or learners with their tutors or learners with the system or learners with the institution or learners with the The technology and then within side the institutions amongst Employees Which is clearly just too big to tackle And what we've been doing so far is attempting to think this through As a theoretical exercise But I don't mean I don't think given the resources given the time and given the kind of diversity. It's going to be a tool easy and one of the inch on the aspects that interest me is The possibility one of the certainty I suppose that both trust and pedagogy are culturally specific That they exist in cultures and trust for example exists in a culture alongside authority risk Community difference and choice so I'm kind of obliquely referring to Hofsteder and how you characterize one culture as opposed to another And how one might be risk-taking and risk-avoiding for example or one might be authoritarian and one might be consensual well trust obviously Sits in amongst all of those different dimensions Just in different societies those those dimensions will be different and so the place or the absence of trust will be significant, but how those different Aspects of culture then relates to pedagogy are also part of the equation. So it's not simple So yeah learning exists within culture trust with it exists within culture And so on and so on and I think that's part of our problem that this is just way too complicated for our resources. This is Way too complex for our Empirical work and unfortunately we're trying to invest too much into smaller volume of Researchers So on that I've still got ten minutes Well, I was an abbreviated Questions in the audience. Yeah, do you need the mic or thank you Rob Farrow from the open University? Thanks, John So I don't know much about international development, but I think about open quite a lot about and open and Here's some of the things that I found helpful in terms of from a worker out One would be to say there is no sort of essentialist Definition of open. It's not sort of universal category. We can look at sort of specific instances and examples And it's of contextual understanding of open in that context and a similar point. I would say There's a sort of linguistic trick we play with open, right because when we say this is open We it sounds like we're ascribing some sort of positive quality to it, right? But actually what we're talking about is an absence and it's the absence of restriction or barriers to activity So if we say this is open access, it's like well now you can get it There's no barrier that was there before and now it's no longer there This is an area which means you're not impeded if you want to share it in certain ways and so on This is open data so you can access it and you can do these things with it But it's always the absence of restriction rather than a sort of positive quality I'm not sure if I'm explaining that very well, but once you start thinking about it in this way Some of these problems that you've identified I think might be Ameliorated a bit because there is no sort of universal open thing that we're imposing It's like well in this context it means this and these are the barriers that are being removed So I'm just referring that as a kind of provocation. I suppose or something for you to Ruminate on if you wish, but I found it useful No, sorry, I agree with you. I hope I understand you I think actually the problem is often and maybe that's true of much research that we understand and nuance what we're saying amongst ourselves But that is not what for example practitioners corporations or policymakers want and What on the one hand might look like essentializing? from our perspective is Seen as a very necessary way of making progress amongst all of those other Communities that they're actually doing things Sadly Any other question the audience or comment or anything that would To John's confusion Hi, I'm Elise de Fia from from publish what you found which is an organization that campaigns for a transparency and I'm currently also Doing research. I come back from Ben and in Tanzania looking at potential of uses for of Open aid data And I wanted to pick up on a few questions that you mentioned at the beginning if you could elaborate when you you were asking like does Open do no harm or whose interest does it serve like if you could elaborate a bit on this because I guess I So far the work that I've been involved in was looking at it from a different perspective as in how could open data actually help overcoming some of the like disparities in terms of you know power imbalances between donors and recipients for example and and help in terms of Leveraging I guess that the playing field. So just yeah, if you could elaborate on these questions, what do you? Would you mean when when you're asking like that's open do no harm in whose interest I think it was our reaction at the time in To what we saw as a simple a simplistic assumption that Open everything was unconditionally benign and it was just something we felt needed building into the discussion You know stop look wait ask Is it really the case that such and such an intervention or such and such an initiative is if you Serving the interest of the people for example that we want to serve and Not others not malign rather than benign and I suppose actually Conversations are in the international development community seem to talk an awful lot about unexpected consequences So it was a case of does this not only seem benign But if we then thought attempted to think through the unexpected consequences, would it then still appear? Benign and just not to proceed on the basis that Open is good and therefore we go ahead Any other question? We still have a little bit. So if anyone is well, if not, shall we give? Voice to Tina Papa. I don't know how you pronounce it. Thoma Papa. Thoma. She's talking about MOOCs and copyright So I didn't think about that And so I'm Tina Papa Thoma I'm a PhD student at the Open University at the Institute of Educational Technology and My research is related to how educator MOOC educators learn how to teach in MOOCs However today, I'm gonna present something a very small part of the research that has to do with the copyright material and issues if you want that educators found while during the process of Preparing MOOCs So So let's unpack this research question We are looking to how do MOOC educators find out about copyright when we talk about educators Of the educators may be PhD students lecturers, professors, learning designers, a librarian People at the head of the organization related to education and all these people were involved in the process of designing, running and Facilitating the courses When I mentioned find out I refer to the knowledge they get and the problems they experience About copyrights and all we ask So do they learn from From training, do they learn from practice while they are running the MOOCs? Do they learn from each other while they collaborate with their colleagues? Do they self-regulate Do they reflect on their own practices and How do they integrate with each other? So this is part of the the integrative pedagogy framework of T-YALA. You can find it online and When we are talking about MOOCs They are courses Offered by the future land platform So I actually did a case study, a multi-case study and I looked Oops, I forgot the copyright thing the most important thing so The law gives the creators rights to control the ways In which their material may be used So we're gonna look at this So I took a multi-case study approach And I looked on seven courses cases that they were related to history and politics and I conducted 28 interviews With the PhD students that were facilitating and writing in the external blogs. I will explain what that is Lecturers and professors that they were actually preparing the academic content and they were also facilitating the courses learning designers that they were responsible for the for the design of the MOOCs and A number of staff of an Organization related to education. So What do we see from the data? According to the integrative pedagogy framework So individuals did not engage in training with regards to copyright And they were not aware of restrictions of copyright to use their own work and to use OERs And it was it was time-consuming for them to use OERs to actually find out how they can do it and So they learned in practice by experience They worked collaboratively and With their colleagues and they wrote new material new content and they said they share its other's expertise and they reflected on their learning experiences about and copyright and they basically Slightly changed their practice and their attitudes and So here's a mountain We will talk about the problems that educators experienced When they tried to use copyright material in an open setting We will see whether these problems plant educators to use OERs or Did they struggle on using copyright materials and then they look at While they were learning about copyright as they learn about copyright does actually that That knowledge changed their their attitude and I will finish with How we could possibly support educators So starting with the problems That educators experienced When they tried to use copyright material in an open setting they found restrictions on the use of copyright material Online versus traditional classes. What do we mean by that? So here is a quote of an academic Educator that he was preparing the academic content So he's mentioning that when he was doing a lecture He was not too worried about About copyright because it was just inside a room So he could show clips and of films, but on the new environment He was feeling that it was a public domain and he and this became problematic for him And that he couldn't actually show videos that he probably wanted Another restriction is that they couldn't that educators couldn't