 Very quickly, I work for Comcast. I run the open-source program office at Comcast. Yes, behind all of the technology that delivers media and entertainment and internet services is a huge technology organization called technology products and customer experience. We have thousands of developers working with open-source every single day and as an enterprise who's going through digital transformation or who's doing digital transformation, having an OSPO has been incredibly helpful and I hope I can share some of that with you. I also sit on the board of the Linux Foundation and very proud to be the chair for the last two years during the pandemic. So we haven't really had a face-to-face meeting until I think in November. So there's no doubt and you heard Jim say this as well, that open-source is here to stay. It's disruptive, it is used by everybody, and you have to deal with it as an organization. You cannot ignore it, you cannot shove it under the carpet. You've got to do something intentional, something proactive and thoughtful and strategic about open-source. Just to reinforce the point, I know Andreessen said this long ago that software is eating the world, and our good friend Ibrahim Haddad said, no it's really open-source that's eating software because a lot of how we develop software today cannot be done without using open-source development practices or open-source components. So you've got to know that if you're innovating, if you are creating products, if you're creating services today, you inevitably are using open-source methodologies or you're using open-source software. And since we're in Seattle, I've got to pay homage to Satya Nadella. And Satya said all companies are software companies. It's not just your tech companies, it's not just your cloud companies, it's companies like Comcast, it's companies like Capital One, it is universities, it is governments, it is everybody. And so if you are a software company, then you are touching open-source, you are inevitably intentionally or unintentionally bringing in open-source into your company. So the momentum, I don't even have to share this. I think Jim covered this extremely well. Open-source in its 30 years, Linux in its 30 years is dominating every single industry and is everywhere. And in terms of investments and money, there's so much money going into open-source, whether it's projects like CNCF, or this is from 2018 from commercial open-source software from Joseph Jax. And you can see that the exits, the valuation, the amount of VC money going into open-source is incredible. Think Joseph's 2021 slide says the valuation of open-source-based companies is almost $380 billion. And Red Hat is just 10% of it, not even the whole $380 billion. I think back in 2010, Red Hat was almost 90% of open-source-based company valuation. So you can see that other companies are creating value, not just Red Hat. But there's also, while there's opportunity, there's also risks associated with open-source. And one risk which we all know in the Ospo is IP risk. If you don't use open-source correctly, if you connect or link to it incorrectly, you could potentially leak your company's software. Second one I think is non-compliance risk. We all use open-source, we need to respect those licenses, we need to make sure that when we distribute open-source outside the company, that we are complying with the licenses, posting disclosure notices, copyrights, and other information. The third type of risk to me is reputational risk. If you are not engaging correctly with the open-source community, if you are not abiding by licenses, you risk, you know, backlash. It makes it incredibly difficult to work with the community if you are not respecting the norms of community as well as open-source. This is one of the areas where it's so incredibly important to have trust and relationship with the community to function in open-source. The last type of risk I will say and why OSPO's are so important to innovation is if you don't have an open-source strategy, if you don't have an intentional OSPO kind of driving open-source, you risk being left behind from an innovation perspective, from a time-to-market perspective, from a cost-advantage perspective, and in disrupting markets with open-source that you release or open-source engagement. So you do have to, as an organization, acknowledge that risk is extremely important. And this was a slide that I put together intentionally for the board members that I was talking to because boards have to worry about risk. And I wanted to point out that they need to understand the risks and rewards of open-source. So the way I attacked this conversation with them was to say, let's look at four types of companies. And to your left, to your right, or wherever, I am losing my perspective here. You have startups, you have private companies. I was talking to people who sat on private company boards and public company boards, I was saying, okay, if you're a private company director, you have to look at two different kinds of startups. One is a startup that's creating services and products with lots of different software, but they're not based on one major open-source project. They're not behind one open-source project. So they are delivering other services, right? And then you have open-source-based startups themselves, such as Confluent behind the Kafka, Apache Kafka, and you have Databricks behind Apache Spark. And they are commercial companies that are kind of standing behind these open-source projects and delivering value-added services on top of that project. Then in public companies, I looked at two different public companies. One is a large technology vendor, take Microsoft, VMware, AWS, Google, et cetera. And then enterprises like myself, like Comcast, who are going through digital transformation. And we'll examine all these four and the kinds of open-source strategy and risk things that they need to think about and maybe an approach to how they organize for as an Ospo. So when you look at a small company or a startup that's using a lot of open-source in every company, every startup is using open-source software to get to market faster, innovate faster, better. And for them, it's really about risk management and also exit management. As a large company, I often do due diligence on companies we invest in, companies we acquire. And inevitably we find