S06E01 · L'Open Source et OpenUK

0:02 What I found is that trying to make tech democratized through that drives me because I'm doing something that I know is good for society and that will create a legacy if we manage to do what I want to do. And I also have a sort of second thing, which is I don't work with people I don't like. When you have somebody who is a leader, whether they are self-appointed or they've been elected, those leaders only lead if they have a community around them and behind them. Hello everyone, I'm Philippe Ensarguet, VP Software Engineering at Orange. But today, it's as a member of the Tech.Rocks content team that I'm here. I'm absolutely delighted to be with you for this Tech.Rocks podcast, and I have the pleasure of welcoming Amanda Brock. Nice to be with you, Philippe. So a few weeks back, on December the 7th and the 8th, at the Comet meeting booth in Paris,

1:04 we had our seventh edition of the Tech.Rocks Summit that gathered nearly 400 mainly people that were CTO, VPs, and head of technology profiles. It has been a very important moment because it brought our community together. It was a moment of inspiration and reflection and a perfect opportunity to network and meet new contacts and strengthen our practices and learn together. During this event, we had the pleasure of welcoming on stage for a keynote Amanda that delivered a session called Will Open Source Fail? That was a true success. This podcast is an opportunity to come back on the topics covered and to have some deep dives on the topic that Amanda covered. So let's enter into this podcast with Amanda. So I'm really sure that our audience, Amanda, would love to better know who you are. As you said, I'm Amanda Brock, and I'm the CEO at an organization.

2:05 called Open UK. We are an industry organization focusing on the business of open technology. And we are very unusual because we don't focus on companies. We focus on individuals. And we do that because we have discovered that when you look in geographical areas beyond the US, primarily California, when you look at your geography, this will be much the same in every country, what you find is that a lot of your engineering, particularly your open source engineering people, work for international companies. So we focus on people. And by doing that, we bring together a community in the UK. Now, I am sort of a founder in this space and I have been in the role just over four years, almost exactly actually four years when I did the Tech.Rocks keynote for you. And my background is that I'm a lawyer. And I spent 25 years being a lawyer. I had a career change five years ago.

3:08 I had seen the light long before and I was probably in the wrong career. But I gained massively valuable experience in those 25 years that I now bring to Open UK, where we do the community work I've mentioned, but also we do a lot of policy work. I'm curious to understand how did you make a link between the law and the regulation and the technology? What was the booster for this? I started by accident in the 90s. In 1996, I joined a law firm and the law firm interviewed me and I told them I wanted to be an IP, so an intellectual property lawyer. And the lady interviewing me kept saying IT. And I kept saying IP whenever she said IT, because when I was in high school, they tried to teach me to code and my code did not run once. And they told me I should stay away from computers. So then years later, I joined this law firm where they wanted to train me to be an IT lawyer. And they very generously sent me to do a master's.

4:11 And the master's that I did was a university in London called Queen Mary, and it was an IT and IP law. But it also included the first Internet law course in the world for lawyers. And I ended up working in the dot-com bubble in the late 90s. I was doing Internet law advice from mid-90s. And then in 2008, I joined a company called Canonical, the commercial sponsor of the operating system Ubuntu, if anyone doesn't know them. And I spent five years there running the legal team and building the legal team as their general counsel. So I guess the rest for me is history. We are feeling a lot of energy when you're speaking and I'm a little bit curious about what drives you and gets you up in the morning. Do you have some daily inspiration you could share with our audience? Yeah, I made it. career change and I made a shift in my life. I'm quite open about my age. I'm 55 this year in the summer and I was 49 at the time and a lot of change had happened in my life and I made a decision that I was going to do a couple of things.

5:14 One, I was going to do something that I believed in, that I felt changed things for people, that was useful, that my career today, I looked back and I'd done super interesting work and I'd made the most of it at every stage. But I'd spent my life making a lot of money for people and it doesn't drive me. And I'm driven by interest and doing something, you know, that fascinates me where I'm always learning. And I'm interested in seeing things be better. So I made a decision that that's the way I was going to work. And I think I found my purpose by getting back into open source and really focusing. Now, we at OpenUK do open technology, so software, hardware, data, AI standards. But my personal deep expertise is open source software. What I found is that trying to make tech democratized through that drives me because I'm doing something that I know is good for society and that will create a legacy if we manage to do what I want to do.