use their own work Because it was protected by copyright so An educator that was preparing the academic content here She's saying that they were told that they couldn't actually even use the text of their own articles They couldn't copy and paste Other restrictions was the price of buying material copyright material Yeah And also they were restricted by time That they needed to find all we are is to use them in their courses so It's some an educator who was preparing the academic content in another case He's saying that it turned out to be extremely expensive So they made a very limited use of materials And that they were given license and the great use of materials of creative common shared Licenses, but the reproduction was very they spend a lot of time trying to find open source is materials So do these problems prompt educators to use all we are's or do they struggle on using copyright materials so Basically they created their own material From scratch they did they had to this these issues that they had with a copyright made them redesign a lot of material and They the use of material they used material outside The platform the future land platform Via external blogs on YouTube on flicker pages that they had to share photos When they were having issues with a copyright so The the landing designer here is saying that In order to get around with some of the legal complications They linked from the course to To the blog and to YouTube So they didn't have to worry the legal team about using data That they could that they were copyright The other problem as I already mentioned is that They person's very limited copyright material so they were limited by the content They use the all we are's, but it was time-consuming So as they learn about copyright It is interesting to see if these changes their knowledge or their attitude to all we are's They say that the creation of their own material Which is unknown if it's all we are's or not so we don't know if the material they used Is open is all we are and They reused they reused this material for other purposes So they used it in the MOOC this material and then they took they might have taken The MOOC in the class and they reused it And They also used existing all we are's on their teaching practice. So The academic the educator that was preparing academic content in case G said that Because everything is being published Online there is a heightened awareness of the need to get permissions for all the materials We use which you don't get when you are teaching life But it made you very aware and it's given me some useful resources for getting creative common Commons images, which I now use and build my own teaching practice in my own teaching practice. Sorry so They did change Attitude and they did try to embed all we are's in their classroom apart from the MOOC So what could we do to support educators? Perhaps we could We should raise awareness to educators about copyright and all we are's by providing training before producing video images and text content and The legal experts may be able to collaborate with educators to help them gain this knowledge about copyright Thank you. Any question from the audience? Yeah, Rob. Thank you. Um, I was just wondering if you could share with us What's the most kind of unexpected thing that someone said about all this in these interviews? They were They were They were actually saying that even though they had these difficulties of finding content and This difficulties made them stronger let's say and they produced the content that Otherwise they wouldn't be able to use so this was very important. This was a Learning care for them. They were mentioning it and they were reflecting on their practices actually not only about copyright but about different different things because Basically the way they are learning is in practice. That's it. They don't have any training on anything and They don't really know they have most of the people that I interviewed We cannot generalize obviously because it's a a qualitative research most of the people have Huge experience in face-to-face classes But not in the online environment Any other question I Have one did Why they were doing their own materials that you were saying that they decided then to do their own material Did they do the proper then? Licensing so that could be then used by others with less difficulty. I was just wondering Yes, actually the legal team in one case at least that the the university was very into nooks. They had a legal team that was Quite supporting the educators and They made the educators to name every photo every text and So that they so that it has license and in a in another case That the person did not mention anything about copyright issues and stuff like that Because I actually participated in most of these courses to see how they were how Educators were actually responding to the course the this educator had a CC by in every Text in every photo and He was mentioning who created what but this was not the case, you know You know the courses I looked at. Thank you very much. Any other question Shall we give them? Oh, yeah, there we are Thank you. Thank you Robin Wright from Swinburne University I wondered if anyone that you spoke to was aware of the existing copyright exceptions that existed in their copyright law that they Were using in their normal educational practices and thought about how they might transfer into the new environment They they were aware that there are copyright material that they cannot use but as I Showed one of the quotes They were not actually Considering that there is copyright restriction when it was in the class So when they actually went online to produce the courses produced to create the courses They were quite surprised They the strut of the lot So they were not prepared at all of what They they would have to face with Copyright, I don't know if I'm answering your question, sir They yes, they had to do that. They had to get a copyright clearance in lectures, but you but Not everyone talked about this so Yeah, any other one with any other question Well, is that it. Thank you very much Tina So we have a next talk And I think it is Rob. Is that right and Jan. Yeah Yeah Great to see you here. I saw your webinar Yeah, yeah, very very interesting Thanks very much Are you starting it? Micros on everyone can hear me. I think yes. Yes I'll turn mine off. Yes, okay Okay, thanks very much I'm very happy to be here to speak at the OER 17 And give you an update on the OER world map project My name is Jan Neumann and I'm working for the North Rhine-Westphalia and Library Service Center and We are doing the project Incorporation with graph thinking gig game Baha, which is a small developing company in Berlin And we are very happy to have Rob ferro in the team And we are also very lucky to be funded by the Yulet Foundation. So and Actually, I changed the name of the title of the presentation a little bit I made it a little bit more clear and shorter than the original one and I also shifted the Focus a little bit more to focus on to policymaking So what I'm going to talk about today is I just Want to give you a very short project definition. I hope I will manage to do it short and Then I will talk about Project stakeholders and data collection, which is a very important topic in the project and then show three examples of how the OER world map can support policymaking and Then ask for your support to the project finally. So what is the project? I recently said that the OER project. Oh, yeah, world map is a project in its adolescence So we have been working for two and a half years on it now and it starts to make sense so it has a very huge scope and so we had to put much energy into building up the platform and Now you can see the results. I think it looks good and the usability is already quite good, but it's still difficult to find the Data and so it's it's not yet complete. So it starts to to have muscles and to be useful But it's for sure not a finished project. So if you look at it, just keep this in mind Actually I we had many ideas or we had some problems to define what what actually the core of the probe of the project was and So in the last two years, we had many ideas what the OER world map could be and We started with a definition that it's something like a database that the database is the important thing Then we came up with the idea that it could be something like an open operations room Which could be used by the OER community to step in get information about the state of the OER movement and Take decision and and go on and we had recently ideas that it wasn't Vicky which is true as well and Then we came up with the idea that it's an educational Management information system and we had the idea that it's a directory So you see many ideas but hard to put the focus on and and so I'm just going to give you the E-sense. Oh, there's one slide missing right now. I'm not sure why it is Doesn't matter. So the essence is it's a platform for collecting data and information on actors and activities from the field of OER and open education and So but anyhow, I mean that's when you are in your adolescence I'm not sure if you remember your own poverty or if you have children in that age I think it's quite normal and maybe the answer to the problem is not to find the final answer But to move on and focus on more on what you are doing and stop asking yourself what you are so What are we doing? We have Identified three main epics. So which are three directions and I'm going to just read them for you It's as an OER actor I would like to find other OER actors and connect with them so that I can cooperate in a coordinated way and share Resources and knowledge with them. So this is about Social networking and bringing together the OER community the idea is since we all share the value of sharing and Giving away the most important things. We have our knowledge