5G Requires Service Provider Analytics – Let’s Simplify It


first_img“Service providers are struggling with enormous amounts of data” has been a common refrain of the past 5 years. The refrain has lately taken on a new tone, with the impending arrival of the 5G technology for delivery of connected services.Be it IoT, the Connected Car, the consumer last-mile, or the most common mobile over-the-top services, 5G promises to increase the data-deluge multi-fold, as much as it promises to improve the quality of service delivery, reduce the data access latency, and enhance the efficiency of the mobile infrastructure.The 5G technology is going to affect all forms of services in successive waves of change. Mobile service providers will be the first ones to acquire and adopt 5G. As 5G capable devices and infrastructure equipment becomes common (and thus cheaper), the next wave of adoption will come from connected service providers such as cable and consumer access providers.Next will be providers of software, storage, and infrastructure, and everything else “as-a-service” providers. Customers will expect seamless service creation, acquisition, delivery, take-down, and re-launch – all at their own command and control – with each wave of the roll-out.How will the service providers meet these customer expectations? To begin with, they must listen to what their customer are asking for. The ask will come in the form of advanced data analytics, with the expectation of the ability of pin-point use of artificial intelligence, machine & deep learning, and of inferencing, using as input all the data flowing over the 5G networks.Service providers need to start preparing today for his emerging era of 5G and start improving their analytics and learning abilities.A large section of the service provider vertical is struggling with the even the basics of analytic capability. The struggle is the direct result of the complexity of analytics software, and complexity of the underlying hardware & networking. Getting a single instance of an analytics software stack completely configured, tested, and delivered to users in production commonly takes weeks to months.That estimate also assumes that the underlying server, networking, and storage infrastructure components are properly connected, configured, and ready. This makes a production-ready solution instance already obsolete by the time it is delivered, as the market has moved to the next version of everything. Thus begins the long and iterative process of lifecycle management of the solution. Initial, large investments beg for a long succession of smaller yet numerous investments throughout the lifecycle of the solution, which reduce the overall efficiency of this approach.Dell EMC has created a “ready architecture” approach to address this issue. A Dell EMC ready architecture consists of several guides or books, created by our team of expert technical professionals after thorough experimentation in our global labs – all with the objective of “doing the heavy lifting” for our customers so they don’t have to.A reference architecture guide helps our customers with a precise bill of materials, how they are all put together and why, and options and alternatives available for each component of the architecture. As a whole the reference architecture exemplifies a small / medium / large size of the solution, with guidelines to create a larger or smaller scale instance of the solution.A deployment and validation guide creates a blueprint by which a service provider customer can create a complete data analytics solution stack in their lab. How our team of experts did it in our labs is documented in the fullest detail. A battery of validation tests that were carried out are included in the documentation. Several partner companies of Dell EMC worked with our experts to ensure that their software stacks, as well as their use-case configuration work seamlessly on the reference architecture.Equally important is the performance baseline guide included in the ready architecture. For each partner company’s software stack, use cases of pertinence to the telecom service providers were selected. Then, our team of experts measured performance baselines while running those use-cases with sample, representative data sets. The experimental setup used, and the Hadoop and software vendor optimizations used are documented in detail. Clear performance metrics are reported for each measurement. The data presented will give technical and business decision makers a sense of what to expect from the ready architecture, as well as a what-if analysis in case of scale-up or –down of the solution infrastructure.In this series of blog posts, our team describes the elements of version one of Dell EMC’s Ready Architecture for Service Provider Analytics (SPA v1). We have chosen two Dell EMC significant partners to showcase for this ready architecture. They are:Zaloni, with their Data Lake platform offering and Customer 360 use-caseCardinality, with their Perception Analytics platform for the Operational Intelligence use-caseThe Zaloni Data Lake simplifies