that companies, small startups don't even know what they have, what they've used, what licenses they're using and what risk they have in their companies. And that often kind of slows down the whole investment process or the exit process. And it's so important to have at least a simple framework which says here are our guidelines as a company. We'll use this, we won't use this. And if you're using this, come get the CTO's approval or the VP of Engineering's approval. And you don't have to have a 10 member OSPO as a startup. If you can just have someone in your engineering team be responsible for guidelines, policies, answering questions and at least having a framework for how you're going to use and work with open-source, that's sufficient. And I was pleasantly surprised this week I did a due diligence on a startup that actually had a one-page guidelines for their engineers. And it was simple and nice and they knew all of their open-source that they were using, they had all of their licenses identified. It was dead easy to do the due diligence because they were just so prepared. And I'm sure it didn't take too much time to put that organization together. And frankly, they also have to think about are we attracting great developers and today great developers want to work for companies that are open-source aware or have policies in place, encourage them to work in open-source. So this is to me what a startup should be thinking about from an open-source perspective, not too many cycles but have at least a minimal OSPO and policies. And then you look at commercial open-source startups like, I mean, so many companies that stand up behind open-source, I think your company, right, behind Vitesse. Here, open-source is so central to your company strategy that your CEO should be thinking what is my open-source community strategy? What is my business model? What value am I adding on top of open-source? How are we taking this product both to market and to community? And a product strategy is extremely important. How are we doing with communities even more important? Because you would not have innovation as a startup without that community behind you. Community creates innovation and contribution. It creates adoption. It creates people who evangelize for you. Often, commercial open-source companies will say, you know, this developer at this company picked up the software from open-source, used it, evangelized it inside his company, and then we were able to move to an enterprise-level contract with the company because they were able to try and they were able to be part of this community. And if we don't take care of that community, we don't have a business. So you'll find that successful commercial open-source companies have a great community strategy and have a really good thought process in terms of how they deliver business value. So some add value on top as a proprietary layer which is very enterprise grade. It could be GUIs. It could be single sign-ons. It could be analytics. Some do it through hosting and this is becoming more and more prevalent as a model. We deliver services through a SaaS-based model because SaaS then kind of extracts out all the complexity of operations and trying it and installing it, et cetera. And it's also very helpful for them then to compete with public cloud vendors who are also delivering these services if they invest in creating cloud-based open-source right from the start. The third, of course, is an appliance model. You put hard best software together. It's integrated. You deliver it. And these are just three of many, many models that exist out there. You start with open at the bottom and then you have different layers of how you monetize the software. And this is something that commercial open-source companies have to talk about or... And you've seen a trend towards using license maybe to change how they compete and protect themselves from maybe public cloud competition. It's not always proven to be the right strategy because it kind of fakes an open-source license. It says, yeah, source is available, but you don't have other freedoms. And there's been a lot of community backlash. Enterprises like myself struggle with some of these license changes as well because it's hard to manage it inside the company. What's open? What's not open? What's commercial? And so license changes have not proven to be a good way to protect yourself. The proven strategy with companies like Confluent and Databricks and others has been starting with a SaaS-based model right from the start and truly adding value and managing community correctly and continuing to innovate and increasing the value line, if you will. Technology companies, these are public companies. Large public companies most of the time. They were some of the early adopters of open-source. You heard Jim and others talk about and Chris about IBM's son and others be kind of the forefront of the open-source movement in 1998. 2000, I was at Silicon Graphics. We were also working on how do we move from being a proprietary vendor to an open-source vendor. Then you saw cloud vendors build the entire data center infrastructure based on open-source and Microsoft and others embrace open-source in their cloud strategy but also in serving developers you have to have an open-source-first type of a strategy or open-source being a very core part of your strategy. So a lot of technology vendors have to look at how do we work with open-source? How do we interoperate with open-source? Are we part of key open-source ecosystems like CNCF or open-security foundation, open-source security foundation? They have to make sure that they have partnerships with open-source companies, commercial open-source companies and other ecosystems. They cannot just exist as a proprietary island by themselves. They have to look at how everything works together. Reputation in the open-source community, frankly, is extremely important and you find really strong OSPOS at VMware, at Microsoft, at AWS, at Google. These are fantastic OSPOS that really work on community strategy. They work on partnership strategy. They work on how they fit into the world that developers are demanding today, where they want to work in open-source and they want to work in a much more open API type of a world. And managing open-source risk is something all of us have to do, as you saw. Even, and especially