and this should be helpful for us as a global community because if Different projects are working on similar goals They should connect to each other and and learn from their experiences and share experiences and resources and all this stuff Second one as a teacher or learner. I would like to get qualified Complete and current lists of existing OER office like OER repositories so that I can easily find open resources Which fit to my current learning or teaching context? so From the beginning on we didn't focus on individual resources we focused on platforms like repositories or Search engines and all this stuff. So currently we have I think something about three hundred and thirty repositories and other services on the list and so it's already quite a lot and Actually, this is not only true for For teachers and learners but also for people who want to build OER search engines So our idea was that if you want to build in search engine It should be very easy to identify the sources of OER go to their find the API Take the stuff in your index and then you have a nice search engine so it's just like a primary step into the direction of building search engines for OER and And last but not least we had the epic that as an OER policymaker I would like to get a meaningful Statistics and oversights on the status of the OER movement in order to take and defend decisions in favor of OER So this is also very important as well We we are talking here about the politics of open and policymaking for sure and has the potential to improve the Open educational resources movement and What we have to deliver to them is to provide better statistical Material so and and we thought okay since we are collecting all this stuff. Anyhow we could try to make statistics out of it so Who are the stakeholders of the project? Just we identified at the beginning That at the core there is the the movement the the members of the OER movement at the open education movement Which we estimated to be something about 3000 people, maybe it's more maybe it's less. I don't know and Currently we have only 180 of them on our Map or 180 of them have a profile And I would love to see by the end of the year something like a thousand are something So if you you are not there just go on and create a profile We have then in the second circle The policymakers which I already mentioned which can be institutional policymakers or national policymakers And policymakers on very different levels and last but not least we have teachers and learners Which is a circle and and we are not addressing them at the moment directly, but maybe this could come in the future and Only the the inner two circles are Addressed directly so we think that the the members of the OER community might go to the platform and and use it for direct consultation and The other two ones the policymakers and the teachers and learners are probably more Addressed indirectly so there are different ways for this. We have produced a printed report on OER in Germany I'm coming coming back to this later on and also we are very much interested in building in reusing the data So so the system is built in a way that it's very easy to implement Parts of the map or parts of lists or search results in your own a website so for instance we have them in in Belgium we have platform which has direct connection to the community so we we don't think we should Address Belgium teachers directly, but asked to class cement to help us there So I'm just have to speed up a little bit. This is our country champion network many institutions and people who are working and and supporting the project and I've got to get to the one important point here to the data collection and the question is who who collects all the data and we have three groups of people and The first one is people who are being paid for it The second group is people who benefit from it like if you have your own project then you might want to use the world map as a platform for marketing and Last but not least there's a small group of people who just have fun collecting this data and our idea is that We should build something like a hybrid Business model where we have paid editors like in Germany now We have an OER program and we have one person who's being paid for to collect the data in the OER world map and so that that that grows a basis of data and as soon as there is a Critical mass is achieved. We hope that more and more people will jump in and and spend their own data To the platform and we hope to create something like a virtuous cycle which supports itself and and just Yeah results in and sustainability So the the situation of the or the location of the project is quite interesting from a community Developments point of view because it's just at the interface of top-down and bottom-up when we started to do it We didn't know how to do it best so we said we were taking an open approach and just see what happens and for sure our Mental one models were very much influenced by by bottom-up because that's at the core of of OER But nevertheless we found out that it's not Yeah, the top-down approaches might help as well And so we were open to there and as we will see now we we got some initial Examples, which I'm coming more from these top-down field So how does the OER world map support policy making? I I have got three examples for us the first one is We we have the OER info program currently in Germany this is why so many German people are running around here at OER 17 and and these is something like 25 projects who are being funded to develop know-how on OER and And in the scope of the project there will be developed something like a country map interface So at the moment we have have the world map interface and and we will build an OER Germany map Interface for this and we think that this Helps to to focus on the national perspective and for sure as soon as we have it for Germany It can be reused for every other country of the world as well So if any organization is interested in running an OER map of their own country They can simply take it implemented in their website and then start collecting the data in the back end and so this will be One one point I think Second point is reports. I also already mentioned them We developed and printed report on OER in Germany It was something like 80 pages long and it was presented last year While in the middle of the the policy making progress and and we believe that that this is maybe old-fashioned But it works for policy maker because there are some people who are very more Yeah related to to print still and and it just gives you some haptical experiences and if you see here We have these country view on Germany and just down there. We have something which we named country report. So This is linked to the OER Atlas. We are going to produce or hopefully we are going to produce a new version this year And we hope to implement this as a function of the platform as well And we hope to link to other reports as well at the moment if you make a country report on OER It's just something like a snapshot and I think one big potential would be to link it to the underlying data So if you have the data you can click on it and directly see what initiative is behind it And what's the state of the initiative? How did it develop and I think we can improve The quality of our reports very much and and then get more money from policy makers because there's more evidence So I think this will be a very interesting challenge of the future and this year's program documentation also from the From the OER info program in Germany and it's it might not be so revolutionary to you what you can see here is the profile of the program which is called Richtlinie zur Förderung von offenen Bildungsmaterialien and Under here you can see this is a list of all the projects which are included in the program And if you click on on the project then you can see the project and you can see all the people who are working On the project so there's a direct link from the program to the individual people who are working there And you could imagine that we Expanded by implementing policies there. Then you have a policy click on What what is the program which resulted out of the policy? so which services resulted out of these policy and we can build chains of Logical change to find the right information we need so you can find At the end the people you can contact and ask them for the information So I know in the UK the OER program was very well documented So it might not be so new to you, but in Germany. It's it's quite new and programs are normally not that well documented Last but not least I'm talking about statistics and at the moment. We have some very simple statistics Online on the platform, but we are working to implement to which is called kibana It's actually already on our server, but we still have to implement it in the system and in the front And and this will bring much more power to generate statistics and we'll see how this Manage and and works out in the future. I think that the statistics epic is still the last Least developed them epic so far so we we can Yeah, we'll see what what this year will bring for us. So help us to grow up What can you do and simple thing just register on the map and create on And First one is empty. Okay. All right sounds different as well Okay, and last but not least you can become a strategic partner of the project and so one of our current projects is working with the open education consortia and So we are trying to collect data in the year of open implemented then on on the open education consortia websites and so this would be for sure we are looking for other partners as well and I'm Coming to the end some minutes before the time and finally with a new and fresh micro here Good for questions now Yeah, and if I might say just I think well, I have seen your work before I think it's just really incredibly useful and and timely and I think in your case your PhD study where Everyone was struggling with CC law and all of that copyright That could be an amazing tool isn't it to just really see where are the open education as resources that they could use and they Would be already Documented licensed and all of that and you could be future learn could be an incredible partner for this just me kind of I think it's yeah Anyone with with questions or comments or anything? Well, I think we have done incredibly well in this session We have time for refreshment Shall we call this a session and an afternoon and We're ready for coffee and tea if anyone doesn't have anything to say Yeah, great. Thank you very much for being here and for the great presenters