processing of large amounts of data using Cloudera Hadoop. Data ingestion is simplified, and the time-to-results is significantly reduced. Future blog posts will show how the SPA v1 ready architecture with Zaloni can get you from thought-to-results faster than anyone else.The Cardinality Perception platform utilizes a Docker and Kubernetes container ecosystem for ultra-fast processing of real-time ingestion of data streams with a unique approach to the ETL part of data analytics. Unique data annotation and labelling follows, which in conjunction with real-time information gathered from a provider’s mobile infrastructure, yields significant operational insights. The Perception platform is able to scale linearly as your data grows – all owing to the modern, container-based architecture of the platform.Stay tuned for the next edition of this blog series to learn more about Dell EMC’s Service Provider Analytics ready architecture v1 (SPA v1).For more information, please see the posts:Do You Have Deep Insights Yet?Service Provider Analytics – Unlocking the Value of Datalast_img read more

National Popular Vote Movement Closer To Changing Presidential Elections


first_imgSign up for our COVID-19 newsletter to stay up-to-date on the latest coronavirus news throughout New York Long before Hillary Clinton became the fifth presidential candidate in American history to lose an election despite winning the popular vote, a movement had already begun to change how our presidents are elected. Instead of the Electoral College having the last word, the goal is to give each voter a true stake in the outcome by empowering state legislatures to pick the victor solely according to who won the most votes nationwide.Then came Nov. 8, the day Republican Donald Trump pulled off one of the most stunning upsets in modern times. He’s expected to occupy the White House in January but Clinton may have beat him by more than a million votes when the painstaking task of counting all the ballots is complete.To undercut Clinton in the Electoral College, Trump took the perceived Democratic strongholds of Michigan and Wisconsin, as well as several key battleground states where various polls erroneously had predicted Clinton victories. There’s no way to know if the election would have turned out differently if the candidates didn’t have to focus on getting the 270 electoral votes needed to win. Trump himself is a past critic of the Electoral College. He acknowledged on Tuesday that had a popular vote system been in place, he would’ve deployed a different strategy. He might be right. Or wrong. As Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post points out:“The fact is that just because Trump lost the popular vote last week doesn’t mean he would have lost a popular-vote election.What do I mean by that? Basically, losing the popular vote in an electoral-college election isn’t the same as losing the popular vote in a popular-vote election. The former involves a very specific strategy that may cost you when it comes to winning the nationwide popular vote. But you pursue that strategy because the latter doesn’t matter. You need to get to 270 electoral votes, not a majority or plurality of all votes.” Abolishing the Electoral College outright is a daunting proposition because it would require amending the U.S. Constitution. First, both houses of Congress would have to pass the amendment by a two-thirds majority in each legislative body. Then 38 states would have to ratify it within seven years of its passage.But the reform movement aims to get around that with a simple solution called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.Already 11 states, including New York, have passed legislation to join the compact. Collectively, these states represent 165 electoral votes, only 105 votes shy of the 270 threshold. The compact wouldn’t take effect until the pro-popular vote states reach the magic number. Under this system, states that sign onto the compact would award their electoral votes to the consensus popular vote winner.The non-profit organization spearheading the movement, National Popular Vote, is not advocating for the Electoral College to be abolished, but rather that the total amount of votes nationally take on greater significance.“I think there’s a lot of dynamics that would shift and become more fair” in the event a national popular vote was installed, recently elected Vermont State Sen. Chris Pearson, a Democrat, tells the Press.That Clinton won the popular vote has reinvigorated the discussion about whether America’s archaic system is in desperate need of an overhaul.Trump himself has in the past railed against the current winner-take-all system of awarding electoral votes by state. In an interview with 60 Minutes on Sunday Trump said, “I’m not going to change my mind just because I won.” But a few days later, he changed his position, calling the Electoral College “genius.”In 2012: Altering the system could change more than just how votes are counted, advocates say. It could affect everything from which states campaigns choose to visit, how federal