I think technology vendors, because they are selling product, both proprietary as well as open-source based on open-source, they have to really, really look at how they're managing this risk. Are they using open-source correctly? Are they being compliant? Are they making sure that their IP is not in some way compromised? It's talking to a company that's very IP based in the UK, I think many of you know, and because their business depends upon licensing IP, they're very, very conscious of having a fantastic compliance program because they have to make sure that everything is clean and well-managed. And today, if you are in the cloud, you have to work with cloud-native compute foundation, cloud-native open-source components. You have to make sure that you have the right ecosystems around you. You cannot ignore developers' needs for open-source services being provided, right? If there is a popular open-source component, developers want that to be available as a service on their favorite cloud render. They don't want you to create a competitive proprietary service. So it's important for cloud vendors to work in open as well. And then I'll come to companies like myself. We are really have to accelerate and this whole pandemic completely sped up the digital transformation for many of us. We had already started the journey as a company in 2004, 2005, but the level of investment we needed to make in networks and in mobile applications and low-touch and self-service type of components that our customers were looking for was dramatic over the last two years. And boards and chief technology officers at companies like us need to worry about is our digital transformation plan, does it include open-source? Do we have an open-source strategy as a company? Do we have an OSPO? Are we intentionally driving innovation? Are we making sure to get the advantages of go to market and time to market rather and cost and other elements that open-source brings to the table? And to be honest, the other very important piece for us as an OSPO is at Comcast is attracting good developers and retaining good developers. It's such a key part of our strategy because a lot of enterprises are not known as tech companies and we are competing with amazing tech companies and so we have to have a developer environment and culture that's attractive, just as attractive as tech company's culture. This slide, I think you'll recognize, it came from a white paper which says how enterprise adoption of open-source is so vital to companies. Everything from the feedback our engineers get when you're working in open-source. We just did a podcast recently inside Comcast and one of my engineers said, he loves working with open-source because he has so many teachers in the world that are teaching him. It's not just his small team or mentors within his company. He can tap into this global network of teachers who are helping him become better. And they learn by contributing, by feedback and I think this article talks to the fact that companies that are not just consuming but contributing back and engaging actively and intentionally with communities are much more profitable, much more productive, much more effective than companies that just consume and not engage. And I'll suppose they're the ones that really manage the engagement. So I always say that the whole reason for having someone, whether it's one person or a working group of people working across the company or a centralized big open-source program office is it brings focus. It brings intentionality to what you're doing. It's proactive, it's strategic. It's consistent across your organization and it's visible to the community and to your company. And you can't do that by just letting everybody do their own thing without having some sort of a framework and consistent practices and policies to drive it. And the ASPO survey results also indicate that almost 77% of people are saying it really helped me. It really had a positive impact on my company. I can see the positive results. And two of the top areas that were really positive was it drives my innovation. So connection to innovation is very strong and it drives better software development practices. And I absolutely agree. Everything from how you set up your project to componentizing your architecture to documentation, documentation, documentation to creating community and contribution guidelines and a code of conducts, it just makes you a better developer. It just makes you a better project. Some resources for the ASPO, the Familiar One to-do group, that is our go-to always because of this huge body of people that I can tap into. I can talk to Justin. I can talk to anyone on the to-do group and Dawn and others and get advice on what they're doing. And we all face very similar as public companies, especially we face similar things. The second one I would say is the ASPO++ and Jason is here. ASPO++ has started out as an incubation and conversation area for both universities as well as municipalities because they have incredibly different needs. And so it's a great place to kind of connect across those ecosystems and learn from each other. And it's another source. The third source I would say is Inner Source Commons. And I have to quickly say what Inner Source is because Open Source has been so prolific and good at innovation outside companies. What if you brought that same openness and collaboration into your companies, inside your companies and do more collaborative development, break down silos, work across departments and business units, reuse components that are already created instead of creating duplication. That's what Inner Source Commons focuses on. Focuses on practices of open source that you can bring inside your company. And we are a big supporter of what Inner Source Commons does. Open chain inside the Linux Foundation is a huge part of what I do because as an OSPO, one of the biggest things I do is compliance. And so we work with open chain to understand compliance best practices, specifications, training, tools, et cetera. And ACT is, did I get that right? Is it ACT? I think it is ACT, which is the tools organization, compliance, tooling under the Linux Foundation, which also is somewhat of a new organization, but they're collecting all the open source tools. Like Chris was saying, we are all doing exactly the same thing. We're building the