Connected Planning and Promising Account Based Solution Demonstrated at Anaplan Hub17
Connected Planning and Promising Account Based Solution Demonstrated at Anaplan Hub17





GPU (graphical processing unit) maker NVIDIA launched the Deep Learning Institute one year ago, offering low-priced training to developers on a variety of AI and machine learning technologies. Now it has significantly ramped up its ambitions, saying it intends to train 100,000 coders this year, compared to 10,000 in 2016. Here are the key details from its announcement at the GPU Technology Conference:
The institute has trained developers around the world at sold-out public events and onsite training at companies such as Adobe, Alibaba and SAP; at government research institutions like the U.S. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Science and Technology, and the Barcelona Supercomputing Center; and at institutes of higher learning such as Temasek Polytechnic Singapore and India Institute of Technology, Bombay.
In addition to instructor-led workshops, developers have on-demand access to training on the latest deep learning technology, using NVIDIA software and high-performance Amazon Web Services (AWS) EC2 P2 GPU instances in the cloud.
Beyond reaching more developers, NVIDIA is adding to the Institute's curriculum. New areas of study include the application of deep learning for self-driving care, healcare, robotics and financial services.
NVIDIA is not attempting to reach 100,000 developers on its own. It will partner with AWS, Facebook, Google, the Mayo Clinic and Stanford to co-create training labs. The labs will focus on the Caffe2, MXNet and TensorFlow deep learning frameworks.
In addition, NVIDIA has teamed up with Facebook AI research head Yann LeCun to create a teaching kit for educators. It says hundreds of professors at Oxford, UC Berkely and elsewere are already using it.
Lab content is being ported to Microsoft Azure and IBM's cloud. And finally, NVIDIA plans to introduce formal certifications for DLI students. To date, DLI has issued certificates noting the completion of a course, but does not offer certification tests.
Analysis: The AI Opportunity Is Far From A Game to NVIDIA
GPUs are better suited than CPUs for deep learning due to their architecture. While CPUs may have only a couple or several cores, GPUs have thousands of smaller ones that are geared for massively parallel processing of simple tasks. This maps well to compute-intensive deep learning workloads.
NVIDIA's GPUs have long been dominant fixtures in graphics and video cards for gaming and other purposes, but the company's investment in deep learning extends back nearly 10 years, long before the current awareness and hype level around AI.
An aggressive expansion of DLI now makes sense, since the market for GPUs in deep learning remains nascent and NVIDIA should make every effort to expand on its early lead. Its chief competitors, AMD and Intel, are only bringing specialized deep learning GPUs to market this year.
While Intel in particular will have plenty of money to throw behind its products, NVIDIA's other edge lies in the extensive libraries and mature software frameworks it's already developed for deep learning workloads. The more it can train up developers, the more GPUs it can sell, both in specialized hardware or to cloud service providers. In turn, AI developers who align with NVIDIA for GPU acceleration benefit from its early-mover maturity and expertise.
24/7 Access to Constellation Insights
Subscribe today for unrestricted access to expert analyst views on breaking news.
Constellation Research VP & Principal Analyst, Doug Henschen, reveals truths and 3 imperatives on which new disruptive business models are gathering the greatest momentum for data analytics, Big Data, and AI. Join our Constellation Executive Network to exchange ideas and solve business problems in real time.
Data to Decisions Chief People Officer Chief Information Officer On <iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/214075835" width="640" height="389" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>Find out how artificial intelligence will help people get work done in the Future of Work with Constellation Research VP & Principal Analyst, Alan Lepofsky. Join our Constellation Executive Network to exchange ideas and solve business problems in real time.
Future of Work Chief People Officer Chief Information Officer On <iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/216614848" width="640" height="400" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>Facebook, the social media juggernaut, seems intent on swallowing up any social media network that poses a threat to its soon-to-be monopoly over the world’s mindshare.
Facebook is a precursor to The Borg: Assimilating competitive networks until all that’s left is one large, ubiquitous social network.
Facebook acquired Instagram, the mobile-focused image sharing network popular among a younger audience because its demographic (Millennials) were slowly but surely leaving Facebook, which they saw as their parent’s social media.