A patient came in, you know, to the essential triage, which is the intern over at the VA, saying he couldn't read his computer screen anymore. He was only 42, and he had had a history of uncontrolled diabetes for like 10 years. His A1C was 10.4, and he'd reported just blurry vision for a week. He had just decided to start treating his diabetes. He'd been on Metformin, but he'd stopped it. And then a couple months ago, he was started on insulin. He had no other history, and this was his visual acuity. And these were his funds photos. You can see, you know, multiple areas of flame-shaped hemorrhages, dot-block hemorrhages, exudate cotton wool spots, and tremendous macular edema, which you can see here on OCT. And he was just very frustrated because he decided to make a life change, get his diabetes under control, and then this happens. On fluorescein, you can see, you know, areas of hyperfluorescence and leakage, and the blocking areas from the hemorrhage. So, you know, obviously he needed treatment. And part of the difficulty was just helping him kind of cope with this debilitating vision, you know, down to 2400 kind of vision. And I became interested in this topic where, and it seemed like it would repeat itself multiple times where patients would start therapy to get their out-of-control diabetes back under control and they worsen all of a sudden. And the terminology had been coined by the diabetes control trial called early worsening, and they've published several things, and there's been several other publications that have discussed this common finding. In the DCC trial, they had two groups. They had this intensive treatment group that would get three or more daily injections of insulin or they were on a pump, and you had this conventional treatment group which would get the one to two daily injections of insulin. And it was shown that the intensive group had better outcomes as far as diabetic retinopathy and other microvascular complications of diabetes. But they also showed an odds ratio of 2.98 for a three-step worsening of diabetic retinopathy in the intensive group early on at the six-month and 12-month time points. And here's the table from that study. So here's that odds ratio that I just quoted you. In the intensive group versus the conventional group of a three-step, you know, 15-letter worsening since treatment, both at six months and at 12 months, you still saw kind of that trend. And if they looked at other ways to look at cotton wool spots or Irma, you know, that same trend continued where the intensive group would worsen early on. And I know it's a busy slide. I don't want to go over the rest of this, but that was the main point from this table. I'll look over some of this other stuff in a little bit. The baseline factors, you know, when they went and looked at which patients were doing worse than others, they found an interesting trend here. If you looked at screening A1C, so the A1C at the time of enrollment where they started either conventional or intensive treatment, there was, the early worsening was much worse in the, you know, with an odds ratio of 3.4 in the patients that had A1C over 8.8, you know, up here in the really high patients. Whereas the ones that weren't too bad off to begin with didn't show this early worsening. Okay? So that's all I wanted to show from that table. So subsequently they went back and looked, and they looked at four years out and to see whether the patients that had the early worsening continued to be worse. And they found that first off, intensive treatment overall had better outcomes even if the patients had this early worsening. So it wasn't that intensive treatment inherently is bad. It's just that these, you know, it's just they're going to be worse in the beginning and eventually get better. However, if you have early worsening, whether you're in the intensive or the conventional treatment group, so it didn't matter whether you were, you know, getting your A1C down lower, they overall had a worse prognosis than if you didn't have early worsening. So from that, another study came out which they showed this interesting table here. So it's kind of hard to figure this out. But the triangle lines or the ones on the intensive treatment in the circle or the square or the cube, I guess you'd call it, were unconventional. And these are the percent with the early worsening. And interestingly enough, the patients that both had the worse A1C to begin with were out here with a high percentage of both the intensive and conventional. But also if they reduced their A1C significantly at the six months, so you compared the intake A1C and the six month A1C, that seemed to play a role also. So there had subsequently come out with some studies that showed that lowering of the A1C at 0.3% per month, you didn't get an early worsening. So if you kind of brought them down slow, but if you were more than 0.4% per month, you did get it. So it's kind of like the triathlon bike race portion of the triathlon. You don't want to go too fast, because if you do go too fast, then you don't have enough left to do the run. So you got to hold back a little bit. And the recommendations at this point, let me skip that for a second, is to lower the A1C at about a rate of 0.4% per month. Now, whether that's really hard or not for a primary care physician to do, I'm not sure. I imagine it's kind of tough for them to gradually bring the A1C down. But it's important to maybe discuss that with them as you get these referrals for a newly controlled diabetic, and they have baseline retinopathy, and their A1C is greater than eight, to mention that in your referral letter or your dictation letter back to the primary care doctor. And I think it's also discussed with the patient the possibility of this early worsening. Or if they come in with early worsening, be kind of like my daughter here, who's the cheerleader for the patient who just doesn't really care or is just not excited about what's going on. And it's important also they recommend that you follow these patients a little more closely early on. Even if they don't have treatable diabetic retinopathy, at the time of presentation they're likely to develop it if they meet these criteria where they're over A1Cs and they're starting this heavy regimen of insulin. And our patient, he didn't do real well. He did get triessence on the day of presentation. And then in the other eye, you know, a couple of weeks later, then he came back for laser treatment, for focal treatment. He ended up eventually developing a vitreous hemorrhage. He needed PRP, and I want to say he's had a vitrectomy in one eye and the other. So he's done poorly, and his vision hasn't really come back. So he kind of fit that mold where the early worsening patients tend to do worse long-term. Any questions or comments from the faculty of retinopathy? They defined early worsening as vision, three-step worsening, you know, on the ETDRS vision charts. But they also looked at treatable diabetic retinopathy where it's all some come to the point where you need to do laser or something like that. And that also had early, they had that early worsening characteristic. It is mainly macular edema, that's right. Yeah, and they've done studies to see whether focal laser helps with it, and it does help, you know, obviously, but they don't respond as well as other patients that show up with macular edema that aren't part of this early worsening. I know the Accord study, you know, they stopped early because of the cardiac complications, but they had a group, the Accord study took patients and they kept their A1C under six, and then they had another group that kept them between seven and eight. And they found some, maybe some benefit to that for diabetic retinopathy, but not a lot. But they didn't look specifically yet at early. You know, they think the pathophys is this mismatch between IGF-1 levels, the soluble growth factor and the receptors. And having someone with these high chronic sugar levels, your receptor levels, you know, chronically get changed to adapt to that environment. But then when you get this, the patient under immediate control, the soluble levels of IGF-1 change, and then the receptor levels haven't yet caught up to that change. And that mismatch of having that too much, I think it's too high a growth factor with too low receptors, or maybe it's the other way around, that seems to be, so I don't see why it wouldn't cause other, you know, microvascular complications like that. Thanks, yeah.


Well, the initial embedding is constructed from three vectors. The token embeddings are the pre-trained embeddings. The main paper uses word piece embeddings that have a vocabulary of 30,000 tokens. The segment embeddings is basically the sentence number that is encoded into a vector. And the position embeddings is the position of a word within that sentence that is encoded into a vector. Adding these three vectors together, we get an embedding vector that we use as input to BERT. The segment and position embeddings are required for temporal ordering since all these vectors are fed in simultaneously into BERT and language models need this ordering preserved.


