Okay, yeah, hi. I'm Daniel. I'm in the compiler team for yeah over four years now and Yeah, originally the plan was for this talk to be held by Chris who couldn't make it at Bogota So I have to improvise a bit. I brought a lot of code snippets Which will explain what we have currently in the compiler currently the state of the language and where we are headed with this Yeah, I guess you if you are familiar with Solidity, which I hope most of you are you probably know it mutables But now it's been around form for a while and it's a very highly appreciated feature from our impression Which yeah, I still will quickly explain how they work. That's the owner variable here It's looks like a state variable, but it's not a really proper state variable in storage But a mutable variable which can only be assigned to once in the constructor And then can use this many times as one wants read only in the runtime code as a contract But there it's the access is very cheap. It doesn't require an S load, but it's basically inlined in the Code as if it was a literal So, yeah, you probably know this and people liked it a lot and an apparent and very obvious extension to ask for is Why do we only support that for value types? That's the restriction you had so far that it's only integers only addresses, but not a raise of things for example So this was for example, it's taken from and get up issue that I think open several in open with us to Yeah asked for an array of immutables, which would then yeah the initialized by index accessing and otherwise work Just as As one is used to with immutables And we're working towards that end, but there's some issues with that. So, I mean we have these assignments here where a randomly assigned Into elements of this array and in general I cannot check that this is really assigned only once I mean the question is is this still an immutable thing in that sense Also, if I start having a race as immutables, I will want to have local references to them Which I could then reassign. So if I keep the name immutable I just changed what this points to so this is really it doesn't look immutable immutable doesn't fit this concept anymore properly So let's yeah, let me explain a bit further how immutables actually work in the constructor Owner is actually a position in memory. So we store Whatever you write to this variable in memory and then when the actual runtime code of the of the contract you're part of deploy It's copied in memory to be returned by the constructor. We fill in From this memory location into the bytecode the value that is there which in the end Results in the runtime code to actually have it as a literal in the bytecode So this variable in the constructor actually is a memory variable in runtime It's actually something that lives in code But filling in literal values in some so basically the push argument into the bytecode won't work anymore for Dynamic types if we have steadily sized arrays We could still do that and we probably will for efficiency reasons But at least for dynamic types to be put go full way We cannot do that anymore because we don't know the length of the thing so we can't reserve space in bytecode for that So instead we need to rely on code copy and Yeah, I already mentioned we will probably want to pass the immutables around by reference. We will want to slice them Which if you think about all that together Makes immutables not an annotation for a safe arrival anymore, but it will become a proper whole data location But this will probably look like this in the end As I said the right in the end will live in code So code and the opcode that will access it is code copy. So code is a natural name for these things So here I have a data variable abides and dynamic array In code which I can then in the constructor just treat like any old memory variable Assigned to it modify it freely You can drop the requirement that it's only written to once in the constructor because that was always an artificial requirement so if we actually be Yeah, call it what it is a code variable that will actually be inserted into or use as in the code in the end We can freely modify it and Then in the runtime code It basically behaves like a call data reference a read-only reference only that it doesn't come from call data But from code so I can slice it Have local references to it and pass it around to functions all with very little cost This will be a bit tricky to write to type check in the end because yeah in the constructor It is a memory variable in the runtime code Be as differently. So if the constructor calls functions, we need to type check everything twice But we have different calls for refactor in the type checker to actually do that as well So we will do that and there's still some considerations of gas It would be very handy if they had a code load upcode similar to a call data upcode to actually write read single words from code, but We don't so we will whenever possible probably still use the same mechanism as immutables use now to actually fill it into a push argument in white code if not, we will probably yeah code copy either in an entire memory region or if you just need a snippet of a Dynamic array code copy to scratch space and em load from there But it will still be significantly cheaper than anything in storage Okay, yeah, that was the first topic I wanted to talk about the second thing that you may have noticed in the recent versions is our move to Allow user defined value types go to test case for this concept was always fixed point types Which we decided to not implement as a first citizen type in the in the latest type system But to build the infrastructure to define it as a user defined type. Yeah, I'm assuming that you're familiar with those so I won't go into that much more detail in the basic concept which What we recently added or more recently added is this global keyword you see in the first using statement which means that currently a using statement is only locally effective whereas a Using statement with a global at the end will only be allowed in the Very same source file in which you define the type But we'll have that the effect that wherever the type is available the functions you bound to the type will also be available So this is what you can do then in the end practically to write type libraries But you're in that library define the type Equipped with some functions and then anyone importing the type only can still use all the functions on that Still of course one major inconvenience with that for defining for example fixed point types that are actually nice and usable Is that we have only functions in? that can be defined and Equipped to the type of using statements, which is what we will soon change So this is open PRs currently that are under review, which will probably yeah in finite amount of time. We actually Merge and come through which will allow you to define operators and literals in In the first versions in a very limited setting So the addition for example can only be between the two between two Expressions of the tie that you define such that is not getting messy and you know no longer know what Functions will actually be executed if you have an Operator expression, but it will still already be yeah very useful. I hope In making these user-defined types more yeah convenient to use literal similarly we will Introduce a way to define functions that can Take up as argument a Mantissa in that sense and an exponent which is basically yeah here for example for the example below it would be 100 115 and the exponent is 10 to the power of minus 2 Which will allow to yeah, then deal with for example a fixed point setting rather gracefully and have literals without Yeah, especially code constructs Eventually we will have a proper rational Rational literal type instead of splitting it up in a value mantissa and exponent here I think at least but for now this is the fastest path to get this work But yeah so far these user-defined types we have only our value types This might be equal cost to want to encapsulate and abstract dynamic types arrays structs and so on and there's also of course Yeah, the desire to have proper algebraic algebraic data types in general so the more user-defined data types We have the easier it is to write a usable code and Yeah, there's questions about that for example where data locations would go currently the data locations are associated with variables and not types which makes that a hassle Which we will also probably change for independent reasons but yeah, I mean You may See where I'm going with this if we have all these kinds of types and maybe I would also use a different containers and all that It will no longer be feasible to To write functions to cover all these types and that's separate functions for all these types So all this Increases the need for having a construct of generics in the language Which has been long an idea to introduce to the language and which yeah, we're finally now making moves towards But yeah this if we have that The natural question is if even the built-in ties we have now can be user-defined instead Which leads me to another topic that we already started Just a standard library The idea here is to move whatever manually hard-coded constructs we have in the compiler now or as many of them as possible to actual implementations in Solidity written user code and then to ship that as an Standard library that's integrated into the compiler So yeah, this is what this is in the first instance going to look like that you can enable The standard library version of the compiler which in the end we will move towards and then import Built-in constructs from the standard library and it will be possible to export the standard library as a set of files Out of the compiler and they can then inspect what this function actually does for example Atma as a simple example, which can then actually be implemented in Inland assembly with additional checks that works To reduce the footprint of the compiler and to yeah make it easier for people to inspect what's actually happened and to extend it even But the problem there again is this is of course very restricted in the scope in which we Have what we couldn't move into the standard library as long as all functions is a little bit of monomorphic As long as we don't have generic functions that can handle multiple types So the full potential of the standard library will only be unleashed if we have generics Yeah, and the question is also whether we can not only move built-in functions But also built in types which would end then as you had earlier as user defined types in the standard library So the end go over the standard library is reduce the language to a small simple core language and have most of the current Features that we have in the language Defined in a standard library that is written in Solidity can be quickly iterated on can be extended by the community and can be audited and so on and so forth But to get to that point in full in each generics So the idea is to yeah I get inspired by a nice system of generics, which is based on a logically grounded type system We have products I have some types function types Which if your mathematician or category theorist the type system will probably form an petition closed category Which is how these things work usually in probably design generic languages like Haskell or like the trade system in rust or the generic system in rust And yeah, we will have polymorphic functions that can have it take arbitrary types and Yeah, ad hoc polymorphism using type classes or that's in rust. Maybe if people are more familiar with that trades And yeah, we will also for this to work out You kind of need to go all all in on it and I'll go to go for the web code the whole way that will also have Agri-variate data types and Yeah, all of this will also be only really useful if you have compile time constant expression evaluation because you will In generic functions have yeah constructed parameters that should be evaluated compile time. So Yeah, that's also something We will have which is as I said earlier for the code data location We will need to refactor the type checker to have be more flexible for this. We will need that as well And yeah, maybe we will also have linear types, which is how rust sporo checker has constructed But yeah, I will now