Adding Instagram to its roster of companies was smart as it allows Facebook to combine data analysis and sell advertising to a wider range of businesses.
Not even the mighty Google could not depose Facebook of its reign. Google Plus, it’s failed attempt to compete with Facebook, had the right concept and, some will argue, a more intuitive and robust network.
The problem was, it could not create a unique differentiator that Facebook could not duplicate, and do better. Unable to buy Google, Facebook cloned the Google Plus services we loved and in a very surgically way, made Google Plus redundant.
Google Plus offered a few differentiators, including hangouts, real-time chat, and “groups.” So, Facebook introduced Messenger to provide real-time chat and video chat and expanded its Business Pages format to offer a Google Plus-comparable groups function.
Further, it updated our ability to manage our network by adding a “friends category” function so we can group and share content with sub-sets of our followers, just like Google Plus’s Groups.
Facebook-owned the market; there was no longer a need for people to waste time building out a community on another network to access those services. It rolled over Google Plus.
Whatsapp, the digital messaging platform was a real competitor for Facebook’s continuing push to become a mobile platform. Facebook had Messenger, which it could have further developed into a “Whatsapp Killer” but Whatsapp’s ability to replace text messaging was a service that Facebook’s Messenger could never provide. Instead of cloning the service, it purchased Whatsapp.
Twitter took a stab at Facebook’s dominance with the introduction of the Vine and Periscope networks, which quickly grew in popularity among younger audiences seeking to become content producers, influencers, and receive more entertainment value from their social exchanges. And it worked, for a time.
Instagram’s video service crushed vine, and Periscope was taken out by Facebook’s introduction of Facebook Live, among other execution issues by Twitter. Facebook’s cloning strategy beat them at their own game.
Twitter? I don’t think so. Despite the “Trump Effect,” which has driven fans to the network to hang on his every word, and detractors to gawk at the train wreck, Twitter’s been relegated to a niche play.
Twitter’s value to advertisers is diminished – and has possibly become toxic – due to the platforms “too little too late” effort to control trolling and hate speech on the network. Advertisers are running, and potential buyers are following suit.
Still, there’s something Snapchat can learn from Twitter. The challenge is can it remain Facebook-proof but not become a niche network?
Snapchat, through its parent Snap, recently launched an IPO and is the next challenger for the attention – and dollars – of advertisers and marketers.
Despite the success of its initial IPO, some believe Snapchat is the believe Snapchat is the heir apparent for Facebook’s next takeover. The question, in my opinion, is not if, it’s how?
Will Facebook acquire Snapchat the way it did Instagram? Or, will it simply clone the technologies that make Snapchat appealing to younger audiences, starving the growing network’s growth of digital oxygen like it did with Vine?
If the writing is on the wall, what’s Snapchat to do to grow? Or remain relevant? Or stay in business, for that matter?
It does seem that there’s no beating Facebook, which has innovated, spent, and cloned its way to an omnipotent social media juggernaut. Can Snapchat survive the inevitable takedown by Facebook?
The solution is not technological.
Snapchat will never beat Facebook. Facebook has proven it will buy or clone what it wants, assimilating and cloning technologies. Its only chance to remain independent and a competitor to Facebook’s advertising prowess is to do the one thing that Facebook cannot: Stay relevant to younger audiences.
The Millennial generation has proven they do not want to be a member of their “parent’s social network.” Now that Boomers have become digitally savvy themselves, Millennials – and each generation after them – will always jump to newer, hipper, and sexier networks. Any network their parents join will become instantly irrelevant.
Facebook may clone Snapchat’s self-destructing social post model, or it may just buy the network, but that will just send the next generation in search of a social channel of their own.
Snapchat has an opportunity to beat the odds but staking a claim on the official “voice of the next generation.” In other words, Snapchat could be the first one to beat Facebook at its own game: Buy and clone new technologies and channels relevant to younger audiences, driving a bigger wedge between what’s hip and “my parent’s social networks.”
Doing so could replicate Apple’s success in becoming a cultural brand rather than a product or technology. Becoming the “cultural voice of a generation” would render it toxic to a Facebook takeover.