Hi, I've put this short screencast together to show you how you can import music to a new library So I've got a new iTunes library here and what I've done I've just copied a few albums into a folder that I've called music. So if we just double-click that so you can see So I've got three artists, three albums and some music in there like that. Just on preferences. So if you're going to music Preferences and under files. You've got two choices. You can either leave the music where it is on your external disc or You can choose to copy it into Where your music library currently is So if you want to keep your music on your external disc Then turn that off and click okay, and it will leave it on your external disc And I suspect this is probably what's happened in that your library file was on your old Mac You weren't copying your music to the folder on your Mac where your library was and when when your old Mac died That's probably why you can't find your your your library So to add music file add to library then all you need to do is to browse to folder Click open and it will then find all of the tracks In there and then add that to your library. So you can see now. It's just added all those sort of tracks there And It's as simple as that now the only disadvantage of doing this is if you had a lot of playlists Created then you're going to have to recreate those but that's probably the easiest way to rebuild your library Hope that helps


All right. Well, thank you very much. Full crowd here, standing room in the back. So hopefully we won't put anybody to sleep. There is coffee right outside. My name is Greg Nierman. I'm a technology evangelist for Hitachi Data Systems. I also co-host a podcast called Speaking in Tech, which is distributed on the register every Wednesday. This panel is being recorded. It'll be available on YouTube. And we're also have it available on the podcast this Wednesday as well. And I also want to introduce Ken.  Ken's co-moderating with me. Sure. My name is Ken of Hoyt. I am a technology evangelist at Rackspace, focused on educating users on OpenStack and helping the community. So one of the things I want to encourage you all to do, if you're on Twitter, to go ahead and tweet things you're hearing in the session using the OpenStack hashtag. Please do. We'll start off with Brian. If each of our panels can introduce themselves, so everybody has a context for your backgrounds and some of the discussion we're going to be having. Brian? Sure. Thanks. My name is Brian Graceley. I'm Director of Cloud Solutions at EMC. And I also run the Cloudcast podcast. My name is Manju Ramanathpura. I work for Hitachi Data Systems. I'm a CTO for Intelligent Platforms. Primarily, I focus on Cloud Platforms, OpenStack being one of the primary initiatives that I'm driving in Hitachi. And my name is John Griffith. I work at SolidFire. I'm a software engineer. My focus is actually OpenStack, the PTO for the Cinder project right now. Neil Levine was VP of products for Ink Tank, the sponsor of Cef, and I work for Red Hat. And I'm not going to announce anything here. I'm Val Bercovici. I'm the evil twin of the guy with hair up on the screen there. I've been at NetApp a long, long time, more than a decade and a half now. I direct research for the company, and prior to that, I was a reform developer. That's outstanding. I want to start off this panel discussion. Neil, obviously, Ink Tank made some news. Something happened? Yes, a little acquisition happened. So I don't even know which company or title to put you under. I need to speak to my lawyer. I can't comment on that. I can't talk about that. Give us some context for Red Hat's acquisition of Ink Tank. And I don't want to make this about vendors necessarily, but there is a significant impact here for Cef and the technology that surrounds that. Can you give us some background specifically around Cef? And then, largely, I want to open this up to the rest of the panel about the state of storage technologies in OpenStack in general. But just to kick us off, let's talk about Cef and Red Hat for a minute. So for those who don't know, Red Hat announced an acquisition of Ink Tank the week before last. So Cef is a massively scalable open source distributed storage product, which has seen a lot of traction in the OpenStack community, especially on the block side, but also on the object side. And I think the acquisition... You'd have to ask Red Hat exactly for all their reasons, of course, but certainly Cef's popularity within OpenStack was a huge part of that. But I think also they recognized that to become a serious software-defined storage player or to make a sort of dent in the storage community, they needed to bolster their portfolio, bring in some of the strengths that Cef has, which complement Gluster, the existing storage technology that they have. So OpenStack was definitely a part, but with the very early discussions we've had already, it was about more than just OpenStack. Certainly there's the big data part that Cef is looking to pay to get involved in as well. So OpenStack plus more. Outstanding. John, why don't you kind of... You've got a lot more exposure, I think, than a lot of us here on the panel about the state of storage and OpenStack right now. It'd be great to get your feedback and kind of a summary of where you think things are right now. Sure. So I've been working on the Cinder project for a couple of years now, well actually from when it started on. I think it continues to grow, continues to mature, I think it gets better every release. And one of the things that drives that is the fact that there are more and more vendors and more and more choices being introduced. But the important thing is not only are we introducing more choices and more vendors, at the same time we're also enforcing compatibility between those vendors and those choices. And I think that makes a really huge difference. So in my opinion, of course, I'm biased, but I think the state of storage in OpenStack, at least block storage in particular, is fantastic. Very good. Val, it's kind of funny. We've got three big traditional vendors, I guess is a good way to describe it. What's the... When folks think about storage in the OpenStack environment, a lot of times the thoughts go right down to commodity hardware, with the features being built into the software. From your perspective, and your view of where OpenStack is progressing, is that true? Are we boiling this down to commodity storage? I think some of the people, I can't generalize anymore with 4,500 people here. I used to be able to generalize a couple of years ago and these sessions are smaller. But today there's no easy answer to that anymore. I think if I were to sort of tread on that overused and abused software defined storage term, if nothing else, I think OpenStack is the embodiment of software defined storage. To administrators, it might mean options of white box as well as traditional storage vendors. But I think to developers, there's no better community, no stronger community in the world of actual practitioners that implement storage through software, as well as developers that consume it through software. Even Amazon, which is obviously the 800 pound gorilla in this space, it's a closed system. You don't implement it, you just consume it. Here you get the choice and the luxury of actually interacting with people that implement. That to me is the true definition of software defined storage. Not to just brown nose here, but I think this community really is leading the way to the promise and the value of software defined storage. Let me bring this up. We're talking about software defined storage in OpenStack. Red Hat bought Ink Tank, which is a unified storage platform and does software defined storage. In everyone's viewpoint, is that where we're going with software defined storage? That there's no longer value in the hardware, it's going to be purely in software only? Who heard Chris from Disney this morning? What were the three top words he emphasized? Fast, fast, fast. You got to look for where the value is. The value for fast in my mind is at least two-fold. The predictable one of when I'm in production, I want the application to be as fast as possible. Hardware acceleration, heavy metal helps there. But really, it's that 80, 90% of the application lifecycle during development and test, where you can be truly agile and create some of our probably other members of the panel here. You've got solutions that can create hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands of instances, NOVA instances, Cinder instances. I'll put a plug-in from Manila later in terms of why you need that. But all those instances very, very rapidly create them, delete them, make them permanent even though they start off as ephemeral. Those are things that we add value to. So it's really hard, again, to generalize and say, only SAF, or only Swift, or only Gluster, whatever is the way of the future because you've got to have that option of being able to go fast when you need to go fast and deliver value with a range of options, including software only, including hardware only, and the right balance in between. And again, it doesn't have to Uval, but other folks on the panel.  