6:15 And I also have a sort of second thing, which is I don't work with people I don't like. Yes, I think it's an interesting outcome. Thanks so much. Open source is a very vast topic. And you mentioned it just Previously, it's about open technology, open source software, open hardware, open source AI. There is legal trends, open source business. So I'm curious to understand how you are organizing yourself to manage your watch to be able basically to comment or to bring. Position that are so accurate. Do you have a secret sauce for this? Do I have a secret sauce? Be a lawyer for 25 years. So much as I complain about it, one of the great things about being a lawyer, and I spent 20 years working in companies where I was in the legal team or running the legal team, you get an overview of how business works that most people in a company never see. And you see every problem that a company faces.

7:16 Now, that's really stressful. Even if you think at the time you're not stressed, there's a constant underlying stress. On the other hand, it's really useful because you learn how things work. And back in the day, I moved every couple of years. I've had two jobs other than Open UK, one in Canonical and one in Dixons, where I was working on a digital transformation and the ISP FreeServe. So those jobs have been five years long. Everything else I've done, I've done for sort of 18 months, two years. So I've moved a lot and I've seen a lot of different industries and sectors. And that's given me an understanding of a really broad range of issues. And in the legal team, you also deal with policy. So you also. to deal with new regulations and laws and responding to those. So in many ways, it really prepared me for that. I was wondering, because you edited the well-known book called Open to Slow Policy and Practices, and I'm curious to learn how it started and what was the initial motivation to reach

8:21 basically such an impressive result. It's the worst thing I've ever done, Philippe. And I keep saying that I'll never do it again, but actually we may do another edition next year or to be published next year, so we'll see. And it's 640 pages long. I didn't mention before when I was answering you that I have ADHD, so applying myself to some of these things can be really hard. Editing a 640-page book is part of that. When I said to you that I did the first internet law course in the country, the chap, the professor who taught me is called Ian Walden. And Ian's not that much older than me. He's still teaching. But he had edited the first version of this book with one of his colleagues. And I was very late in submitting my chapter because I have ADHD in the same way as I was probably the last person to give you my slides for the conference. And everyone is always chasing me. I do it, but it's just in time and it's the way my brain works. So I think he played a trick on me. And when it came to a second edition of the book, it had been something like five years and I was chasing him to create a second edition.

9:30 And he looked at me and said, I don't have time. You do it. And I think he got his revenge because I then had to deal with 26 authors, feel the pain he'd felt and edit their work. OK, fine. Just before I would say entering into the topics that you covered during your keynote, perhaps a last question in this set the stage with Amanda. I would be curious to understand if the initial definition we may have. around open source. When we are today in 2024, do we need to stick to the definition that have been previously done? And because the hardware, the software, the AI are very different material, if I would say. So I would be very interesting to understand what is your position and to what we need to stick about definition in the open source ecosystem. This is a really topical question, and it's become really topical within open source because we have our internal frictions around people moving away from traditional open source licenses.

10:38 But last year, 2023 is definitely the year of AI. And what we saw was. Lama's launch, which is not open source in a traditional definition, but is open in which OpenUK supported because we cover the range of opens. That's brought this question to the top of the agenda. And it's exactly what we're going to be talking about in a lot of depth at State of OpenCon in London a couple of weeks. The issue for me is that the thing that is so sweet to me about open source isn't that this software complies with all 10 of the definitions. It isn't that it has an approved license. It's the effect of that. And the effect of that is that. Anybody, anywhere in the world, without... Any exclusions for any reason can use the software for any purpose, good or bad. And the originators, the creators, the engineers, the developers make no moral or ethical judgment.

11:44 And there's nothing personal about it. And what that does is it allows a free flow. And that free flow allows the world to rely on their ability to use it subject to the license. And that's what open source licensing is about. Now, if you think about that, anything less means that you are always going to have some level of restriction to check before you run something that you can use it to check that you don't have to pay somebody. So if we look at Lama 2, it's not true open source. Falcon, the UAE AI is. Microsoft released on an open source license something called Phi 2, which is a tiny model a couple of weeks ago. They're true open source. You can use them. You know that whatever you develop, you won't have to pay either Microsoft or the UAE for usage. However, with Lama, there are restrictions. And one of those restrictions is if you hit 7 million users, which is a hell of a lot of users. But if you hit that, you've got to go back and get a license.