Just imagine Apple being purchased by Microsoft. What would that do to Apple’s cache among its core audience? Would they continue to be as blindly loyal and fanatic – even if the technology didn’t change – if owned by Microsoft? Of course not.
In the same vein, Snapchat has a chance to make itself toxic to predators.
Will it?
The post Making Snapchat Facebook Takeover Proof appeared first on http://www.senseimarketing.com.
Marketing Transformation Next-Generation Customer Experience meta Marketing B2B B2C CX Customer Experience EX Employee Experience AI ML Generative AI Analytics Automation Cloud Digital Transformation Disruptive Technology Growth eCommerce Enterprise Software Next Gen Apps Social Customer Service Content Management Collaboration Chief Marketing OfficerTitle: Understanding the Four Types of #AI
Source: Twitter, via Vala Afshar
We need to do more than teach machines to learn. We need to overcome the boundaries that define the four different types of artificial intelligence, the barriers that separate machines from us – and us from them.
My Impressions: I often marvel at the attempts from Hollywood to portray AI as a foregone conclusion of using computers, and how simple it is to do things if you are a computer. My favorite depiction continues to be the Star Trek computer – if you ever worked in AI you know how far we are from something like that… but I digress.
I often find myself having the debate on whether that model will become reality, whether the singularity is possible, and how we get there. While most people get hung on feelings and emotions as the differentiating factor between us and them, I favor what I call the three I’s (feelings and emotions can be recognized, measured, and replicated — the key is to identify the few variables that affect them – like sarcasm, but we can talk about that some other time).
The three I’s are Intuition, Innovation, and Imagination; they are not measurable or easy to replicate (yet). As I often use as an example – Monsieur Fleming would’ve never found penicillin with the search parameters her was using if he was a computer. It’s a fungus growing on food — not sure how to tell a computer to test that (especially since they would not bring their lunch, where the mold would grow on).
This article goes one further examining how the real barrier between computers and people is memories – and how they work. If you think about it, the most complex process we have as humans is memory, not emotions. What, how, where, and why something is stored, recalled, blocked, used, or discarded is far more complex that crying when you see a commercial with puppies (not that I do that, but I’ve been told some of you do).
Read this article so you can see what are the major challenges we have to focus on, not for advanced analytics only (although the ability to hold a conversation that is coherent requires memory) but for machine learning.
Good stuff…
When most organizations think of Microsoft, they still think first of PCs, Windows, and Microsoft Office. They often don't fully perceive the fast-growing cloud juggernaut of today, replete with the very latest enterprise technology capabilities such as their rapidly evolving suite of Internet of Things solutions, industry cloud solutions, or growing machine learning capabilties. Nor do they regard Microsoft as a likely strategic digital business partner to help them fully reach their digital potential.
However, given that the global value of the digital growth in the next decade is estimated at a sobering $8 trillion in additional commercial value creation ($28 trillion in total new economic output, of which 28% or so is digital), today's tech giants have a newfound sense of their economic influence, even their ability to shape corporate destiny using sophisticated and powerful new digital business capabilities. Not surprisingly, these vendors seek to claim their role in this unfolding saga, and even help write history a bit along the way.

Microsoft clearly senses this historic inflection point and would like to be perceived as a top player. Thus the computing giant is currently in the process of trying diligently to change the perception of the organization as a vital enterprise-class business partner, not just another big technology vendor. As part of this ongoing effort, I was invited last week to attend their Digital Difference event, an invite-only confab at the historic Cedar Lake event center in West Chelsea, where they showcased in a carefully staged and well-orchestrated half-day session how they have expanded "up to the stack" to help some of the world's leading organizations digitally transform their businesses.
Hosted by Abbie Lundberg of Harvard Business Review's Analytics Services, who was also joined on stage by Microsoft's Judson Althoff, who is Executive Vice President, Worldwide Commercial Business at Microsoft, the company's perspective at the event was quite clear: 1) Companies have been underestimating the urgency and scope of digital transformation and can no longer put it off. 2) They must find ways to realize their digital potential, not just to thrive, but to survive, and that 3) Microsoft has had a growing role in partnering with large enterprises at the most strategic level to help them plan and executive on their digital future. It was this last part which was the main objective of the event.