Again, in a world where AWS, a lot even opens that cloud, the storage is dumb and cheap. We don't really care what's running on them as long as they present this capacity. Well, I think, so again, I would go back to the keynote presentation. Glenn Ferguson from Wells Fargo talked about some of the challenges that banks have in terms of meeting the compliance, making the backup, and having certain expectations built in in terms of the rules and regulations that you follow. Those challenges, we still need to evolve as an OpenStack community now I'm speaking. I think there is room for OpenStack as a whole to improve. When you look from a software-defined point of view, I think that's where the gaps are. You look from a software-defined, it's really about using your software to programmatically manage your infrastructure. It's less about using the commodity hardware or using non-commodity hardware. That's really the abstraction, software-defined. OpenStack has really driven the wave of using the commodity hardware, especially in the space of shared-nothing storage space. But when you go into the shared storage space, there is still a lot of work that we all have to do as a community. That's where I think some of the, when you talk about value-added functionalities from storage vendors, I think there is more value over there. And that helps for customers like Wells Fargo that we're talking about, meeting certain compliance requirements.  I don't think that's true, I don't think that's true at all. I think there are a lot of differences, whether it be via the software, like some products are, or whether it's via hardware or whatever. There are significant differences, and depending on your environment and your use cases, they matter. It may be performance, it may be things like battling the noisy neighbor problem, quality of service, things like that, or maybe it's just more along the lines of availability, HA, redundancy, things like that. Those things are really, really important. The thing is, is everybody offers a different sweet spot. Everybody on the stage, I think each of us would take our product and be able to put one thing up and say, this is one thing we do extremely well compared to everybody else. And I think depending on your use case and your environment, that's going to dictate which one of those you're going to want to look at, or maybe you want to look at all of them. Please don't ask us to define what software defined storage is, because I think you'll find people. You'll get three opinions just from me. But I don't want to make a forecast about the future, and is it just dumb storage, is it just commodity. I think the great thing about OpenStack is it's allowing the businesses to discover what it is to them. Yes, there is obviously legacy stuff there, and now they've got a chance to explore and say, well actually, do I want to try commodity based hardware for my storage, or do I want to have a mix and match approach, and it's one of the great strengths of Cinder, of course, it allows you to do that in a relatively seamless way from the control plane. And I think customers are trying to, they're discovering that now, what is the value they get from the different solutions. And as John says, some of them really value the QoS or the HA, of course some of them really, really value lower cost storage. So where the cost is the primary consideration, obviously that's where the commodity comes in, but yeah, of course I think there'll be heterogeneous environments for a while, but OpenStack is it's surfacing the value very, very obviously to the different users of OpenStack. Ken, we've got a question in the audience, come on up. If anybody else has got some questions, just line up behind the microphone. Go ahead. Just talk really loud, we'll re-articulate the question. You used to have it years ago, mainframe, but we don't know about that. So the question, if I can summarize this, when we'll get to the point where because of the APIs, you can actually do the management of the storage layer up at the OpenStack layer as opposed to having to go to each individual storage solution and do configurations there. I just want to make one point and I'd like you to pick it up. I think instead of using commodity hardware, it's probably good for our conversation to use general purpose hardware. The difference is people associate commodity with cheap and no value in the hardware. The real discussion here is having a general purpose hardware so that you don't have like a vendor lock-in from a hardware point of view as well, but you still get the benefits of differentiated hardware. So if somebody wants some acceleration that has to happen on hardware for faster data application, faster snapshots, they should be able to do it. But the differentiation there is use a general purpose hardware so that the customer could use Hitachi's API, NetApp's API, ENC's API, SolidFire, anyone's API, and they should be able to pick and choose the underlying hardware platform. John? So there's a word I think a lot of us use here which is a storage catalog. If you expose your interfaces for sender and others through a storage catalog, implement it inside that catalog should be your specific provisioning for the kind of service level you expect, the kind of pricing, the kind of replication, backup, and so forth that you need. So that's sort of my simple answer to that is if you implement most of the storage, implementation, and orchestration, provisioning and orchestration services behind the catalog, we can satisfy what you ask for. Brian? I mean, I think the other thing to sort of keep in mind with this, and we've seen this over the last three, four, five years is we see more and more converged systems. We've seen what used to be siloed things. You've now got a virtualization team that has to know enough about networking and enough about storage. Some of that exists today already, but we're getting to the point where the storage team, provisions whatever there is on the network side, they provision pools of storage, and like Val says, they'll expose that through either service catalogs or through an API. I think the thing that's a little bit of a stretch though, and you'll find it in little pockets of things, but it's quite a bit of a stretch to believe that you're going to have application teams that are going to know enough about storage, and if you think about storage, not just I want a blob of whatever, I need a lun of whatever size, but I need to know what that thing does, because somewhere down the road in your application you probably have to back it up. It may be important enough that you need to have a copy of it somewhere else, and God forbid it becomes a compliant and thing that you've got to govern. That's not stuff that any application team typically is thinking about, other than they just go, I want it to run all the time. So the premise that you're going to build a system that storage is just an API and you don't have to think about anything else, but I think it's a stretch, I think what you were talking about though, if you get to a point where that storage team or that data team gives you either pools of data, however you get to it, object, file, block, and that they're going to worry about some of those things in the back end in terms of giving you what looks like an SLA, I think from an application team that's when you start going, okay, it tells me how much it's available and I can dynamically grow it or shrink it how I need to. So it becomes much more tenable in terms of that split between whether it's dev and ops or apps and storage or network. John, I see you following your brow over there. Don't always look like that. So I'm kind of confused because basically what you described and a good part of what people have talked about here is actually what Cinder does, right? So when you talk about provisioning storage, I guess maybe I'm confused on which piece of the provisioning you talk about. If you're talking about installing and configuring the storage device, that's one thing and I don't see that going into a common API. But if you're talking about actually provisioning off pieces for users, that's exactly the point. That's OpenStack, that's Cinder, right? It's self-service and... Okay, perfect. Sure. Yep. Yep. And that's exactly what we have. So in Cinder, what we have is we provide an API. The end user doesn't know necessarily what is on the back end and what's serving it up and they may have choices. So depending on the OpenStack admin and what they set up, they may have choices like I want something that's HA, I want something that's backed up, I want something that has this performance level, whatever it might be, and we use a filter scheduler to do the automatic placement based on those parameters that they provided. So I think we're closer to what you think than maybe the impression that you have. I think the question comes up is maybe we're mixing OpenStack now with software-defined storage. But I think the question is how much of the value of each of your individual solutions should you surface up to OpenStack? Because remember, right the reference implementation for Cinder, for example, was on commodity storage that had no QoS, none of those types of function. But now we're talking about each of you unique functionality. Should we be exposing that up to OpenStack? So here's the thing. So first of all, the software-defined storage thing, this was a really hot topic over the past year, right? And I was on panel in Hong Kong on this and got beat up really, really bad. But the way I look at it is OpenStack and Cinder in my view, everybody has a different view, right? So maybe I'm completely wrong. But the way I view it is Cinder is the software-defined storage. That's the whole point, right? So that's kind of the premise I'm going on. So if it doesn't match up, maybe that's why. In terms of the features, absolutely, the whole point is there's no reason to have a lowest common denominator and a race to the bottom in terms of the storage and in terms of OpenStack and Cinder. But at the same time that has to be done in such a way that it doesn't impact compatibility or usability for anybody else. So the way we do that in Cinder right now that I think works really well is we allow you to custom-define volume types. And those volume types may point to different things or expose specific functionality and features that different products have. So SolidFire, for example, we expose quality of service to that and actually now multiple vendors