12:46 Now, those license terms are undisclosed. And what that means is that Meta someday could have some influence and control over what you do with your product. They could demand a royalty from you or another payment. So there could be an impact on your... commercialization. That's really important. And that free flow to me is at the heart of the benefits of open source. Now, we are going to be having this discussion because the friction within those of us, within the friction. Within the communities that those of us involved participate in, around moving away from open source towards propriety in our heads, towards proprietary by putting restrictions in place as a problem. Something I will say that's really important is this does not mean that open source software doesn't comply with legislation and regulation and laws. Like anything else, it's subject to those. So the freedom and the free flow I'm talking about is from the grantor, the developer giving you the gift of this software, the engineering community giving you this.

13:48 What it's not is a path to avoid laws. And I think regulators sometimes misunderstand and think that by being open source, we're anti-establishment, we're anti-regulation. And that's not the case. If there are going to be laws, if there are going to be restrictions, those we believe shouldn't come from us. They come from government. And regulators. But then when we look at these restrictions that individuals are putting on their code, you can understand why that causes friction. And we would call it public source or distributed source. There's a bunch of different names. I don't think people are so much angry that that exists. Although if you've been in a... community where you've contributed your time free to build something that somebody else is now restricting for a commercial purpose you can see why that would annoy you you would feel that your community contract had been broken but I don't think the anger that we've seen has been so much around that when it comes to commercialization

14:49 I don't think the anger has been so much around that as it's been around the fact that we have companies who are open washing. We have companies. who call something open source that isn't open source and causes confusion. And when we talk about open source, we mean open source software, which is why OpenUK uses this term open tech. And we have room in that open tech definition for distributed source or public source. And it's quite complex. It's quite complicated. So you can understand when it comes to AI, why regulators are struggling. When it comes to security, why regulators and policymakers are struggling. And also why, if we're fighting amongst ourselves within our community about what things mean, because they're not defined legally. In a regulation or anything that we have to abide by, you can see why there's a lot of friction and confusion. So what we're trying to do within OpenUK is convene the right leaders and to start to have that conversation very publicly.

15:50 And I think that's super important. Thanks so much for all these precisions. So now we can perhaps switch to the TechRox Summit and your keynote and your content. So just before deep diving, it's perhaps interesting to remember that in 2022, the theme was about scaling. And last year, so in 2023, it was about efficiency. And I'm really interested to understand basically how the efficiency theme basically resonates for you and what does it represent? Well, I think efficiency, when I was talking about open source and when I'm thinking about technology, Generally, to create efficiency, we don't want to start with a blank piece of paper or a blank screen every time. What we want to do is to recycle and reuse our code and to build on that, to be able to stand on the shoulders of the giants that have created that code for us. So I think that one of the key reasons people use open source is that efficiency.

16:53 We also see when it comes to any vulnerabilities or other problems that you have a collective response. So again, the resource that manages the ongoing utilization, the responses to issues, that that's a collective, which is also efficient and minimizes resource and ensures a quality response. It's interesting because in how basically efficiency resonates for you, you answer as well about the question of is open source technology making the world more efficient? And I think that the answer is very, very clear. The next question I would love to answer to you is, and basically you scratched the surface previously, but it's interesting to deep dive in. Nearly one year back, we have this kind of tidal, this tsunami with generative AI that already changed the way we are working. But there is still a lot of pending questions, and in particular, this topic that you scratched of the open versus the closed model.

17:57 I would love to perhaps to... hear your thought and your consideration and perhaps the point that our audience may have in mind when it's about generative AI and open source. Yeah, so I'm assuming, Philippe, your audience is mainly in Europe. Is that right? Mainly, yes, you're right. Yeah, okay. So you're in a very similar situation in the EU as we are in the UK. So, you know, we can talk about Europe collectively in this situation. UK is supposed to be number three in the world in AI, depending on how it's defined, something to do with businesses based on AI. And that number three must be a massive drop behind number two. And number one and two are the US and China. Now, when we look across Europe, if we want to have an AI future, We need it to be opened up. We can't afford to go and build competing technology. Our companies can't afford to go and develop LLMs generally unless they're doing it collaboratively and through an open environment.

19:01 If you were to go back, I don't know, 30 years ago, when do we really think the tech sector began? The 80s, 90s, 80s, maybe? So when we look at the start of that, say 40, even 50 years ago, If you were sitting and strategizing, how do I want the future of my world to look? If you were looking at a movie and saying this science fiction movie is actually about to become science reality in 30 or 40 years, how do I want it to look? I suspect you wouldn't say. I want a few individuals running big companies to make the decisions about technology, which will create the infrastructure of my public sector services and the infrastructure of every enterprise that I work with. I suspect you wouldn't want to be dependent on their whim. And I don't think we would have allowed. The way things have panned out to happen. I think we would have understood better. So today in 2024, as we look forward, We're in a different world. We know what's happened if we just leave this to run and evolve its own course.