Harvard's Abbie Lundberg, Microsoft's Judson Althoff, and La Liga executives at Microsoft Digital Difference in New York on April. Photo Credit: Dion Hinchcliffe
Throughout the event and quite commendably from my point of view, Microsoft was intent on demonstrating real proof points of their work with respected large brands, instead of just providing marketing soundbites on the importance and urgency of digital change. For me, the key customer stories I witnessed at Digital Difference were:
Numerous other enterprises had booths at Digital Difference as well, and most of the stories were interesting, if earlier stage than the examples above. Interestingly, Microsoft's Hololens was on prominent display and I had a chance to use one for the first time to view building models that architecture firm Trimble and Gensler used to visualize initial designs for customers, and was a compelling vision for the future of that industry. Microsoft's Connected Car was on the showcase floor as well, and was a popular attraction.
Finally, I was able to sit down with Microsoft's Judson Althoff personally to have a one-on-one conversation about how Microsoft is thinking about how best to work strategically with the customers on digital transformation of their business. Judson noted that the "world of customers becoming much more digital" and that what enterprises often don't understand is that it becomes "an order of magnitude more complex to deal with digital scenarios", which is why technologies like machine learning (to handle the volume and combinatorics) is critical to future digital solutions and customer experiences. Judson also had a mantra he repeated several times during the day, which is that "your systems can only be as good as the data over which it reasons." This insight combined with overall "underestimation of what it really means to be digital" has led Microsoft to work with customers on "four categories of deep dive questions that we take our customers through." Namely, asking them if they are truly digitally transforming their "a) customer engagement b) employee empowerment c) optimization of operations, and d) product transformation."
At the end of the day, the result of this work with customers -- typically encompassing Iot, data, and intelligence -- should "turn them into a digital ecosystem," Judson told me. By doing this well, the total addressable market (TAM) for Microsoft becomes far greater than total number of servers and PCs, but essentially all business activity, greatly increasing the market potential for Microsoft to grow and have impact, he noted. I believe this last point is one of the key motivators for Microsoft to become a strategic business partner, instead of a "just" major technology vendor.
My Analysis
There is little question that Microsoft has the skills and delivery capability in terms of a global cloud presence that truly understands the the technology needs of the world's largest organizations. Now the hard work is about crossing over to the business side of the digital conversation. Microsoft's proof points on strategic digital partnership certainly represented some large, well-known enterprise names, and they were able to get several of these organizations to say very encouraging things about their digital partnership so far. However, only Hershey was on hand -- at least in my conversations at Digital Difference -- with hard data it could show that the result had real business impact. So the other half of the equation, the business side where Microsoft provides business guidance based on the art of the possible with digital today, is something that's going to take more sustained storytelling over the next few years.
That said, I don't have much doubt, however, that Microsoft can grow and become a competitor with the Accenture Digitals and Deloitte's in this space. In the end, for them to fully deliver on the vision of enterprise digital empowerment that Microsoft was conveying at Digital Difference will require repeated and sustained evidence like this. Business leaders, particularly the CEO, must receive a steady and very clear sense that Microsoft belongs at the strategic planning table in the boardroom as an equal partner -- as much as it has crediblity in the office of the CIO today -- in terms of fully designing the long-term digital future of organizations. Microsoft made a good down payment against this vision at Digital Difference and I hope they continue the ongoing effort, as it was a painstaking-produced and high quality event that should help further their objectives in this regard.
Relevant Links
Harvard Business Review report: The Digital Transformation of Business
New C-Suite Innovation & Product-led Growth Event Report Microsoft Executive Events Chief Customer Officer Chief Executive Officer Chief Information Officer Chief Marketing Officer Chief Digital Officer| Whitehurst on the opportunity ahead for Red Hat |
| Cormier on the Red Hat Model |
![]() |
| The Red Hat Product Portfolio |
Hyperledger, one of the leading industry consortiums for distributed ledger (or more colloquially, blockchain) technologies, has received an interesting new project under its open-source roof: Indy, which is focused on developing next-generation digital identity services.