do that. But that's just one example. And then OpenStack also provides extensions. So you can always add extra capability and extensions and stuff and customize your deployment that way by impacting base compatibility. Neil, you hit some comics. Yeah, I mean, it follows on directly from what John was saying, which I think the challenge is going to be how I think we've got the commonality done. There's some tech vectors still going to fix, but ultimately the common API is there. And as John said, we can we'll extend to expose our individual capabilities. It's how do we move on to innovate collectively beyond that. That's, I think, the next challenge. And that's going to be a very unusual thing in the storage industry to try and say, well, actually we think we can push the state of the art of storage through a common API with an extension and we'll work on that and develop that individually so we can expose it at different costs or performance points and what have you. I think that that's the in terms of the API flexibility that I think the questioner wanted, I think that's the next challenge for us here. Yeah, just to sort of double down what Neil said, I think exposing the commensurate cost of a particular new feature is really, really critical because you can still sort of dumb down to a naive enterprise setting where the budget was allocated last year or two years ago and I can consume this resource at any rate I want. To be really cloud, you have to make sure that the cost is visible in the upfront part of the interface and it shouldn't always be super intuitive where the most valuable, fastest, coolest feature is the most expensive, but as you start to consume it, particularly at scale, you need to know what the commensurate cost is for the service level you're requesting. I'd like to ask each of the panelists just real quick as we're getting toward the end of this discussion. What are some of the challenges you see around the corner for OpenStack and storage specifically that folks that are exploring this should be conscious of and some of the things you're conscious of and John, I'll start off with you again because I know you're up to your eyeballs in this and I'd love to get your reflections of those challenges and then we'll move around the panel. I think there's a lot of different perspectives on this, so I'll give it as PTL working on the project and what I see on a daily basis. One of the biggest challenges I see is actually how do you continue to have some sort of compatibility and some sort of structure and things like that when OpenStack is now the hot newness, right? Every group, every engineering group, everybody that has a storage product they have marketing people and sales people saying, hey, you have to have an OpenStack driver right now. You have to be in there. The problem is continuing to scale that and make sure that you're still delivering a quality product. I think we're taking the right steps to do that and I think it's going to continue to even get better, but I think that's one of the biggest challenges. The new features thing that just came up, that's a tough one too. And part of the problem there is how do you define where those features should be? One of the big debates that we have is on replication. Is replication something that is an end user feature or is it an admin feature? Does it belong in the API at all, right? So there's all sorts of things like that. So those are some of the big challenges I see.  Yeah, I would probably dwell a little bit more on the feature side. I'm looking more from a customer's perspective and how they are using it today and how they want to use it in the future. I think some of the topics that we've been discussing here from an enterprise point of view keeps coming up. How do I do a replication? How do I do a disaster recovery? And how do I do a fast snapshot, fast cloning when you are deploying hundreds of virtual machines? And backup restore? Those type of things keep coming up in the enterprise world where they are used to using certain other tools that fits in with the rest of the data center and it could be from a compliance point of view for instance, right? So if I configure my data center to meet certain high availability and that matrix is automatically propagated into some other tool that our compliance police are using, right? How does automatically all these pieces plug together in an open stack environment is a challenge that I see. Not necessarily again going back to John's point, it's not necessarily Cinder's problem now. It's really more of a data center management problem. Some of the things are more of a features that are specific to storage. Some of the things are more about how the data center as an entity is managed and how Cinder gives the outbound messaging to those tools. I think that's another challenge we need to look into. Right. Neil, you want to take a pass at it? Actually I was going to echo some of the things here. Again, this is personal from the self perspective. I think there are some more challenges just to surface the kind of enterprise features that customers want. I'm not too worried about that. I think the problem is really well defined and just got to write the code and handling multi-site and disaster recovery a bit more elegantly in these kind of things. I do think there is still some tech that which needs to be caught up on which is natural in a project like this. But I think to speak to Manju's comment, the real challenge I think is going to be the interaction between things like Cinder and Neutron in a sense of actually the network becomes really important and if it's all software defined if there's an asymmetric network failure how do you pick that up? How do you correct for that? How do you modify both? Does the storage react to the network or does the network react to the storage challenges? And I think there's a coordination issue there between Cinder and other projects to handle that in a common way which makes it easy for the administrator or the data center manager to handle and I think it's a challenge across all of OpenStack to ensure that these things are well concept as well thought of before we start implementing things and that's going to be a challenge for people who are just Cinder devs and that's all they are to start really collaborating I think. We'll get to Val next. I just want to encourage anybody from the audience if you have a question please step up to the microphone and we'll get to those questions in just a minute. Go ahead Val. So again I'll just start by agreeing with Neil with regards to integration of Cinder and Swift and hopefully Manila as well into the greater OpenStack ecosystem whether it's Neutron, HeatGlass deeper integration is really important and there are really two really really big challenges which in my mind are also major opportunities. The near term one is the fact that two thirds of enterprise storage today is unstructured through file interfaces. So I think it's a huge opportunity to actually leapfrog Amazon and be able to have something like a project Manila be promoted to a first class project not just a blueprint right now and be able to satisfy all those file interface requests and requirements POSIX requirements in the enterprise of which is influenced in pretty cool shared storage instances between multiple Nova instances actually. That's a huge near term opportunity. The long term one is really what I spend most of my time in research which is super cool. The next evolution of fast storage isn't faster storage it's slower memory. It's persistent memory. So the ability for the OpenStack community to define persistent memory interfaces perhaps building off some of the work that I know Alex is involved in the near community with NVME and NVME programming extensions that Intel NetApp and others are working on the ability to define how you now offer up persistent memory for Nova instances perhaps a new kind of instance type for sender and so forth that is a really really cool opportunity that's something that Amazon inevitably will bury behind some pretty cool instance as well. But the opportunity for the OpenStack community to be more agile to get their first at value there is upon us in the next couple of design summits and conferences that will be a big topic of discussion because the economies of scale are going there. Outstanding. Brian, any thoughts on some of the challenges? I think the thing that we hear from our customers the most is that the applications they're rolling out don't tend to be incredibly siloed anymore. They tend to be there's an element of it that's going to be HDFS and object and they want to do analytics on that at the same time they're doing relational database dips since there's a block element to it and there may very well be a file and what they're trying to do is go I don't want to have to think about five, six different APIs and like how do I get to a point where I'm really just thinking about this as a set of workflows whether it's for provisioning or it's for backup and they're like in us in particular they're pushing us very very hard to go I want you guys as sort of storage experts and people that have products across these things how are you going to make that simpler for me? I understand kind of these core technology elements of it whether it's Cinder or Swift or Manila or whatever's coming on the road that's all great that's that's part to the engine how do you make that simpler for me because I don't want to have to burden my application guys going it's this hard to build an application that has multiple pieces and now the underlying infrastructure is all these different components so that's what we see quite a bit is people going the applications are getting more interesting and more complex please don't keep making your infrastructure so incredibly complicated simplify the number of APIs I'm