funding is dispersed, and more innocuous decisions such as where the president deploys cabinet members to rally support for federal programs, says Pearson.A National Popular Vote surrogate, Pearson said presidential campaigns are “ridiculously concentrated” in half a dozen so-called battleground states.According to his organization, two-thirds of presidential campaigning in 2016 occurred in Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia and Michigan. The candidates made a total of 71 visits to Florida during the general election, but they never set foot in 24 states, including the District of Columbia, the entire race.A map of all the states where the candidates campaigned. (Courtesy: NationalPopularVote.com)Those two dozen jurisdictions were seen as either reliably Democratic or Republican, and the outcomes were considered pre-determined, giving the candidates no incentive to spend time meeting with tens of millions of Americans who would cast their votes for the 45th president.“Basically 10 to 15 states at most are in play, and the rest of us are totally left on the sidelines,” says Pearson, who emphasized that over 90 percent of this historic campaign took place in 12 states.“If you don’t live in those states, you are completely taken for granted,” Pearson adds. “And that is very damaging for the democratic process.”In New York, for example, the common refrain among Republicans is their vote is meaningless because their chances of breaking through a Democratic firewall in New York City is near impossible. The same goes for Republican voters in California or Democrats in Oklahoma or Nebraska.“Republicans in New York are sort of discounted. Even if they get 49.5 percent of the vote, it’s meaningless,” says Pearson. “The Republicans in Idaho deliver a 400,000-vote victory for their candidate; it’s totally meaningless. Republicans in California don’t bother voting.”The popular vote bill in New York, sponsored by upstate Republican State Sen. Joseph A. Griffo, had passed overwhelmingly in both the state Senate and the Assembly. After Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed legislation in November extending the pact, which was due to expire in 2018, Griffo said that New Yorkers were being ignored while fisticuffs play out in only a handful of perceived swing states.“In the 21st Century, every vote really should count, and this legislation will help achieve that democratic ideal in a way that respects the Constitution,” he said in a statement.“This action will help ensure every vote is treated equally, and places New York at the forefront of the battle for fairer elections and to strengthen our democracy,” added Cuomo. “Making the national popular vote a binding one will enable all voices to be heard and encourage candidates to appeal to voters in all states.”New York Assemb. Fred Thiele (I-Sag Harbor) says he may have voted differently had the popular vote system been in place this election. He wrote in Sen. Bernie Sanders’ name for president on his ballot.“It didn’t matter, because Hillary Clinton was going to win the state anyway,” Thiele tells the Press. “If I was in a swing state, I might have had to think long and hard.” Before he became an Independent, Thiele was a registered Republican.“Everybody knew what the rules were” in this election, Thiele adds. “And at the end of the day, that’s the result.”But he said it would be wrong if people regarded the national popular movement as just a reaction to the election results.“It’s a much broader principle,” he says.Thiele, one of the original sponsors of New York’s bill going back a decade, said his reasoning is simple. “I think the person who gets the most votes should win the election,” he says.Not everybody is on board, however.In an article in Slate titled “In Defense of the Electoral College,” U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Richard A. Posner argues, among other things, that swing state voters are perhaps the most informed segment of the electorate because of the extreme focus on those areas.“Voters in toss-up states are more likely to pay close attention to the campaign—to really listen to the competing candidates—knowing that they are going to decide the election. They are likely to be the most thoughtful voters, on average (and for the further reason that they will have received the most information and attention from the candidates), and the most thoughtful voters should be the ones to decide the election.”Separate from the National Popular Vote movement is legislation proposed by retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) on Wednesday that would abolish the Electoral College. The constitutional amendment will have a difficult time passing a Republican-controlled House and Senate.“This is the only office in the land where you can get more votes and still lose the presidency,” Boxer said in a statement. “The Electoral College is an outdated, undemocratic system that does not reflect our modern society, and it needs to change immediately. Every American should be guaranteed that their vote counts.”Thiele believes a constitutional amendment is unlikely to have the requisite support needed to pass. If the current system is eventually changed, it’ll be because individual states voted to join the pact.