have some examples with some made-up syntax and some made-up constructs But I'm going to say this is all early research stage. So we have nothing fixed here yet I'm just telling you where we had it and what we'd want to do in the next However long it will take So yeah, the go-to down-to-earth example of a use of generics is something like a resizable erase some container which Yeah, and this case is just an array that if You want to append something to it and it see the array is already full You just relocate was twice the size copy things over and yeah, otherwise you can just add the element to the end of the array and Yeah, then we can also Define an index index access as a user defined operator, which will then have this thing actually work nicely Yeah, one would need an allocation function and so on equipped with that but one can then build a library to Actually build these things without having special casing for each type each kind of base type But I have ears a bit cheated though because in reality things are more complicated, of course We have data locations again Maybe I need to restrict the base type as by some trade mechanism to something that can live in memory Which may be a value type or another memory array something like that So in the end it will get complicated, but it will be worthwhile and yeah if one wants to take this Up a notch and all the way one can actually then think about even defining the most basic types In Solidity itself This would be the definition of There are current representation of memory arrays in Solidity Written as user defined type with the customly defined index access to it So in the end for any day based on a memory array is just one stack slot We refer to memory arrays just as one stack slot. We index access by it by fetching. I mean the stack slot Points to some memory area where there is a size of the array and follow up by the data. It's a current layout at least And yeah, in index access we can just fetch the size Do some bounce checking and fetch whatever result we have at the offset that the index pointed to And again, we could define then that index accesses work as expected and yeah a length field could be added to that all defined in language Which as the advantage we had often the request to allow slicing for memory types Which we can't because the representation I show here doesn't allow it Since we expect the size to be at the first Memory offset where the memory pointer that is the representation type of this points to is the size We can't just slice away from the first element for that to work Memory arrays would have to work different similarly to call data types. There you have Offset and size on stack It would be a huge effort for us currently to change the entire compiler to come to change the representation of memory types If we had things defined like this It's minimal changes. I can just say now the memory array is defined as a tuple of stack slots one of them is pointed to data area is the size and Yeah, have a similar definition as before slight changes, but a few source changes in our standard library would then Be the same as changing the entire layout of Of memory types, which would be yeah month of month of work Why we maintained everything hard-coded in the compiler Of course, it's all the disadvantages if we actually keep this extremely generic like that We will lose semantic information. This will actually make memory optimization harder because yeah But the compiler sees it's just a bunch of stack slots There's no idea that that's actually memory areas you're talking about that are allocated may only be allocated temporarily And stuff like that so I'm not sure whether we will actually go this far and if so we would maybe probably do this in a Yeah compiler internal manner, but we still assume certain semantic properties about these functions without supporting Similar optimizations as we can do if we know what these things do in Yeah, random user code But yeah, why did I say stack slot all the time? That's yeah maybe obvious but Just to mention the stack slot would be the one primitive type maybe apart from From product types and even the basic Indigit types size integer types we have right now can be defined generically just Yeah, like the other cases we had so I mean this will really reduce the footprint you can Here could also then distinguish between types that are checked arithmetic and uncheck arithmetic by having very few functions that are generally written and Yeah, so yeah, but not to give to Make you expect this to happen too soon. We are still in early design phase for generics There's a lot of questions. This is a very complex thing to do and a very dangerous thing to do because Yeah, all of this needs to be logically well defined to not bite you in the back in the end so I mean we will take some time to design this properly and Syntax is also a question. There's very much Deferring opinions on how the syntax for these kinds of things will end up being I'm not that concerned by that now I would first want to get the semantics, right? But eventually we also need a good syntax for it And yeah, what I just said we need to decide what to do with this trade-off between Making this the language really self-defined in the in the very deepest sense or to have some fixed functions Which are fixed in the compiler, which means we can assume there's a mandates Or there are compromises between that, but we'll see So yeah to summarize What I was talking about and what I wasn't talking about and we will still do hopefully We will in the future Try to allow more pre-competition either in the constructor by the code data location or in compile time by compile time constant expression Evaluation which is something yeah a lot of people have asked for and which obviously makes it easier to Write things in that you don't need for example magic constants embedded in a contract or whatever because you can Compute them on the fly without it costing And yeah, the huge The huge topic for the future will be to make the language extensible and self-defining by means of improving user-defined data types pushing the standard library and making a move for generics But we also of course can't just ignore is that we're still wasting a lot of memory. I mean Whoever has used memory in Solidity will know that yeah, we basically don't free memory which for a long time Wasn't the main concern, but in the meantime is very huge pain point in Yeah for cost of contracts there were several Approaches we discussed so far for improving the situation there we a long time we Wanted to deal with this on the you level it turns out that may not be as simple So maybe we will move actually to analyze and Solidity which has the properties right there We shied away of doing that for Solidity being the more complex thing to analyze But maybe it's fine We will see and yeah We will also of course try to move completely towards via our code generation that we have some heard burdens there to overcome Still like them performance of the optimizer Better tooling support You still need to define but the background data for the tooling tooling to consume to actually make the experience as Nice as with the legacy code generation The details there would be that the tooling expects certain patterns to remain in the in the bytecode in the end Whereas the new optimization pipeline will mess them up by optimizing better But tooling needs to understand that we need to output data for it being able to understand that But yeah, that's hopefully where we had it and Yeah, I'll close with that if you want to give us any feedback help us with designing generics or Criticize what we are planning and saying we are crazy to do that. You know that reach out to us That's the channel see where each other and Yeah, thank you Yeah, it used to be the case that the compiler is too back-end path at the moment So I mean it used to be the case that Solidity was directly translated to EVM bytecode And then only up the only optimizations that took place were On the bytecode level For the past years we have Moved away from that and have a different new code generation pipeline that translates Solidity first into Yule and an intermediate language Which preserves some structure and which allows for more complex optimizations for inlining more analysis and then only to Translate Yule to EVM bytecode as a second step which can reduce gas costs significantly in some cases in some cases It's the same as before but yeah, and Yeah, the new pipeline the Viya IR is via the intermediate representation for compilation via you Thank you for the talk you mentioned generics I'm wondering if you could speak to how you're planning on implementing that whether you're going through or monomorphization Because I worry that the code contract size will balloon if you start, you know Doing the C++ style duplication of implementations or if there are some you know uniform representation You can do a la okamal or you know Java. I think there's not much you can do actually I mean Generics of C++ are different in the sense that they're analyzed differently, and you only get errors and On instantiations but we will still need to instantiate and generate code for each specific case But that's not worth A worse than what you get now what you get now is writing by hand for different types different functions They would end up separately in bytecode so Yeah It's not nothing is worse than that that's Duplication in code and in bytecode if you have generics at least only have it in source in only in the bytecode So my question is related to that question regarding generics, but from a different aspect so Type system understand but once we get generics into solidity Wouldn't the developer have to focus on ten more things instead of focusing on writing business logic? Good question. I would I would think that the Yeah, down to earth go to smart contract writer will not bother with this It's mainly something for us for defining a standard library and for people writing libraries to support smart contract developer so I mean The language supporting generics and having generic types doesn't force you to use them And it doesn't mean that anybody has to use them But it will make a language in the the evolution of language much Faster and more streamlined we can in the future ask People if they propose a feature to just implement it in a standard library way and then standardize it in the end If it works out which will yeah All the advantages one can think about that, but for user code for the end smart or contract code the difference is not that large probably I go into implement lambda functions just with this equation Definitely eventually I would say I'm not sure whether I mean getting the basic type system Going and all that will already take some time But yeah, eventually this is of course something that will make things easier to read easier to write and are beautiful So and maybe not I mean as long as you don't want these things to capture variables. It's easy Capturing even maybe something at some point we can also consider but yeah Not it's not the first thing we will do but eventually Have you been thinking about? Integrating on China computation and off-chain computation in the one source file. This is of course very problematic But in some moment in future we might need it not necessarily in solidity, but maybe you should try to think about that Yeah, I mean on the solidity level we don't yet Interact that much with yeah off-chain computations. They are two stuff or whatever But yeah, we are aware that we need to interact with that and support that where we can I think you mentioned something about the performance of via AR Did you mean how long it takes to actually use it? Yeah, I mean the compilation time Yeah, so relation time is kind of a ten times or even worse in some Exactly anyone that's used via AR today has experienced that so how much of an improvement do you think we are going to see I? mean So far the via our compilation pipeline has not been written with any performance considerations in mind at all they've written it for correctness first and Only now are starting to realize how bad that got and That we need to do something about performance there. So I couldn't mention that we can get quite away But yeah, it's hard to tell before actually doing it Regarding generics, how much thought is put into the audit ability for external code auditors? Will it improve the story make it worse more training? Can they forget stuff? I? Think it will actually improve things I mean We will be able to be happy standard library definitions of all the built-in functionality Which can be exported which can be analyzed I think at the point where we have generics going the standard library going we will actually at some point not promising that happening soon either but at some point be able to Define a form of semantics for the core language that remains which can actually help formula verification a lot and Things like that So I think reducing the language core that is built in and hidden in the compiler is actually a good thing for a form of vacation and audit Yeah, you were you mentioned that the data location is going to be coming part of the type instead of being associated with the Variable is that mean that we are going to be able to start writing things like an in-memory array of storage pointers or a In storage array of code data pointers because those are all well formed But something like a storage array of call data pointers makes no sense, right? Yeah, so what is the well-formedness look like?  First part of the question. Yes, this is what this means. This is what will be allowed Second part of course there are invalid combinations there combinations that are don't make sense which then the types of stability check Okay, then thank you again