same tools. We are duplicating all this work. Why not use open source collaboration to solve open source tooling? That's another great source, I think, for people wanting to either be a small OSPO or a big OSPO or a working group of OSPs working together inside an organization. Takeaways, I would say, as the world gets digitized and open source is everywhere, you've got to acknowledge it. You've got to have it as part of your strategy, whether you're big or small. And if you do not leverage open source, you're missing out on a huge advantage as a startup or as a large company that you cannot afford to. You're competing with companies who are going to market faster, cheaper, better using open source and you'll be missing out on those advantages. But yet you have to also manage the risks associated with not doing it or not complying or not using it correctly. And I think creating a focused OSPO, if it's half a person or the CTO of a startup kind of wearing that hat, is going to be huge at focusing on the right strategy, the right risk management and making open source a key part of your innovation strategy. This I stole from the LF open source is one of the most successful enablers of global innovation in history. And I love the keynotes today because it talked about how it's not just software development, but using these collaborative practices across industries, solving big problems, coming together inside the companies, outside the companies. God knows we have a lot of challenges in the world today. And having coming together from a collaborative perspective gives me hope that we can beat this. And I'm one of the most optimistic persons and I'm very optimistic. We'll come out of this okay and we'll be bigger, stronger, bolder, more resilient than before. So with that, I'm happy to take questions and I hope that was helpful. Hi. How you doing? Good thanks. You don't have this word perfectly. Thank you very much. But I've noticed the keynotes and even the reference here to the value of open source has been huge is, and you made some reference to the academic and ties with the government as well. I think governments are seeing the value in this also and are trying to find how they may carve out a niche for their populace or try to get technical staffs involved and set up hospitals as well. I just hope they don't go down a path and populate it with too many attorneys as I have to deal with it. It's sequencing me anywhere I work. But is there advice or blueprints that they might be able to leverage from the success that you know today to promote that as well? How could governments leverage blueprints or learnings from businesses to use? So within the to-do group, we have some public sector companies as well who are involved in observing and learning from all of these groups. And what Jacob is doing with OSPO++ is also kind of helping to leverage existing practices that are working and then understanding what governments need and matching those together, but also evolving new practices, right? Because governments are different. I'll say one more thing, which is I think establishing an OSPO++ gives us a common language to speak across universities like Jacob is doing in RIT, governments and sorry, Stephen, Stephen, Stephen Jacobs. So he does have a Jacob in his name. Exactly, too many. And everybody knows my, sometimes you can't remember all the names, but I think it creates a common language and a common framework to work across lots of different organizations. So I'm so excited to see that. Denise. I was just getting a question. Excellent, yeah, thank you. Any other questions? Yes. I'm sending out a very known opportunity versus having it be a more organic sort of business itself. Sort of a frozen concept or recommendations there. Is one seen or proven to work a little bit better than the other? I'm happy to comment on it. And I welcome, you know, there's lots of great OSPO folks here to comment on it as well. I think initially things often are organic till there's a tipping point when usually it's legal who says, hey, I can't handle this. Everybody's coming to me. And there are too many questions. We need some structures in place and someone in the engineering organization who can kind of act as a first line between me and you know, the engineers or developers. Or there's some sort of a risk that happens and so compliance risk or something that creates that tipping point. I can tell you within Comcast we have a very structured OSPO in cable but Sky has a very organic OSPO in Europe and it's principal engineers across different business units who also wear that hat. And they kind of loosely coordinate with each other and talk to each other. But they've also been coming to us and saying, hey, we need more structure because my first job is being a developer and engineer. I don't have time to kind of also answer these questions or do structure. So I'm a big, I don't think it has to be centralized. Success is when every single developer in your company it's just part of his DNA or her DNA in how they develop or their DNA and how they develop open sources just in the fabric. So we do want to get to a decentralized and organic world where it's just the way they do things. But till then maybe I'm a believer in some structure. Any other viewpoints? Yes. Oh, any, yes. I can only do one more question and then I have to finish. Yes. That's a great question. I will recommend that you talk to Dawn Foster after the event because she does community strategy for VMware, okay. So to me it's making sure that those who are involved in your project have a respectful space to work in. That's first and foremost, trust and respect. There's a good communication strategy so that you're transparent with them. A good engagement strategy as to ease of contribution, ease of engagement and also a way to escalate your engagement so not just being a one-time pass by but maybe an opportunity to kind of work more in with the community. And not kind of treating them as a sales funnel but keeping them as a respected innovation community that you work with and making it easy for them to use the software and giving them value through the software. So those are a few of them but I know Dawn has a lot more thoughts on that. Are you speaking on it at the conference? I'm speaking on that. Okay. Thank you so much everyone for your time today. Thank you.