20:06 And there's no reason to think it wouldn't just happen the same way again. And the challenge isn't so much for you and I, it's for the people who are running our countries to understand the technology. They won't understand it fully ever, but to understand the technology to the extent necessary to be able to be well advised by their policy advisors and their public sector and to ensure that as we look at our tech future, it's democratized. And that we have access to the technologies, that people have access to them to create innovation, to a life of competition. And to ensure that the infrastructure that we're now dependent on is something that we can rely on. I don't know. Do you have the hokey-cokey in France? Do you know what it is? No. What is this? The hokey-cokey is a kid's game. The Americans call it the hokey-pokey. And you put your right hand in, you put your right hand out, in, out, in, out, and shake it all about. And you do this with every limb, and it's a little song. And I always say that Sam Altman played the hokey-cokey over a weekend.

21:09 So he was in, he was out, he was in again. Who knew where it was going? Microsoft's share price plummeted and then rose when they said they were going to hire him. They did well out of it. It's one of those things where it showed when you have, despite all the concerns about risks of opening things up, there is a bigger risk in having things closed. where when he was removed, you had a situation where OpenAI had all these customers who didn't know what was going to happen. They didn't know what they were using. They didn't know how they were going to get access to it. They no longer trusted the black box that they'd committed to. And also, you know, Microsoft, the amount of money they'd put in, they were reacting to it too. So it's a really interesting example, Sam Altman's hokey-cokey, of where it can go wrong and why when we're talking about risk, we have to understand that risks work in the open, risks work in a closed way. But actually, they're probably not anymore. If we open things up, but the benefits of opening it up, particularly for those of us outside of the US and China, are incredible and necessary.

22:17 Last year, I've been also a very intense year regarding open source about the CRA, the Cyber Resiliency Act. I know that a lot of, I don't know if the word progress is the right one, but it has been a long journey. And I read very recently that there is a final cut around this CRA. I would be curious to have your thoughts about basically where we all landed into this Cyber Resiliency Act topic. Yeah, so with the CRA, the Cyber Resilience Act, there was massive concern this time last year when a draft came out. A lot of the response to that. from the open communities was around the role and the responsibility of individuals and ensuring that individual developers would not be detrimentally impacted by it, alongside looking at our foundations. And the Act was going to treat foundations, which are stewards or custodians of open source software,

23:21 because they're funded by technology companies and some of them have a lot of money, they were going to treat them as a commercial entity. And what that meant is they were replicating in Europe and the EU what they have done in trademarks. So when you put something onto the market, it's a free movement within the EU. And the trademark can be used anywhere in the EU. So they were trying to apply the same thinking to software. So whoever put it first in the market would be liable across the EU for that software. And that's hugely problematic. So there was a huge response led by those foundations and they have had a significant shift in the legislation where the foundations are no longer treated as commercial entities and they're treated as stewards. And steward is an interesting term. It's one we've been using in the UK for a few years and has been picked up for the different hosts of open source software.

24:23 And I think that's a good thing. I'm a little concerned, though, because we've got to this stage where the agreement was made in December. We've. in the first final version. I say the first final version because there is still an opportunity to tidy up the wording with lawyers, they're called lawyer linguists, I think, going through the wording. And the concern I still have, there's a few, you know, I won't go into every nuance, there's a few concerns, but the concern I have is the way they have defined free and open source software. And the way they've defined it doesn't use the existing definitions of open source software or free software. It's a new one. And I think that's problematic in that we don't need a new one. It's just going to cause a lot of confusion. We need regulators, policymakers to be consistent, to stick to what we've got, to what they've used historically and to be really clear, because there are so many challenges. And the reason I'm so concerned about this isn't that open source will be undermined, although that's part of it. The reason I'm concerned.

25:24 Is that there are benefits that we have been campaigning for decades for, for open source, where it's carved out of some of the requirements of legislation. So you get a pass if you're doing open source and you're doing it as a developer and you're not commercializing it. If that applies more broadly, or if we say that in AI, if it's open source, you don't have to comply with X, Y, or Z. If we don't know what open source means or we're inconsistent about it, we're in trouble and people will take advantage of that. I would love to have also your thoughts about the Tech.Rocks Summit event. You have a very impressive and strong experience in giving keynotes, basically in all the best tech place to be. And I would love to hear you about your overall experience at Tech.Rocks Summit 2023. Oh, you were super professional. It was a really interesting experience. And you've inspired me to have a makeup artist at conferences. I'm not, you can see from this call, I'm not someone who wears a lot of makeup a lot of the time and I'm always resisting.