Live from San Francisco, celebrating 10 years of high-tech coverage, it's theCUBE. Covering VMworld 2019, brought to you by VMware and its ecosystem partners. Welcome back, we're here at VMworld 2019 in the lobby of Moscone North, back in San Francisco where it all began 10th year of theCUBE covering VMworld. I'm Stu Miniman, my co-host is John Troyer. Spensive time working for VMware. It's been doing theCUBE with us now for over three years. It was VMworld that we brought in the first time. I believe I was working with you on the other side that year. Absolutely, and welcoming first back to the program, one of our CUBE alumni, Rawlinson Rivera, who's the CTO of the global field at Cohesity. Thanks for joining us again. My pleasure. And always excited when we get to talk to a customer, it's a customer, and a service provider, Brock Mowery, who's the chief technologist at WoW. Correct, thanks for having me. All right, so we're going to get to WoW in a second because we really want to dig in an interesting name. I'm sure you guys have some fun with that, I would hope.  What's it all mean to you? Amazing, the fact that I've been here a couple of times, now it's great, it's a great way to put a stamp on my existence here at VMworld too. Yeah, amazing ecosystem and lots of, as we said, we just had Jerry Chen on it. It's the VMware mafia. I'm sitting here with two former VMware employees too, even when they've left, they're still tight with a lot of going on there. Still in the heart, still in the heart. All right, Brock, you've been to this event a few times. Before we get into WoW, just tell us, what does VMworld mean to you? So VMworld is obviously, it's a huge networking event. You get to not only see your peers, but also other players in the industries and be able to evaluate their products and see what they have. All right, so tell us a little bit about WoW. So WoW.com was founded in 2013. We tout ourselves as a cyber secure cloud platform. We've done more than just stand up the VMware bits for hosting. We've actually integrated some threat protection and some network defense items around that infrastructure. All right, give us a little bit of the breadth, how many locations, locality, all that kind of stuff. So our headquarters is in Hollywood, Florida. We have a data center presence in Miami, a data center presence in Grand Rapids, Michigan and one in Switch LV in Las Vegas. So that gives us coverage over the United States. All right, I've toured one of those facilities. You've probably gotten one. They're amazing facilities. So, yeah. Well, can you tell us a little bit about WoW's business? And I'm particularly interested in being a service provider in 2019, right? A lot of noise about the big public clouds, but as the folks here at VMware know, there's trillions of dollars flowing through an IT ecosystem that, you know, some of it's going to the public cloud, but there's lots of need for service providers providing specialty services or hands-on services I'm kind of curious, what is your business and how does it intersect with data, which is where we're getting to here? Yeah, absolutely. So with our focus on compliance, that's really one of the major differentiators from us with the hyperscalers or the big three is a lot of people like to call them. That gives us the ability also to tune and make sure that their workloads are precise and running the way that they want with the security models around them. Plus it's the, you know, you can reach out and you can contact us. We pick up the phone, we support all of our customers. We love to go above and beyond and make sure that they're happy. So we want to kind of give them that boutique type feel and be able to provide those services out. And we're talking verticals, like? Yeah, so healthcare is a big one, obviously. And then there's, you know, huge requirements around that for data protection and data isolation and so forth. And also, you know, on the cybersecurity side, CyberScan, the new release from these guys is something that we're definitely foaming at the mouth to get at. It's something that we're ready to put into play because it's a value add back to our customers and having their product in that position gives us an advantage. All right, Rollinsen, he teed you up. But, you know, in general, you know, we know where Cohesity has played in the enterprise and what's been happening in a lot of the environment. It gives a little bit of the landscape for the service providers and where Cohesity plays. We know that that's been a great, not only customer, but almost a channel for many technology in this space for a number of years. Well, you know, we have our own sort of like division within the Cohesity, just for the service provider market. And what we're doing now is we're enabling them to provide their customers with the value that we gave our enterprise customers already. So opening up more than just the backup, right? So one of the things that Brock mentioned is this new capability we have of performing scans, vulnerability scans within the systems. When have you ever been able to do that on something that just sits there and it's just an insurance policy in the past? Now we can give you the ability to provide your customers the ability to look into their data, whether they have a vulnerability or not, in place and tell them before they do it, right? Did you want to restore this? Do you want to protect it with X amount of vulnerabilities? Do you want to fix it before you do it? And that kind of level of service that's being provided delivers immense value to customers everywhere. So Brock, is this the first product that you use in Cohesity or have you been using other Cohesity products? So we obviously, we dove in head first with data protection. Our previous data protection product wasn't living up to its claims and that sparked us to go out and start looking at other vendors and it actually happened at VMworld a few years ago, came across Cohesity, worked with their guys, we did a POC, we attacked some of our major pain points right off the bat and Cohesity handled it without any problems. I'm kind of curious, so we're talking about Cohesity's secondary storage platform, backup is a use of it, but once you, we live in a world now, we still put some of the things on tape, but okay, the bits are live, they're on a disc somewhere and I've backed them up. So as an example of this for the security scans, some of this ransomware stuff can lie dormant for months before turning on. So it's not a matter of like, oh, I've just restored the backup from last week, you may have to go search through all your checkpoints, right? So that's an example of how having a secondary storage platform really enables a lot of security. So that's my understanding. So Raul, maybe I'll tee you up. Can you talk about the secondary storage data platform in general and security is one aspect, data protection is another? I don't know. What's going on? You're right. The thing about what we do is that we as a data management platform, which we've now kind of fallen into that, there's many facets to managing the data. We started with the data protection piece. Now we're adding other value to the areas which I just pointed out. There's a lot of dark data that you don't get to see because of the distribution of silos and I don't really use that. Now we have the ability to provide that value that everyone else in the service provider business can leverage because now they have, like you said, I have to go look through all these different iterations of that protection job that I'm doing. Now we do that instantaneously, we do that at the core. So now you're able to identify and report on that and be able to correct the before you have to go through that process, which is incredible. And that's on the data protection side. We also now have the ability of using, you can use Cohesity as a filer if they want to do that. Now we're talking to live information that's being accessed. The same suite of capabilities and tools are there and can report the same way. Yeah, if I can add to that too, one of the really cool features that I like that Cohesity does is when you're using filer services and things like that, you still have the ability to protect that data as well. So you can replicate those snapshots out to other locations and so forth. So we found that was a pretty good benefit for us. We have a configuration management platform that we ended up putting them out on one of those servers and we want to protect that in our other location and this is our own internal operation. So we leveraged the Cohesity platform as well. We protect that data by replicating it to another geo. Yeah, Brock, connect the dots for us. We understand you had some pain points, but what is this Cohesity solutions that you're using mean for your ultimate end user customers? Confidence, that's knowing that when that backup report comes in and hits their inbox that all of those jobs are going to be successful and ultimately what that turns into is when they need that data back, they need to restore it, it's going to be there for them. Anything you'd add about the impact on the customers when you're working with service providers, any kind of broader discussion of the service providers? I mean, it's great, the things that we do because now we're not only, typically we enable our enterprise customers to do this, now we're enabling our service providers to enable their customers to do that as well. And you know what, we're just in the background. It's their business, right? They're the ones who are providing the service, making a service for the customers based on what they need. And it's good for us to kind of enable that and let them do what they need to do which is make money, make money, protect their money and make more money. So Brock, I'm kind of curious, you and your customers, right? A lot of talk of digital transformation, agility, we've all got to make money. We've all got to move fast. And I'm guessing, again, in the ecosystem where there are very big players and very small players, part of it, you still have to move fast and your customers expect you to be delivering new services and reliable services, et cetera. Can you maybe just, I mean, talk a little bit about kind of what your customers are looking for? You know, how the relationship goes with maybe with a provider like you have a team in Cohesity building, how fast can you turn on these services? How fast has the ramp up been maybe with the community? Sure, so it's funny because I've actually been having some other conversations on how we can improve the existing workflow. But the workflow has been not, we've had to re-architect a couple of network items to be able to facilitate external backups, for example, because being a service provider, I don't just back up VMs within my environment. I