Indy is based on a code contribution from the Sovrin Foundation, a nonprofit "created to govern a global public utility for decentralized identity," as foundation chair Phillip Windley wrote in a blog post:
Internet identity is broken. There are too many anti-patterns and too many privacy breaches. Too many legitimate business cases are poorly served by current solutions. Many have proposed distributed ledger technology as a solution, however building decentralized identity on top of distributed ledgers that were designed to support something else (cryptocurrency or smart contracts, for example) leads to compromises and short-cuts. Indy provides Hyperledger projects and other distributed ledger systems with a first-class decentralized identity system.
Sovrin's post takes a fairly deep dive into Indy's approach. It's worth reading his entire post for the full technical details, but other key takeaways include this:
Indy shares three important virtues with the Internet: No one owns it. Everyone can use it. Anyone can improve it. Launching Indy as a Hyperledger Project is a critical component of allowing anyone to improve how Indy works.
Indy's code base was created by the Utah startup Evernym. The Sovrin Foundation was created in September to serve as a governing body for the Sovrin Network, a specific implementation of the Indy code that will continue operations. The Foundation is contributing the Indy code to Hyperledger in a bid to get more developers working on it and making contributions.
"Evernym has been evaluating blockchain technologies for digital identity applications for a long time," says Constellation Research VP and principal analyst Steve Wilson. "Along the way they saw the limitations of the original public blockchain and the Proof of Work algorithm, which was not designed with identity in mind. In fact, the central idea of the Bitcoin blockchain algorithm was to not identify anyone."
Overall, Evernym's work is "a great example of third-generation ledger technology R&D," Wilson adds. "Evernym and now Indy have been refreshingly clear about the problem they're trying to solve, and developing new fit-for-purpose algorithms."
24/7 Access to Constellation Insights
Subscribe today for unrestricted access to expert analyst views on breaking news.
Verizon is the latest company to get out of the enterprise cloud and hosting market, as it has announced plans to sell off that business to IBM.
However, Verizon is characterizing the IBM deal as something more than a simple sale. SVP George Fisher explained the move in a blog post:
Last week, Verizon agreed to sell its cloud and managed hosting service to IBM. Additionally, Verizon agreed to work with IBM on a number of strategic initiatives involving networking and cloud services.
Our goal is to become one of the world’s leading managed services providers enabled by an ecosystem of best-in-class technology solutions from Verizon and a network of other leading providers.
Our customers want to improve application performance while streamlining operations and securing information in the cloud. VES is now well positioned to provide those solutions through intelligent networking, managed IT services and business communications.
Existing customers won't see any immediate impacts to service, and the deal will close later this year, Fisher added. Terms were not disclosed.
IBM has aggressively invested in data center infrastructure, and with the opening of four new U.S. locations last month, now has 55 data centers in 19 countries across six continents, according to a statement.
Verizon initially built out its cloud offerings with the acquisition of Terremark, but last year shuttered its public cloud service and sold off 29 data centers to Equinix.
Ultimately, Verizon's decision to fully divest its cloud business comes as no surprise, given the general retreat of telcos from IaaS (infrastructure as a service), says Constellation Research VP and principal analyst Holger Mueller.
"This was the big diversification play for telcos, and apart from some pockets in Europe, Asia and Africa, it has all but fizzled," Mueller says. "Capital demands for LTE and now Gen5 network buildouts and the need to understand the IaaS market has proven too much for most telcos. For IBM it's another service, and if it's able to transfer customers to IBM platforms that means more load for IBM Cloud and BlueMix."
But the move is also good for customers, "because with IBM, you have someone who long-term has to be in the cloud business, versus someone who is on the fence," Mueller adds. Moreover, "IBM has more to offer as a vendor to enterprises than Verizon," he says. "Verizon is basic data center and then networking, whereas IBM has a full stack."
While enterprises need to make sure IBM's stack is what they want, the bare metal nature of IBM's SoftLayer cloud architecture allows it to take on practically any workload, Mueller notes: "So if an enterprise is also trying to get out of the data center business, IBM is a good partner for that."
24/7 Access to Constellation Insights
Subscribe today for unrestricted access to expert analyst views on breaking news.