26:30 to anybody putting a lot of stuff on my face, but actually when you get someone on stage, it's important. It's important they feel comfortable. It's important that the video afterwards looks good. And that's a tiny little thing, right? But it is reflective of the professionalism that isn't seen at many events that I experienced at Tech.Rocks. You had an audience listening to somebody in a second language without translators who were attentive, engaged. I had people speaking to me afterwards. The process up to it was really good. So as a speaker, I have to say that you ran a great conference. And thank you. Thank you for having me there. OK, thanks so much. There is perhaps a question I would love to ask you, even if you comment on previously at the introduction. I was already a big fan of what you're doing, and basically I'm following you since a lot of time. And during your keynote, you mentioned that you are ADHD, so attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. And I'm realizing that there is a lot of people in tech that are ADHD and at various stages.

27:38 Yeah. But I would be very curious if you can share some tips to our audience about, I would say, ADHD and perhaps having tips on how you are working, what you are fixing in your daily job, because I'm sure that A lot of people could learn from this. I can only speak for myself. I'm going to be very honest about this here, right? So other people, please don't be offended if you think you're ADD or ADHD and I say something about it that you don't like. I have found being diagnosed super helpful. So I'm also autistic and I had an ASD and autism diagnosis during lockdown. And then I think two years ago. I had the ADHD one done and I did the autism one because I wasn't particularly convinced I had autism, but I was doing a project for OpenUK and it seemed logical to be tested. And then I was quite surprised when I was actually diagnosed, but actually I'm very autistic.

28:39 During that process, medical professionals kept saying to me that, you know, we're doing this diagnosis with you. We've got to do X, Y, Z, but you really need to be diagnosed for ADHD. And I was slightly offended by this. I had looked at it and my thought on it was, well, what are you going to do to me? You're going to medicate me. I don't want to be some zombie in a, you know, some medicated zombie who isn't themselves, who loses their personality. How dare you, you know, it was that kind of response to it. And I don't know how much of that comes from shame and how much of it comes from the fact I didn't want people telling me I needed to change or that they wanted to change me. And actually, I did it because one of my My friends from university who is a top psychologist had told me that she had taken the medication and it had changed her life. So I started taking something called Elvans, not Ritalin, but Elvans.

29:44 A couple of you, I don't know if you're allowed to advertise on your show. I started to take what is effectively an amphetamine. About two years ago. And the difference it makes to me is phenomenal. So they don't really know what causes ADHD. you are generally told is that your brain is searching for a dopamine hit. So it is jumping from thing to thing to thing. And it's looking to find that hit. And by self-medicating, by giving yourself that tiny micro dosage of amphetamine, it causes the dopamine in your brain to release. And that means that you can be focused. Now, it takes a bit of time to work it out. I take the absolute minimum adult dosage and sometimes I take a child's dose. Some reason in my body, you know, medication process is fast. If I take more than that, I will work for a minimum of 20 hours. So obviously, I don't want to be doing that. You know, it would kill me. And I don't take it at weekends. But I have found that the two things have come out of being diagnosed.

30:47 The first is that the medication has really allowed me to focus, which doesn't just make my life easier. It makes everybody around me have an easier life. And then the second thing is that I have researched it more and I've been able to say, ah, so that's why I do this or this annoys other people because I do that and I have no idea about it. Or if I can see people lost because I'm jumping in a conversation, I can say to them, you know, some of my colleagues record me so they can follow. If you want to do that, I won't be offended. You know, those kind of things. So it's enabled me to be more comfortable and understand myself better. It makes my life easier. easier because I'm able to focus and get stuff done. You know, when you look at my screen, I will still have more windows open than you've ever seen. But honestly, you know, it's, yeah, and I've learned how to put things in folders and whatever. But I see a lot of people around me who clearly have it. And it's very difficult to get the diagnosis.