back up VMs in customers' environments as well. So laying the foundation to be able to have these units replicate between each other eases that path. And again, it comes down to revenue. The faster I can get that box coming in, the faster that I can realize revenue on that product. Yeah, Brock, a lot of discussion in this show about some of the future things. VMware is talking about containerization and building Kubernetes into vSphere, talking about their multi-cloud connectivity that they're having. I know Cohesity's got a strong play partnering with all the public cloud environments. Give us a look out as to how does that impact your business? Where do you see that going from your roadmap standpoint? Absolutely, so with the Cohesity platform, especially with the big three hyperscalers, for example, we're actually looking at a way to put our long-term storage out on those services. We'll keep our short-term storage internal or on-prem wherever the customer's scenario might be, but we want to leverage that long-term storage so that we don't have to manage that data over a seven-year period. We do manage it. We leverage your guys' tools to be able to do it, but it's in a hyperscaler. I don't need to worry about it. And to add to that, we're also as VMware moves along and catches on the wave of the Kubernetes and all that stuff, we also do that already. So we can actually provide protection of namespaces for the Kubernetes environment, some of the things that you'll start seeing, you'll see we release very soon. So we already, given the service providers the ability to compete with the hyperscalers, providing those newer cloud-native services that need to be available for them too. So we're going to make that, we're going to enable that for everyone and they'll have it, they'll be able to offer it very soon. Well, that actually brings up a question, Brock. How are in terms of being cloud-native, either you guys spinning up more services, more cloud-native apps, or your customers? And I'm not sure if they're bringing off the shelf apps to you, or if they're building custom apps. I mean, where do you see the evolution of this whole field in terms of DevOps and cloud-native? Definitely, so cloud-native is a very interesting architecture play, especially with the microservices and dynamically building machines on the fly and things like that. It's very exciting, very intriguing. Our workloads tend to be more traditional VM type workloads. I have been having conversations with customers, technical groups, hey, you guys should start looking at microservices. This is something that you guys can improve your service delivery with. We haven't gotten there yet. We're using some container services internally for our own operations, but externally, we're still trying to, you know, part of the digital transformation, work with your customers to provide them solutions. All right. Brock, when, you know, one of the things we come to this show, we always get, okay, great, here's where we are today, here's where we're going tomorrow. Usually I have a wish list, you know, we know service providers, yes, if you can make it a little cheaper, you know, we need to be able to pass those margins, you know, down to our customer. What's on your wish list? What would make, you know, your company's life easier? Well, Cohesity's done a very good job of that already. So again, you know, having confidence in your backups and being able to sleep at night is definitely huge. So on my wish list, I like the direction they're going with the integration and a lot of the workbench products and so forth. Honestly, I don't have a ton of wish list. I'm more sitting back watching what these guys are going to come out with, because CyberScan's one that actually came out of left field for me and this is awesome. What I think is interesting about Cohesity's architecture is that there are this app layer that they're now introducing, that yes, there's Kubernetes there, but it's a lot of apps, data services that are very close to the data. I don't know, what do you guys have in store? What are you talking about here at the show in terms of new services?  The focus for us is basically continue to deliver value on the platform that people only thought it was data protection. It's way more than that. Here comes the vulnerability scanner as being one of them, but also opening the platform for customers and sales, service providers. You know what services you need to create and develop for what you need to do. Do it and put it on us. Do not move the data away from where it's safely stored and located, bring the application to it. That eliminates risks of data leakage and all these kinds of things. Because now you have a secure centralized location that's scalable, everything you want, it's all in place. Yeah, I think it's a great point. When the company first came out, it's like, okay, well here's the product at the day, but Mohit is building a platform. That is his history and that's what he's doing and I know that's what excited a lot of people in the early days and as you said, your data management platform now. So we now actually, or at least at the early stages of where the company is going with the overall solution. You know Mohit's very methodical. He decided to go one thing at a time, right? We're not a Swiss Army knife. We're not trying to boil the ocean.  We've fixed back up and now we're going to give you the rest of what you can get from the platform after we master that. All right, Brock, want to give you the final words. You've been going through this journey now for a few years. When you talk to your peers, what advice would you give them? Anything you've learned along the way. I said, oh, it's great, but boy, I wish I could have shortcut certain things or plan something a little bit different. What learnings can you share? So definitely plan your deployments. There's some new features and new items that are coming out, but again, one of the great things about Cohesity, you have a virtualization VE series. Go in there and break it on the VE series and then deploy it on your hardware. All right. Brock and Rollinsen, thank you so much for joining us. Appreciate all the updates and congratulations on the progress you've been making. For John Troyer, I'm Stu Miniman, back with lots more coverage at the midpoint of three days wall-to-wall coverage, two sets, 10th year of theCUBE at VMworld 2019. Thanks as always for watching.


Good morning everybody. My highlight is a way too bright today. I get for filming while I'm trying to get ready. Today is discharge day, which is so exciting. Butter, because you know my appetite's amazing. Got my blackberry. People thought I was joking when I said I bought one. But she got it, so I'm doing my emails and stuff like YouTube and business things. She's doing my hair. I'm just washing my hair for her. She's doing a bit of self-care. No, it's not self-care. It's care. Care of the other person. Ask the audience. The consultant to make my...  She knows what I threw in books at her now. I completely understand. In the words of the consultant, if you're struggling with depression, just motivate yourself.


This is the VOA Special English Agriculture Report. Two of Santa's reindeer, Comet and Dancer, got loose on a busy roadway in Texas just days before Christmas. Think we're joking? It happened halfway between Houston and Galveston. The reindeer's owner, Joe Mormon, is a professional Santa Claus, also known as Father Christmas, or St. Nicholas, or Chris Kringle. But unlike many other Santas, this one really does travel in a sleigh pulled by reindeer, except when he has to transport them. On December 14th, the back door of the trailer opened as he was driving them to an elementary school. Comet and Dancer escaped onto Interstate 45, not exactly the North Pole. Another driver alerted Santa. As he told TV station KTRK, someone pulled up beside us actually and blew the horn and was waving and all that, and told us we had some animals loose. Well, my heart did not do too well. The morning traffic was heavy but slow, with people on their way to work. Drivers called the police, who at first thought they were joking. Yes, there really were reindeer in the road. Then Santa found that he had some helpers. People stopped traffic and got out of their cars. One woman took off her shoes and ran after the reindeer. Another person followed. But the reindeer themselves were the ones who ended the chase. They found a park and stopped to eat. Joe Mormon says he was more shaken than they were. He says God was with the reindeer, you know, and he takes care of fools and things that cannot take care of themselves. The story had a happy ending. Santa and his reindeer were able to visit the school children as promised. The Reindeer Owners and Breeders Association says reindeer are easy to train to pull a cart or sleigh. Greg Finstad at the University of Alaska Fairbanks says reindeer like people and are pleasant to have around. He says reindeer management is not very difficult. It's good, since he also says, and children might want to cover their ears for this part. Reindeer is a basic meat in the cold climate of Alaska. For VOA Special English, I'm Alex Villareal. You can watch a story about the runaway reindeer by KTRK reporter Deborah Wrigley at voaspecialenglish.com. Special English is VOA's daily news and information service for people learning English. You can also get English lessons three times a day, Monday through Friday, at the VOA Learning English page on Facebook.


Pentagon is the world's largest low-rise office building. Throughout the Pentagon, there are medical and dental facilities. There's a post office and a bank. We have gifts.  When I first started giving tours, I had one day where I tried to go down the wrong escalators about three times during the day. The ones that were coming up, I was trying to go down them backwards. My tour group just stood there and laughed at me. It definitely wasn't funny to me. It was really embarrassing to be going down the wrong escalators. We give around 5,000 tours per year, and that is around 100,000 people per year. To be chosen as a Pentagon tour guide, we first are chosen out of boot camp to go to our ceremonial guard units. From there, they do a long interview process with our chain of command to select us to come to the Pentagon tour program. When you first get here to become a public tour guide, you get 15 business days to learn 33 pages of information. Be able to walk the mile-and-a-half route backwards. Some of the weirdest questions I've gotten from tourists is probably where are the control rooms here in the Pentagon? Where are the secret tunnels? People think they're secret tunnels that lead from the Pentagon to the White House. Before I got into the Navy, I was a very shy individual. I still am shy right now, but when I am doing tours, I try to be as loud and outgoing and friendly as possible. I'll tell you guys a little bit more about the Outdoor Memorial. You guys notice I had really good cursive handwriting, so they made me write all this? Being a Pentagon tour guide definitely has helped me personally become more open, more approachable. My favorite part about giving tours is just being able to be here and be a spokesman for the Navy and just to become more confident speaking with the public.


Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu held talks in Moscow on November 8, with a senior Chinese military official and said they would discuss steps to deepen cooperation, Interfax News Agency reported. We, unlike some aggressive Western countries, are not creating a military bloc. Relations between Russia and China are an example of strategic interaction based on trust and respect, it quoted Shoigu as saying at the meeting with General Zhang Youxiath, vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission, IT was the second time the two men had met in the space of ten days, following talks on the sidelines of a forum that Shoigu attended in Beijing on October 30.President Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping proclaimed a no-limits partnership less than three weeks before Russia sent. It's troops into Ukraine last year, and China has refrained from criticizing Moscow's actions there. The United States has warned Beijing against supplying Russia with weapons.