“It’s obviously a state-by-state decision,” he says. “But I certainly think the recent political history is in our favor, and I think that will cause every state to take a second look and [a] closer look at National Popular Vote.”Pearson says the organization still has its work cut out for itself to convince other states to join the pact. In Arizona, Oklahoma, Oregon and Arkansas, legislation has passed in one legislative chamber, but not the other, he says.The past election could help the cause. Since Nov. 8, National Popular Vote’s webtool to help voters connect with their legislators has been used at least 40,000 times, Pearson claims.If NPV makes it to its goal of 270 by 2020, it would be “enormously gratifying,” he says. This week:last_img read more

How Foreman dumped boxing gloves for Bible


first_img Every Sunday, Foreman, 71, has churchgoers at the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ in Houston, Texas hanging on to his every word. ‘Big George’, who famously fought Ali in ‘The Rumble in the Jungle’, is now a preacher fighting for the belief of God. His knockout delivery, often lasting an hour, covers everything from drug use to the planet Pluto, getting lost in traffic, the morals of dogs, and, of course, Adam and Eve, the treacherous serpent and a furious God. Born into a poor family of six children, his mum didn’t have time to take him to church – and the only time he went was for a “free lunch.” But in 1977, after a brutal defeat to Jimmy Young, he believes he came face-to-face with God. “In the dressing room I was walking back and forth to cool off,” he told the Houston Chronicle. “Then in a split second, I was fighting for my life.” He slipped into unconsciousness before a “giant hand” pulled him out and he found himself on a locker room table surrounded by friends and staff. “I knew that Jesus Christ was coming alive in me,” Foreman said. “I ran into the shower and turned on the water and — hallelujah! — I was born again. I kissed everybody in the dressing room and told them I loved them. That happened in March 1977, and I never have been the same again.” A year later, Foreman was ordained as a minister – sometimes preaching on streets of Houston to hone his public speaking skills. “I want to tell everybody that there is really a living God,” he told Believers Portal. Promoted Content7 Universities In The World With The Highest Market ValueThe Very Last Bitcoin Will Be Mined Around 2140. Read MoreBest & Worst Celebrity Endorsed Games Ever MadeEverything You Need To Know About Asteroid Armageddon12 Countries Whose Technological Progress Amazes5 Of The World’s Most Unique Theme ParksDeepika Padukone’s Most Memorable LooksIt’s Time To Show How Bad Some Women Can Really BeTop 10 Most Romantic Nations In The WorldThe Models Of Paintings Whom The Artists Were Madly In Love With6 Best Natural History Museums In The WorldWhy Go Veg? 7 Reasons To Do This Loading… “This is not about a television show, but this is real and it scared me. When I left boxing in 1977 to be a preacher I couldn’t make a fist after I learned about Jesus Christ.” In 1980, he founded The Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, where he entertains his followers to this day. Then, in 1984 the George Foreman Youth and Community Center was born, where kids of all denominations could visit for guidance. The aim was to teach children that a clenched fist was not the answer to combating anger issues, and he became a father-figure to many who had lost their direction. So dedicated to the cause, Foreman came out of retirement in 1987 and returned to the ring for a series of pay days – just so he could keep the centre open when he ran into financial problems. He would fight on the Saturday night, rush to the airport and fly back to Houston, just so he wouldn’t miss his Sunday service. After the congregation have been warmed up through song, singing the gospel, Foreman takes to the stand. Standing at 6ft 4in, he commands respect – not just for his presence, but through his teachings. “I’m always studying the Bible,” Foreman told The NY Times. “It’s all about studying and learning, and here’s the scary thing: The more you learn, the more you realise how much you don’t know.” Juggling his George Foreman Grills business, his meat company, and managing the youth centre, Foreman still manages to give up to three sermons a week. “On Saturday evenings and Sunday mornings, I try to reveal something about the Bible that they didn’t know,” Foreman revealed. read also:Foreman: ‘I Can’t See Joshua Beating Fury’ “On Sunday evenings, I understand that people need something to help them all through the week. I have the New Testament to draw on. It’s 2,000 years old. I can’t run out of ideas.” FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmail分享 Muhammad Ali might’ve talked a good fight, but he would’ve had nothing on famous for George Foreman’s sermons.last_img read more