31:49 In the end, I had to pay for it. And That was quite hard for me because it is quite expensive, but it was worth it. It was an investment in my future. I think it really helps. I also suspect that there is a kind of person who is successful in tech who is more prone to having this. And whether it's ADHD with the hyperactive bit that I have, or whether it's ADD, which is just the attention deficiency. I think it comes from having spent a lot of our lives on the screens. Therefore, people, you know, we're not digital natives at my age group, but I've spent the last 30 years, 25, 30 years on a screen and multiple screens. And I'm fast and I jump between things and that enables my success. You know, I touch type, that kind of stuff that's made me really fast. So I think that there is a tendency for those of us who have become successful within the tech sector and who are obvious to the rest of the world and obvious to our own communities to be those kind of people.

32:53 And when you look at the public profiles, you're seeing people who will also do talks, who will also do podcasts, who will also write. I think they're even more likely to be people who do multiple things and who can't focus on one thing and need the relief and the release almost. And just before I stop talking about ADHD, because I'm sure I'm talking for too long, there's another school of thought around ADHD, which is about emotional well-being. And it's around the fact that we jump not because our brain is looking for dopamine, but because we're looking for or we're looking to please people. And we're trying to if I do this, will you be happy? If I do that, will I be you? Will you be happy? Or maybe I should do this. And we're trying to grab everything to people, please, to give people what we think they want. And that probably comes from our very early childhood patterns. And I think whichever of those it is, you get to the same outcome. That if you can get yourself into a position where you understand it, you can think about whether there are those emotional things that you want to deal with. And that helps you in your personal evolution.

33:55 Thanks so much, Amanda. I think that it was a very, very interesting testimonial, very insightful. And thanks for sharing this. What are the main topics that you put on the top of your agenda for this year? Where will you spend your time and energy this year? It's really interesting. I mentioned earlier that I'm aging rapidly. It feels like you age faster when you get to this age than earlier. And I have become conscious in the last few months that I may only work for another 10 years. And if that's the case, I only... want to be focused on and doing the things that matter. So I'm really thinking more in life about everything that I do, having impact and being the right thing to do or with the facts I have the right thing to do. And my focus this year is very much on the fact that we're going to have an election here. You know, I think you're also going to have them in the EU and in the US. So it's going to be a year of transition and change. We have to bring into that what's happening with our digital environments and digital futures.

35:00 We have to think about what's happening with, in my case, open source within that. And then we have to think about AI and how we shift from AI panic last year. To being in this year of pragmatism towards AI and making sensible decisions and accepting it as part of our lives the way we did the web. So those are my focuses. I'm also trying to focus on You know, you're talking about keynotes earlier. I only did my first keynote in September 2019. It's worked very well for me. And, you know, I'm very lucky that people will fly me all over the world to talk now. But I think that we all have to look at how much we travel, where we travel from a sustainability perspective. And then we have to think about where the value really is added. So I'm also trying to be careful. About where I do that and how I do that. Thanks so much. And I think that it was totally main stage for us at the Tech.Rocks summit organization to take sustainability and where our speakers are coming absolutely critical.

36:09 So I think that you mentioned at the last point, but it's extremely important, I would say, and it's a topic that we all have to manage honestly. Amanda, I'm curious to understand what will be your next big event. So for OpenUK, our next debate. A big event will be State of Open Con 24, our second annual conference, which is taking place in London on the 6th and 7th of February. And it's in the heart of the City of London this year at the brewery on Chiswell Street. You can find out more at stateofopen.com or openuk.uk. And we're looking at over 170 speakers over two days. And we have 50 partners who will be sharing information about their projects, their organizations across open source software, open hardware, open data, open standards and AI openness. And we have rock star plenary speakers, which I know you'll relate to.

37:10 And I would love to see people coming over from Europe. The Eurostar is doing some deals. We have tickets priced at £199. And we also have free tickets for community students, the unemployed. Just drop us a note at admin at openuk.uk. So we are reaching now the end of our podcast, Amanda, and I would love to ask you one last question. What does it mean to be a leader in tech with open technology in mind for you? One of the things that I love about open source is that the community rules. So. When you have somebody who is a leader, whether they are self-appointed or they've been elected, those leaders only lead if they have a community around them and behind them. and they only lead for as long as the community backs them. So we hope that our conference in two weeks time in London will be successful and it will only be successful as it was last year if the community around it, you know, the 170 speakers, the 50 partners who are going to host stands,

38:18 the audience who attends if they believe in it and they want to support it because they're what makes it work and we have this term an open source forking and if a community doesn't believe in you they fork and i think that uh that for me means that it's a privilege to be allowed to continue to lead within what i do in open source Thanks so much. Amanda, the time spent in your company has gone very quickly. It was captivating, exciting at the same time. So thank you very much. You're too kind, Philippe. Thank you very much for having me.