We recently covered the impressive ancient dwellings known as dolmens, which can be found littering most of the European countryside. Enormous ancient structures, which we feel were left by a surviving, less capable branch of an earlier civilization, still possessing advanced knowledge, allowing them to build with such stones. Having remnants of the group, we also believe were responsible for the masterfully constructed ancient ruins which can be found upon the same continents. Additionally, this era within human history was the inspiration for an animated TV show, namely the Flintstones. Curiously, the Flintstones, dubbed the Modern Stone Age Family, could easily be mistaken for a lost advanced civilization. Did the makers of the Flintstones know something we are currently unraveling regarding the builders of the Flintstones' homes, namely the dolmens? Or is it all a mere coincidence? Some of these dolmens still possess as yet unexplained evidence which flies in the face of academics worldwide. Sites such as the Dolmen of Menga, found near Malaga in Spain. This massive dolmen, one of the largest megalithic sites in Europe, is a prime example of the unexplained features which defy current explanation. The dolmen is 902 feet long, 20 feet wide, and 115 feet in height. It was built with 32 megaliths, the largest of which weighing over 200 tons. Nearby is another impressive dolmen, known as De Vira, discovered between 1903 and 1905 by brothers Antonio and José Vira of Antiquera. This site also possesses some of the most impressive megaliths to be found in any dolmens anywhere in Europe. Who built these incredible structures? How did they build them? La Rocha Fille, in the French department of Villeville, in the Brittany region, was named after a legend claiming that the stones were brought by fairies. This clearly inspired by their inexplicable nature. A name of fairy rock was given to many French dolmens or covered walkways. Regardless of whether our own theory is correct, the still surviving features of many of these ancient dolmens is clearly indirect contradiction with attested theory. Another alternative study is desperately needed of structures we find highly compelling. We feel that the evidence to suggest a highly capable technologically advanced intercontinental possibly interstellar civilization once flourished here on our planet is now irrefutable. The questions we now feel need answering. Do not now regard whether they existed, but surround their true origins, actual age, and indeed final destination. We would, of course, be the descendants of this past civilization. Yet the proof of global flooding, past cataclysm, and a technological reset occurring within human history, we would hope, is clear for all who peruse our channel to see. With such an event experienced by a civilization, once capable of lifting and building with unimaginably huge megaliths. One would presume that post-event one would encounter primitive dwellings yet built partially with these now dwindling technologies which would eventually become lost knowledge. We feel that indeed many ancient dwellings that can't be found all over the planet, in particular the United Kingdom, currently claimed as Neolithic, are suitable candidates to support this supposition. And with enormous, unexplained, mysteriously lifted megaliths, are these sites remnants of an advanced lost civilization? We hypothesize that the builders of such still retained limited knowledge and or technologies left from their now lost civilization, allowing them to create stable, immovable, yet primitively constructed dwellings which we still cannot explain today. Furthermore, and the purpose for our video, the extremely ancient, little academically shared dwelling, tucked away among a remote region of Russia. Located within the Caucasus Mountains, hundreds of similarly aged megalithic monuments which the Russians call dolmens, uncannily similar to the ancient trilathons found within the UK. However, it seems that these remaining remnants, possibly of the same lost civilization, still possess something which allowed them to carve perfectly spherical holes through enormous megalithic stones. Just what were these ancient people using to create these ancient structures? Or indeed, the perfectly cut spherical doorways within? Who built the ancient dolmens that can be found dotting Russia, the ancient trilathons found dotting the United Kingdom? Are these structures, as we have suggested, remaining relics left by a civilization who had just experienced drastic cataclysm? If this is not the case, why did they possess characteristics indicative of lost knowledge, yet appear to be of such a primitive design? We find our hypothesis and the supporting evidence highly compelling. There are many places on our planet so remote or little mentioned that much of the world has never heard of said sites, and the great Selbik Kurgan is one such example of an incredible ruin that has been largely forgotten or overlooked by modern academic study. Clearly of a neolithic age, the thing which is most striking regarding the ruin is the sheer size of the megalithic blocks which make up the main structure. Claimed by many as the most majestic and mysterious ancient monument of southern Siberia, the mound is located in what is locally known as the so-called Siberian Valley of the Kings, where several thousand years ago it is claimed that there existed a kingdom, one made up of a people once known as the Tagars. Thus the age monument has been pinned on said culprits, with an age of around 2300-2500 years attributed to the site. The main earthwork is a stone square mound 70 meters by 70 meters in size, as mentioned, huge slabs of Devonian sandstone. Some estimated as weighing as much as 50-70 tons were somehow once inexplicably delivered to the site from a quarry site of over 100 kilometers away found upon the banks of the Yenisei River. It is believed that it was an ancient temple and at a later date an ancient astronomical observatory which like most other neolithic sites incorporates processional cycles in its alignment, showing the movement of the sun and the moon. As mentioned, it still remains a complete mystery as to what devices were once utilized for the importation and installation of these gigantic stones. But the corners and sides of the stone fences are deeply driven large meneers.  The rare excavations and explorations noted as having been undertaken at the site note that before the construction of the giant earth embankment and its accompanying stone fence there was a crypt of logs in its place, once in the form of a truncated pyramid. This whole crypt can be found inside the huge earthwork, preserved beneath untouched, yet covered with a thick layer of bark. The crypt had the height of 2.5 meters in depth of 2 meters of water covered the pit. It is claimed that around the burial zone for a long time a strong anomaly has continually been observed. The study of these phenomena has indeed been engaged by scholars, but the pace of said explorations has been suspiciously slow paced. Who built the great Salbiq Kurgan? How were these huge stones transported to the site and once driven into the earth at the site? What is this quote, strong anomaly? More investigation and popularization of the site is desperately needed. It is a place which we find highly compelling. Thanks for watching guys and until next time, take care.


Should you spend money before we even start? No, I see the best quarterback in the game probably is is he that much different than whatever quarterback you're rocking right now Absolutely, not don't fool yourself Wait until his price goes down by the time his price goes down.  Especially a limited, but I'll show you guys what I got on Andrew luck the cappy tan Let's get it. This is my team right now I'm rocking and I'll probably rock something similar here for the tournament this weekend You guys know we play that live on Saturday and Sunday, so you guys can tune in there live on switch that link is below Let's check out this team right here right now. I'm rocking a dolphins and campus heroes theme team I have season one motivator for jail and Ramsey. I changed the dolphins Anticipating their 70 point performance would give them a really fast running back maybe or any player will see but at the end of the Day, it's all about Tyree kills speed so you can get that with chiefs or dolphins or anything like that So for the most part for me, that's really what it's about. But with dolphins you also get jail and Ramsey I'll show you that on defense. So right here. We have Andrew luck here He is I have not been using gunslinger the last week or so, so I don't even have gunslinger I just have gift wrap.  I've been using it all year. So I've been experimenting with out Gunslinger has been working pretty good. It has been so I mean, I think I'm gonna rock no gunslinger But this is Andrew luck. There he is 85 speed.  So we'll see I think I say what's his release like? I honestly never really noticed the difference Jordan love I thought had the quickest But other than that everybody was pretty much the same for me We have Bo Jackson Tyree kill, of course with that Dolphins team team is going to be 91 speed So he's a burner, you know what? He's gonna be really hard to guard. He is short. He is small I don't know what his his release is. I guess they don't even show that until maybe we go down the offense But at the end of the day much like our boy DK Metcalf, I think just being smaller you're gonna get pressed a little bit more and more often But he's so fast that he's just want to get by He's gonna get by the defenders from time to time and you can't deal with that speed to begin with so Tyree kill here. He is just what we're gonna rock with Obviously 57 strengths not the best but 91 speed He's the best. He's the fastest in real life fastest on the game and to combat our 5-9 receiver We're gonna have big Mike and Calvin Johnson Calvin Johnson 100% is the best receiver in the game without a doubt if you told me as a card worth it I would tell you Calvin is because he's huge. He's fast. He can juke He gets it done 100% he can journal juke run deep route short routes anything. He's tall He's fast 88 speed is the fastest stock you can get right now Mike Evans is like Calvin Johnson except he cannot juke so I would say there's probably there might be better options I mean Hyatt is still a god and he can juke I think the 85 juke is the number that you get to we can be able to juke you see Mike Evans is 82 So I like Mike just cuz he's huge pause But he can't juke so maybe a guy like Hyatt or somebody I can really like make plays after the catch is maybe a little bit Better because the juke is so powerful this year. It's definitely important. And that's another downside with my tight end Rob Gronkowski same thing like huge can block catch passes the fastest you can get at the tight end position But you go down here. He's got 73 juke. So he's not juking at all He can definitely truck and stiff arm which is decent, but the animations are so slow this year But I think Gronk just intangible speed everything. I'm using him. Oh line. I don't think matters that much You just can't have 78s out there really and I think bigger guys are better the fatter the better on the O line Really, that's what I learned Bo Jackson's best running back in the game My other abilities are slot apprentice on Tyree kill for that short post route and the angle route on Bo Jackson Like I had these two slot apprentices I pretty much only use the post route to the slot and the angle route to the running back So those are my two other abilities I can use because I don't have gunslinger and we have energizer on Bo Jackson and juke and go to the crib for the most part now Here we go defense. We're gonna rock primetime Charles What's an up top one right Joey Porter, Jr. Antonio Cremardi outside of corner Jalen Ramsey in the slot You see him right here with that dolphins theme team with that season one theme team 89 speed 92 man covers six foot one Ramsey has always been a dog. The biggest thing too is he can always hit 72 hip power 88 press. He's got man He's got zone. He's got play rec He's a god best corner in the game. I would say I don't know if he can get pick artists at this level I don't think he can I think we got a way to the next next level But I think I would wind up putting him out wide at some point instead of Cremardi Or maybe a safety instead of Woodson or something like that, but right now he's in a slot Manning up pressing people things like that or so Ramsey's a god. We're going to use Michael Parsons We're going to use Bruce Smith and we're going to use Lawrence Taylor Linebacker Sean Taylor, Isaiah Simmons also had Palomalu lurking around here somewhere I use on the team Eric Berry's on the team as well just in case So that's squad boys. Like I said dolphins campus heroes is the wave Let's take a look at how Andrew Luck plays in this game and before don't even think about it He's not worth it.  