talking to simplify the points of management and so forth right we got quite a character here ready to ask a question Alex go ahead what's your question so the question is about standards go ahead John so well the only thing so I do want to touch on the vendor lock-in thing and you said that vendors are usually kicked out and so I would argue the complete opposite especially if you look at the stats on any project in OpenStack right now but especially Cinder and you look at where the contributions come from and what's going in it is vendor driven and vendors are valuable and important there's no question about that I think the vendor lock-in argument is kind of hype to be honest because if OpenStack is doing its job and doing what it's supposed to do and giving you that compatibility of what those pools are on the back end vendor lock-in shouldn't exist it shouldn't matter so standard so when you say that right so standards are you talking like SMIS or are you talking just keeping standards and keeping things from breaking okay totally totally agree totally agree with you 100% and that's something that Cinder side we've definitely tried to focus on because we've seen what's happened in some of the other projects when people do upgrades and it is bad it is really ugly I think everybody has come away pretty bloody from that and they've learned and I think everybody every project in OpenStack now is really fully aware and focused on trying to make that better I don't know how we standardize that and make it you know something as part of a process I mean right now we have grenade which runs and actually takes all your code and ports it back and make sure it runs on the previous version of OpenStack as well as the current version right all of those things are good and it's a good start we definitely have a long way to go though I think we have to make that better I'll just make a quick comment I think where we are from OpenStack point of view it's really following the model of fast fast fast we really want to get OpenStack ready, deployed, managed it's in sort of like a startup phase still I think and but some of the components like Cindernova are maturing at a faster rate than some other and I think it's more of a cycle you know once you have customers deployed Cinder once you have customers deployed Nova you will start seeing the resistance to not make major changes to the API structure I think that will sort of evolve into its own standard this is just my perception as opposed to following say SNEA standard or CDMI or something like that and that my take on why that's happening is probably more because of the developer mentality to let's get it done I don't want to get bogged down into the bureaucracy of standards I'll actually pause on the second one I think to a certain extent so yeah there's some general sort of don't do evil types of things but the marketplace knows how to deal with vendor lock in they know how to deal with risk management storage is one of those few industries that you don't have truly truly an 800 pound gorilla I mean that 30% is sort of market leadership it's not networking it's not database so the market knows how to deal with this stuff customers have choice in which distro they want to use they have choice in which platform they want to use today if they want to go wild west and go look I'm just going to kind of pick and choose whatever I want find me a customer who goes I really don't care which vendor I do and I just plug them all freely in for Ethernet switching or storage that's kind of a problem that's solved I think the vendors tend to focus on it because we have to sort of defend it a little bit to our customers who go well I'm going to beat you up for vendor lock in vendor lock is a risk management that's what it is and whether you look at it as cost management or technology management the market knows how to deal with this stuff we as vendors worry about it because we have to fill out RFPs and stuff but I don't see it as a massive massive problem because again you don't have at least in storage you don't have that one gorilla that owns 60, 50, 60, 70, 80% of the market that can make one change and everybody else is locked out I mean there's how many 20 something storage vendors that are contributing code now I think maybe you use the word standards and you thrown everybody because we thought it was capital S, CDMI, SNEA kind of things I think quality and sort of not breaking things is probably quality is actually the phrase you meant maybe not you know don't don't change the API so suddenly everything breaks I mean I think I mean this is a standard thing in open source communities it's like the developers want to rush forward developing cool new stuff and the product guys are going wait wait you're breaking things it's an emergent thing which will happen in the community it's happened in other open source projects and I think there'll be a natural shift probably in the downstream open stack products where they take a lot of the driver code and everything else and I mean they'll maintain the quality because they're the ones who are on the line for you know when mind you new masters of red hat or canonical or cloud scaling whoever it is when they're shipping a product they're going to be ones on the line when the customer does the upgrade and everything breaks and I think they'll police things to a certain extent but I think in a way I think it's kind of it's fairly mature from an API point of view so that clean abstraction I think it's fairly consistent now and doesn't vary huge amount especially because of these different extensions which give the vendors the opportunity to play with things but you know if when the customers really demand do not break anything at all I want 100% verification they'll put you know that'll force the change and I think that's happening right now so it's not a concern we've seen from our customers certainly within a couple of years and I think that's a good question. Okay let me ask one last question. Hang on I got to jump in here. So I'll be brief. So the adage about cloud is you know the cost of failure is really low which is why people like to move fast and break things because the failure cost failure is low but the price of success is high so there's a major milestone I can't let pass with that question that happened two weeks ago who knows what Facebook's motto used to be that motto at the F8 conference they just held where they realized their developers now their own infrastructure and all of the APIs they exposed to the billions of dollars of revenue they do with their developers the interface is so important now that keeping that stable consistent and so forth is the new mantra and the new reality so I think it's a really fascinating milestone it shows you that once you succeed you grow up and I expect that problem to go away with success. So last question this is related to storage vendors and open source right so I talked in the ecosystem to be frank there's a huge suspicion about storage vendors that basically you guys are in it basically just to sell products that you're not really interested in helping the community open stack move any further so A how do you address that accusation and B what do you do about it and specifically I'm talking about people who say all the storage vendors are doing is adding drivers and doing anything to make open stack storage a better product. We're going to need to move very quickly. Look at the data look at the contributions that people make not just lines of code number of contributors to the open stack project but look at open source in general contributions to Linux to BSD to the new Heartbleed initiative in terms of securing funding the secure open source foundation for a lot of our infrastructures look at the data it's an ignorant comment if you look at the data I have a slightly different view maybe I'll come back to my earlier point we've got pretty good very good API abstraction now we need to innovate on it so it's going to be step up in the show and yeah I mean look we had to do the drivers everyone had to do the drivers so that's the table stakes to start playing with the API at that point but I think they are committing the resources yes I think they have been focused on just making their stuff work but I think it would be especially interesting at the summit and the next one what new features do they surface first in the Cinder API and that they put resources into it and to that which then benefits everybody in the community I mean it's the proof will be in the features and the code well unfortunately we're getting the hook I got it from the back of the room John I'll let you go real quick and we'll wrap up all right so this is one of my favorite topics so I I would say that that can absolutely there are definitely vendors in the community that are just doing a driver and that's it there are other vendors that are doing significantly more again you can look at the stats you can look at Garrett you can look at GitHub and you can find out who those are you know I'm the perfect example I work for a vendor but we're not in it just to sell more product or just to get a driver and obviously I've been leading the project so you can look and get that information at the same time though I want to say that a vendor that wants to just put a driver in and be an open stack try and get some sales that's not a bad thing in my opinion because the bottom line is I don't care if if anything is driving open stack and getting more customers and more potential users interested in open stack and that's a roadway that's a gateway for them to get into open stack that's great I'm fantastic with that I think we're going to have to wrap it up on that note thank you very much Ken thanks Val Neil John Marju of course Brian thank you Full House we appreciate you guys making an out for this thank you