Not worth it, but take a look at how he plays Yeah, but honestly the running back is not that big a deal really We'll see what the other cards are because ultimately it's about why receivers and DB's really that's almost That's why dolphins are good.  I haven't been using slinger for two weeks where I really haven't I don't know I could be tripping, but I haven't thought I do not need it That's a good way to start the evening You can't make that pitch. Are you kidding me? Oh my god.  I dare say I dare say in the chat I mean, dude, you had no desire to run your route right there like just none. I Just completely hate passing the ends on like what a passion. I hate it. I really hate it Why would I use Christian McCaffery in all seriousness? He's not he's not campus heroes team team And I mean it's probably better catching the ball But Bo Jackson can juke as good as anybody and he can watch them call it I'm gonna be honest with you.   I'm only a weak box Yeah, I respect these kids though, man. They stick to their other often.  We really are In this age in this age of pussy football, we are underrating.    I for real I don't know why I'm not running that. Why is Henry not running that?   Yeah, just drag them forward for it. Why not?  Ah, so Hertz is so strong Hertz is so strong. That's why it's good for the Eagles. Yeah, okay Well, so since our quarterback so strong, we shouldn't be able to run that, huh? Is that what you're telling me like Lamar Jackson shouldn't be able to run fast then, huh? Like that's just not fair. It's really just not fair because apparently it's just not fair, dude Oh my god Okay, Andrew Luck doesn't fumble first time it Oh, he might be a god This guy's actually just too good when I really when I really break down the film against this guy.  This is rags offense this the corner back the running back motion out This is rags offense It's not a fumble. So what you're telling me is that that was a forward pass is what you're telling me Is that you're telling me that was a forward pass.    Are you are you joking?  Yeah, man You know, those people really probably like getting cheated by this guy I mean only one-on-one on me again. I mean Andrew Luck we soared that yeah the good guys want to play some sim football You know, I mean it just takes a man of 20 years experience to learn to put zero-yard hard flats on both sides and not rush the quarterback You know, it's not like it's rocket science He's got three tight ends out here. They're not going to really beat man coverage I don't got to worry about these guys out a little bit so they don't get like, you know I don't really know what to do against the run of mines. We're gonna stay back here Like he doesn't have a pass play. Look at this Like that's his pass play like that's it. Honestly, it's funny how you guys like haven't Like what do you think I changed my abilities because I had a new quarterback I just really feel bad for all the guys that get put through this offense. Yeah, dude It's just awesome, man. I mean bless the best player on the Eagles. Honestly is Iain Johnson, I mean he plays like rag till a little bit Plays like rag a little bit. I always appreciate these guys sticking to their game playing. You know, I really do Don't that's insanity Like I bodied him as much as I possibly could right there.  Like this is just like actual trash, man. He's gonna run option here I don't even know you could run it back like that other way like no, I really don't know how to stop that option I really don't yeah, that's the worst part of the game is that I get pancake getting pancake is literally the dumbest part of man you know I've never understood the argument for it dollar.   I honestly don't know what to go about it Do you guys know what to do?  Do you see where he pitches the ball to what do I look like flash running out there? All right, the run goes to the right.  It's 34 to 16. Of course.     Do I think options on conservative would help?  I just never thought to do that Oh my goodness. Can you actually make that adjustment? Can you put that like what are they gonna do when you bought I didn't know you could do that coach You could do that coach. I'll never play man before. It's my first game It's definitely right here is optional. Let me tell you something about me boy. So you dog Maybe I need McCaffrey for that reason right there. The double Mabel is the greatest defense in Madden You know why because you never know where there's no hole when you think about that defense in Madden You realize there's absolutely no hole then The double Mabel is the greatest defense Madden has ever seen gun bunts is solid, but everybody uses it So therefore it's not as solid Gun bunts is it's a solid but everybody uses it. So I don't want to use that when I run Slipple up. Look out boys. Slipple option coming your way Look out boys. It's two men under working really good for this guy And when you think about defenses, you have realized that triple option is one of his favorite You know or two men on there is working so well for this guy Oh my god, I just really feel bad for all the people that he beats for being a cheese ball I really do he probably wins so many games being an absolute cheese ball And it's frustrating because there's people that think Madden sucks because of this guy, you know He probably makes life miserable for a bunch of people But now you guys know What happened there Andrew luck what happened there, dude Now you guys know what happens when something like this gets on a real field, you know, I mean he's having a good time This guy, you know, he's really if he's having a good time This is where I get pancake. What we think of pancake. I can't believe this guy doesn't have double Duke box But if he had double Duke box it I'd be worried There it is there it is pitch. Oh another pick by Palomalu. What a play.  There it is There it is boys. There it is, you know, did we absolutely cut the cheese right there? Did we cut the cheese? Did we cut the cheese? So I want to ask the boys did we cut the cheese right there? Did we do it? You know, we're gonna sell YouTube, but gun bun for thief Why because I put a streak in a corner out and make a read and I got to put a drag And I put a running back route and I had to make a read is that cheese to you the thief that was cheese And that beats a lot of people in Madden boys. All right, remember that it's because Troy Pomalu is a high awareness You need to play with my high awareness because you know J. L. Ramsey and cams handler. They just don't have high awareness


This is Think Tech Hawaii. Community matters here. It is Thursday, folks. Ted Rawlson here, our downtown Honolulu studios of Think Tech Hawaii, overlooking a kind of a construction in the background here, I guess, rebuilding the studio. You see some of the structure members back there behind us. Anyway, our show, Where the Drone Leads, where we bring you current and relevant information about the emerging world of dronism, people who play in it, the agencies who manage it and such. And today, we have, as our guest, from far across the sea in San Diego, Punahou Boy, David Place. Dave, welcome aboard again. Thanks, Ted. Good to see you again. Hey, it's looking good to see you there. The sun hasn't set yet in San Diego, apparently. Like it used to set when we had this show late in the day. Yeah, no? OK, you're checking to see if the sun's there. I like that, Dave. That's a good policy. Anyway, David Place, X Punahou, X Navy, X Naval Postgraduate School, and a longtime UAS operator, planner, or fiction auto program manager, welcome on board again. We see you in the looks like the studio loft of your house in San Diego. That's where I am. OK, good enough. I thought about going out in the backyard, but it looks too much like Hawaii, so I don't want to do that. OK, anyway, we're at the kind of an interesting kickoff point here, David. We had a good discussion with Jay Fidel last week on this show, anticipating, looking forward to this incredible FAA, Department of Transportation, White House initiative that got launched a week ago today. And then we had more information on Friday, and more information even was latest today, on this Department of Transportation FAA pilot program, where UAS unmanned air system drone operations, as conceived by state, local, and tribal governments and agencies, to best affect the usage of these systems in their own domains, is what this pilot program is all about. And that is really an incredible turn of events. And in my mind, we could either see massive success, we could see massive failure too, because I don't think we in the local state area are really used to taking over and providing insight to federal activities that have long stood the test of time in terms of, in this case, airspace ownership. So to discuss back and forth where this all might go, look for a model where it might be useful to wrap our relevant thinking around, but discuss how we should all go forward from the knowledge we've got in the background on making something out of this pilot program opportunity. What are your thoughts, Dave, on where this is all going? Well, first of all, I did see your show last week with Jay. And he asked some awfully insightful questions for a man off the street, I must admit. But anyway, to answer your question, I think that what we will likely see is the usual suspects that do have a significant amount of experience in this arena participating. They will probably be the lead agents. It's encouraging that there's a presidential memorandum and that he's involving the secretary of transportation. So you have folks like New Mexico, North Dakota, Nevada, Virginia, Texas, Alaska. All those usual suspects for the test sites are clearly they have the knowledge and the subject matter expertise to make some potent and relevant contributions. My concern is now out in Hawaii, you don't have a test site per se, although you have your pan-Pacific initiative. You are out there with a lot of other folks at the research lab there with the University of Hawaii that do have some knowledge and can make valuable contributions provided you have the opportunity to do that. But there's other areas like some of the smaller, less populated states that don't have the same expertise that you do, not picking on Idaho or Iowa or some of those other states that have just been out on the periphery. My concern is that those folks don't have the resident expertise nor the wherewithal bandwidth, if you will, to make similar contributions. But I would think if we can get all the test site states, Hawaii, Oregon, those folks, in addition to the test site states that do have a lot of experience, I think you can make some valuable contributions. And while, yes, the federal government, and particularly FAA, is charged with providing safety in the national airspace, I don't think they have a monopoly on some good ideas. So folks like you, and I know I think maybe you're going to speak with the Civil Air Patrol folks out there here next month. But clearly, you have a lot of insight as to what constitutes safe and effective operation. I think it's also valuable that the initiative is reaching out to the commercial side, and not just DOD, homeland, security, et cetera. In fact, that's really interesting. And going back to your observation about Jay Fidel and his men in the street status and the great questions he asked, we do have a teleprompter here in the studio, and there might have been something up on it, which would have helped Jay a lot. If he can follow the track, that's often a problem. So we may have actually had him read the teleprompter from the last show. You never know. Anyway, it's great to have these opportunities to interact with Jay, interact with you, and get your ideas. And your ideas, of course, are those formed from your network of folks. And my ideas are from my network. We jam them together here on the show. We could make this the official show of the FAA Department of Transportation UAS pilot program. And we could be glad to give this show to the FAA. Let them have it. This is state and local speaking right to the heart of the Fed. So that's cool. But I think that's a great point, Ted, because one thing I've seen is that while we have some good ideas collectively, we don't have a good mechanism to show the present company excluded where we can reach out to the public that will actually be able to see some of this. I mean, nothing against the press, but some of the stuff that you see on the news kind of has the press excitement. If it's not exciting, then the press really doesn't want to address it. So shows like yours, I think, provide excellent opportunities. And the FAA would be wise to consider this as an option. OK, this is one of the rules we have on the show. We are only allowed to skewer three different organizations per half hour show. So you've already skewered the press. I think you might have skewered the FAA a little earlier. So down to one last organization, you can skewer, Dave. And I just wanted to let you know that. I wasn't intending to skewer the FAA. OK, none of us are, right? We love them. Anyway, what is intriguing, again, is that what we heard just today on the conference call of the Department of Transportation participated in, that's the DOT who owns the FAA at the behest of the National Governors Association, where this all started, was the absolute enthusiasm registered by the member of the DOT and FAA who was on the show on that conference call, promoting actively and asking for rapid response and whole response to this challenge. And what's incredible is that the federal government is, and I have to repeat it many times because it doesn't sit in my brain yet, but the federal government is turning to the state, local and tribal organizations and say, you best know how to use UAS in your airspace. Please stand up and tell us how best to use it in terms of location, in terms of manner of usage, and maybe time constraints or time limits on usage. If you can just stick with those, we'd be very happy to hear what your thoughts are and how to manage, how to enforce, and how to regulate and control. And they're not asking for any rules to be written. They're asking for ideas. And then this thing has a three-year life on it. And after three years, whatever's out there either sticks permanently through some formal program or goes away because it didn't work. But here we have the federal government turning to the states and local areas and saying 200 feet, at least airspace, and maybe 400 feet, consider it yours to describe how best to use that to suit the economy, the local lifestyle, the local topography, the local whatever it might be. Because you may know that better than we know that. And that isn't what we normally see in a strong federal-centric government that wants to build on itself. This is getting rid of it and pushing it out into the far corners, provided we can still maintain air safety in the commercial and military air traffic. So again, I think it's caught us all by sort of an enjoyable surprise. And I was just telling one of my colleagues this morning something that you might even remember, eighth grade at school down the street here called Punahoe. And we had to write a theme in eighth grade English. We had to write a theme every week. Every Friday we had to turn it into a theme with a subject that was given to us on Monday.   So we, as students, say, this allows the idea. We don't wanna write on that subject, teacher. You gave us a bad idea. We can't write on that. Come on, give us something we can write on. Let us choose what we want to write. No, no, no, write on this subject. Okay, we whine, cry, and then submit on Friday. At the end of the semester, the teacher, Ms. Bill Milton, said, okay, guess what? For this week, you guys can write on anything you want. And we all said, oh, we can't do that. We need structure. We need to be told what to write on. So you can't win either way. Anyway, that's what's going on here. We whine and we complain to the FAA that this doesn't work. That doesn't work. And why are you guys doing this to us? You don't know what the local operation's all about. They said, hey, you guys figure it out then. And you have 270 days to do it. 270 days from yesterday. So there's 269 days to do it. The clock started clicking yesterday when the Federal Register announcement came out. So they want whatever comes out of this that gets designed and gets conceived and gets authorized to be rolling in nine months, 270 days. So from your take, did they seem confident that that message was getting that this message that you're just articulating is getting out? That question didn't come up. But I think that's one of the points we have to make back. And in fact, what we'll do, David, we'll ask FAA if they want to come on this show next week and tell their story this way. And then you can circulate on the new service you've got, and we'll get the word out to everybody. And really do our service properly here. But again, it just sets you back so much when you suddenly realize you can't complain anymore. Now you have to perform. We're moving from a complaining organization to a performing organization, which means we have to have concepts and fairness and balance. In fact, I was really struck by the fact that some of the terms in here are all about community involvement, making sure that there is nobody in the community who says, no, that's not a good idea. Or if they do say, no, that's not a good idea, then we provide a time or something like that where they're OK with that. So describing the location, the manner, and the timing, or the time intervals in which UAS can be used to the community's satisfaction, that is just such an incredibly new and novel idea that, again, I think as a group, we're not really prepared to have those thoughts in mind. We are so oriented towards a structure imposed upon us and our response to that. But this also says, and here I am, we have another rule on our show. In addition to only skewering three people or three organizations, we don't allow monologues, except from the guy who's the host. So all monologue guys, one more step here. We do have to respect, I think, other programs that are going on, like Unmanned Traffic Management Program. And that's where I was really interested in your thoughts on how the Unmanned Traffic Management Program is moving forward and where there are pieces in there that can be pulled forward, maybe in conjunction with other pieces or isolated by themselves, such as some of the detect and avoid technology and such, that might fit into this picture of what a locally mandated system might look like. I know there's a meeting on the 30th down in your area, San Diego, where the next phase of Unmanned Traffic Management is going to be looked at. But where do we turn to, do you think, to get a really good idea of what's worked, what hasn't worked, what's been developed, what is still waiting to be developed within the UTM framework so that a robust picture can be brought up and we can pick from it the things that are useful? That's a great question, Ted. Well, first of all, going back to your point, I think it's just not only is it amazing that the DOT and the FAA are pushing down to the state and local levels, but the fact that there's an executive branch edict out there that directs us, I think, is a tremendous step in the right direction. As far as UTM or Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management goes, I have not seen an update on that in probably nine months, at least. So I'm not quite sure where they are. So I think this review that they're going to conduct on the 30th of this month here in San Diego will be insightful. I know there's a lot of companies out there that are working on various approaches to, I think one of the biggest issues with the whole UTM is being able to conduct, sense and avoid or detect and avoid. So you have to be able to see not just other UAS, but also small Piper Cubs, the bigger aircraft like the commercial liners, they're fairly well equipped and we know where they are. But where's the little Piper Cub that's flying along at 300 feet, no one from Inbuktu to Chattanooga? You don't know, the FAA is not sure where they are. So they're flying under visual flight rules, but we need, the UAS need to be able to do that. And there's several companies out there that have demonstrated a capability, but those are primarily on bigger platform. We need to be able to have that same capability on your quadcopters, for example. Let's tell you what, let's get back to that thought, how we're going to take what's been done and develop so far and push it forward after we take our one minute break here. And by the way, the show is now, used to be 45 minutes I think last time you were on is half an hour now, so it gets very compressed. Let's take a break and come right back and talk about that situation. This is Think Tech Hawaii, raising public awareness. Greetings, I'm Stephen Phillip Katz, the longtime host of Shrink Rap Hawaii. Think Tech is important to me because without Think Tech, I never would have had a chance to realize my dream of having a show, of talking with other therapists, finding out what they're doing and sharing it with the world at large. Now, for the first time ever, Think Tech Hawaii is participating in an online web-based fundraising campaign to raise $40,000. Give thanks to Think Tech. We'll run only during the month of November. And you can help. Please donate what you can so that Think Tech Hawaii can continue to raise public awareness and promote civic engagement through free programming like mine. I've already made my donation and I look forward to yours. Please send in your tax-deductible contribution by going to this website. www.thanksforthinktech.causvox.com. On behalf of the community enriched by Think Tech Hawaii's 30-plus weekly shows, thank you for your generosity. It is still the noon hour on Thursday, folks. Ted Ralston here with our show, where the drone leads, having a violent conversation with one of our favorite hosts on the show, Dave Place from Punahou and Honolulu and now San Diego. Retired out of the Navy, out of the Navy Postgraduate School, long-term, long-time UAS operator, fiction auto and thinker. We're just talking before the break about how to take the work that's been done, and we could generalize it beyond undone man-traffic management program. How do we take the work that's been done by FAA programs and NASA programs and such and stand them up so that everybody who wants to apply to do something in this pilot program has access commonly to the state of what's been going on in these other programs? Well, so this meeting on the 30th of November is a NASA, my understanding is it's a NASA initiative to bring folks up to date on where UTM stands. UTM is just a tool, but since it's specifically mentioned in the Presidential Memorandum specifically, then I think you bring up a good point that, so how do the folks that don't follow this routinely, yet they are being charged with providing some insight to DOT and the FAA, how do they know what to do? Now they may have their own thoughts regardless of UTM, but I think if they were brought up to speed on what UTM is attempting to accomplish, that would go a long way towards them providing valid inputs to the state and local level inputs to DOT. So perhaps a recommendation to DOT and or NASA would be this event that occurs on the 30th of November, they might wanna try and make that available via webinar or at least have folks be able to dial in and observe the dialogue that goes on during this conference. Amen, that's a great idea and I will be certainly happy to go to my office when we're done and type that up and send that into the FAA website that is collecting ideas on this, but that also makes me think there's probably other things that the government has invested in that are applicable technologies that were designed to go in this direction. I don't know where they may be, don't even know how to find them. But what I'm thinking is that little guy in Montana or somewhere who has a bright idea and wants to get involved here, may not know about that work that's already been done. So we are- That's absolutely true. And there's a lot of private companies that are also, I mean, so the whole thing evolves to, I mean, we can see you have flight, you have 107 certifications right now, but those are restricted to line of sight operation. As almost anybody understands, the real end state is to do beyond line of sight. So you can only see a quadcopter a quarter of a mile away, but clearly the mission area, whether it's doing agriculture or public safety, typically is a lot further away than a quarter mile. So how do you do that? Well, you need beyond line of sight. How are you going to do beyond line of sight? Well, you need to have to know where all the traffic is, all the air traffic. But there are companies out there that understand this requirement to do beyond line of sight and they are facilitating that capability by generating, and I'll just use one example, General Atomics has built a do regard radar, specifically that will support beyond line of sight operations. Now that's not, I don't believe that's a government funded initiative. I believe that's General Atomics doing that on their own because they understand the value in being able to do that beyond line of sight. But there are other companies out there that also have been looking at this beyond line of sight issue. I think that the Assure program down in Mississippi, which is a conglomeration of lots of universities, lots of industry folks, I think they are also looking at, how do we faithfully and successfully achieve beyond line of sight operations? And that's going to be the key. So right now the FAA has instituted some regulations that provide us some, I use that term loosely, but particularly the commercial folks, some local, very local capability to use their UAVs. Well, you know, this is really something that is almost structural, that needs to be looked at broadly within this FAA pilot program, and I say this very seriously, the private companies that have done their own investment, their own R&D, and their own testing, hats off to them, that's great. If they can use that preparatory development in some way that differentiates them from somebody else, and they can bring that in through a state agency because only state or tribal or city agencies can be part of this, commercial partners have to be coming in as a partner rather than a principal. But to their great credit, if they've done that work, hey, let's give them credit, let them solve the problem, and let's take it on. However, if there's been government investment that has generated this technology, such as the UTM program, that really has to be available commonly to all particular participants, including work done by the Assurer Operation, as you point out, done in Mississippi. So that's, I think, an important thing for us to have the FAA take on is to find a way to get that information out to the larger audience. But I'd like to follow up that by saying that, and I'm glad you brought up Beyondline of Sight. Certainly Beyondline of Sight is one of the key, in fact, that's the first thing listed as the technical functionality that's required here beyond the governance issue and how you're gonna operate rules and regulations and manners of operation and such. It's Beyondline of Sight. That's the measurable thing that is gonna be rewarded for work here. There's also something called ELOS now, Extended Beyondline of Sight, I guess is what that means, although I haven't seen a definition of how Beyond and Extended relate to each other. But those two are the top of the pyramid in terms of what's needed, operations or flight over people. And that means having a 10 to the minus nine safety or something like that that allows you to operate over people that aren't involved in the event. And then operations at night. So these are the things that are in the waiver domain of 107 and the 333s, but these are to be out front in this particular program. So having said that, that means that operations that are allowed under 107 aren't interesting to this pilot program. What's interesting to them is things that are beyond where 107 or the 333s will take you. So I would agree with that. But I mean, just to... No, I'm not securing General Atomics at all. In fact, I believe that the FAA, GA General Atomics is keeping the FAA informed on the progress they are making. So the FAA realizes the value of beyond line of sight and they're, you know, I'm sure other folks are keeping the FAA informed as well. But we still need to get, which is behind the initiative for this to get the state and local inputs to the entire process. And to that extent, the figure of merit or the thing that's rewarded in the state and local domain is the term collaboration and an under term integration. And an interesting question is, I've actually posed this to FAA already, how do you measure collaboration among government agencies? How do you determine something is well-collaborated or something is poorly-collaborated? How do you measure integration? How do you know if the thing is fully integrated, partly integrated? If you had a device that did integration, where do you bolt it on to the UAS? So there's these, you know, grand terms that don't have necessarily measurable parameters associated with them, but yet they are the key terms in the program. So we have some reward generating thinking to think about here and to understand how that's gonna work as well. But these are just, you know, I'm just using these as like filler points. These are technical issues we have to worry about and getting towards making proposals to the solicitation.  Those type of systems aren't necessarily well-known by the small guy that is gonna be providing his local input. So it's kind of garbage in, garbage out. If you don't know what's there, you go, well, wait a minute, we already can do that. Well, I didn't know that. And again, as you say that, that's a great example, ADSB out. The kind of questions that come to my mind are, was that, was the communication system associated with that, which is SATCOM, was that actually designed to operate in an urban canyon, which is where a lot of UAS operations will wanna be in an urban canyon. Do you get signal reflection? Do you get some signal loss with that? But secondly, I've actually operated one small UAS that has dual ADSBs on it. And if it sees somebody else's signal coming down, it simply says, warning aircraft nearby. Okay, I'm not sure what to do with that. I need a situation to display this. I need a collision avoidance guidance of some kind. But David, as I mentioned, this program format is down to half an hour now, and we've managed to get very little of the items of discussion underway, so I'll have to have you back again, as this may be around the 30th, when you're gonna go to the meeting, I'm sure, down there in San Diego. Well, let's keep talking about this subject and make this the official output of information to the public on this incredible FAA and the Department of Transportation pilot program for unmanned air systems operated in a local environment with local authority being invited, being requested to provide operational guidance. So, Dave, thanks for coming on again, and gotta get you back here to Hawaii. Wait till next month, after the 30th of November meeting, so we can have some good insight regarding NASA and the UTM program. We'll bring you on for that one, sir, very, very looking forward to that one, okay? And the surf still breaks here, David, so your board is still around somewhere, your 9-6 hobby, I'm sure. That's exactly what it was. Yeah, okay, time to get back here and get some wax and get her out in the water. Okay, Dave, thanks for coming on, and we'll see you all again next Thursday.


Hi, I'm Sammy Nichols with AdWeek, and we're here at South by Southwest. Even though we're here in Austin, Texas, it feels like we've been traveling all over the world. From Brazil to Japan to Australia, companies all over the world have been bringing their tourism houses here at South by Southwest. And we wanted to know why, so we decided to ask them and went straight to the source. First, we're going to go to Scandinavia. South by Frost is the melting pot and creative hub in the world. I mean, this week is amazing. It's the intersection between arts and tech and culture that's interesting for us. We're trying to replicate that, but through our values, marketing today is not about making an ad anymore. It's about being more purposeful, and it's about creating trust to your customers, and we do that through doing actual stuff in communications. So it's a purposeful activation where we actually do make a difference as opposed to only making an ad. I think to take marketing to a different level, today is all about creating emotions. We're not rational today, we're emotional, and so I think that's the main thing. Create spaces for people to meet is this event for us. South by is a great meeting place, and it's here everything happens. Tech, innovation, music, so we think this is a good place to be for us, with a good audience. South by Southwest have a strong relationship from the music and also interactive, and also, recently, education is really important sections. However, the other conference focuses more on technology, like more specifications. We are focusing on the lifestyles, so that can be really similarity with South by Southwest, because South by Southwest have a deeply understanding on the music and also cultural aspect, and also technology. So we are looking for how can we technology and lifestyle can be merged or can be harmonious in Japanese culture. Well, this is the second year that we've brought Australia to South by Southwest as part of Australia House. It's an amazing all-encompassing activation where we've had tourism promotions, tech, innovation panels and plenty of music. Really, this is just about showcasing the very best of Australia and being part of this incredible dynamic festival. We want people to think of Australia at the cutting edge of everything that's happening across the discourse of all the things that are being discussed at South by Southwest. We also want people to understand what a unique destination Australia is. We offer some incredible experiences, something that you won't find anywhere else in the world, and that's why we brought amazing chefs over, produce, wine, and also just the whole Australian experience. There's an amazing discourse here at South by Southwest about creativity, meeting technology and innovation. From our part in Australia, we think we have something very valuable to offer as part of that, and so we want to be here as a whole of Australia presence and encourage people to look to Australia, to go to Australia, and to partner with Australia. Thanks for exploring the international houses with me at South by Southwest. For tech, agencies, branding, and everything else you need to know, check out adweek.com. I'm Sammy Nichols. Thanks for stopping by.