Podcasts about ben there

Shannon Noll actually returned our call! Our parody opening theme is one step closer to happening. Our listeners share some of their most embarrassing moments...did someone say KFC? Quote of the show: "You've failed your hat reference there, Ben" There's whispers of Nollsie on the show today Belle's new boyfriend screams at the footy 610 Quiz: Throw that pasta out Bianca Shannon Noll agrees to voice our late drive intro What was your KFC Moment? Casheoke: Vicki calling through from Liam's hood Asking a stripper if there's a recession coming What gives you the ick? Wanna be on our show? Register here: https://www.novafm.com.au/win/get-involved-with-the-ben-liam-belle-showSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Ever wondered how the savviest of e-commerce entrepreneurs keep their profit margins healthy amidst rising industry costs? Buckle up as Benjamin Webber, a true maverick in the Amazon FBA realm, rides through the podcast to share his unique tactics. He's not just playing the game; he's changing it by using his own truck as an Amazon carrier, slashing his shipping expenses, and keeping his company's financials robust. With a 10% hike in gross sales and an ever-expanding team, Ben breaks down the logistics of becoming an Amazon carrier, the operational efficiencies that keep his business ahead, and why sometimes the best move is to quite literally take the wheel of your product distribution. The chessboard of global e-commerce is complex, but Ben is a grandmaster at maneuvering his pieces. He unveils his strategies for managing inventory across continents, discusses the art of optimizing check-in speeds, and serves wisdom on tackling geographic conversion issues. His narrative takes us through the meticulous dance of manufacturing diversification—from Asia to the Americas—and the savvy logistics of East Coast shipping. As Ben's company eyes a leap into Amazon's global marketplaces, he lays out his blueprint for facing the squeeze of shrinking margins, fortifying supplier relationships, and negotiating like a pro. In a world increasingly driven by AI, Ben has mastered fusing technology with human creativity. This episode isn't just about listing optimization and tweaking ad strategies—it's a glimpse into an advertising revolution dictated by sponsored rank and AI's role in it. And when it comes to product development, Ben and his team are tapping into AI to conjure up innovative solutions to everyday problems. It's a thrilling ride through the intersection of data, technology, and human insight, where Ben exemplifies the adventurous spirit of online selling. Join us, and let your e-commerce curiosity be captured by his exceptional vision and trailblazing tactics.   In episode 529 of the Serious Sellers Podcast, Bradley and Ben discuss: 00:00 - Amazon Carrier Strategies and Profit Margins 06:45 - Optimizing Amazon Stock Check-in and Distribution 09:08 - Inventory, Manufacturing, and Global Expansion 10:52 - Product Warehouse Benefits  15:43 - Amazon Advertising and Listing Optimization 16:52 - Analyzing Conversion Rates and Product Quality 24:31 - Factors for Retiring Products  25:33 - Warehouse Efficiency and Competitor Analysis 31:50 - Using AI for Product Development 33:52 - 2024 Tips and Unique Strategies ► Instagram: instagram.com/serioussellerspodcast ► Free Amazon Seller Chrome Extension: https://h10.me/extension ► Sign Up For Helium 10: https://h10.me/signup  (Use SSP10 To Save 10% For Life) ► Learn How To Sell on Amazon: https://h10.me/ft ► Watch The Podcasts On Youtube: youtube.com/@Helium10/videos Transcript Bradley Sutton: Today we've got a popular guest back on the show, Ben, who's got very unique strategies, such as he made himself an Amazon carrier so that he can deliver with his own truck his FBA replenishment orders 15 minutes away from him for free. How cool is that? Pretty cool, I think. Sellers have lost thousands of dollars by not knowing that they were hijacked, perhaps on their Amazon listing, or maybe somebody changed their main image, or Amazon changed their shipping dimensions so they had to pay extra money every order. Helium 10 can actually send you a text message or email if any of these things or other critical events happen to your Amazon account. For more information, go to h10.me/alerts. Hello everybody and welcome to another episode of the Serious Sellers podcast by Helium 10. I am your host, Bradley Sutton, and this is the show. That's completely BS free, unscripted and unrehearsed, organic conversation about serious strategies for serious sellers of any level in the e-commerce world. You've got a serious seller back for, I believe, the second time here on the show, Ben. How's it going, man?   Ben: Good, how about yourself?   Bradley Sutton: I'm doing just delightful. So I take your North Carolina, which is why I switched hats here at the last second rock in this Charlotte hat. Here Is Charlotte where you're at, or what part North Carolina are you on?   Ben: Yeah, I'm in Charlotte.   Bradley Sutton: Okay, been out there long yeah.   Ben: I came here in 2002 and never left.   Bradley Sutton: Okay, all right. So if you guys want to get more of his backstory, guys write this down episode 379. We went a little bit more into his background there, so we're not going to go too much. You know more into. You know how his superhero origin story, want to catch up and see what cool stuff he's been he's been working on. That was a great episode, by the way. In there he talked about how he had a three million dollars in retail arbitrage sales and he has his cult following now in the Amazon world on the speaker circuit. A lot of cool stuff we talked about in that episode, including you know how to hire for your Amazon businesses and whatnot. But let's just catch up. You know now we're in 2024. You know I think the last time you're on the show was like end of 2022 around there, so it's been, you know, full year. How was your 2023?   Ben: It was good. Our big priority was expanding obviously expanding product lines, and then just figuring out the best ways to manage what we have so that we can grow and scale as efficiently as possible.   Bradley Sutton: How many employees are you guys up to now?   Ben: So we have the warehouse and then we have an international team. So collectively we're between 60 and 70.   Bradley Sutton: Excellent. Now what was you know, just from a gross sales overall, all channels, if you were to compare 2023 with 2022, how did you guys do?   Ben: We're up maybe 10%, so it didn't really push too hard this year.   Bradley Sutton: Now, something that I think a lot of sellers might have said compared in 2023 to 2022, is profit margins were down due to increased cost, whether that be inflation or cost of goods, Amazon fees, PPC how was your profit margin?   Ben: Yeah, it definitely went down a little bit, not as bad as I guess a lot of people have. That I've talked to have run into. But one of the big things that helps us and I think we talked about this before is just that because we are in Charlotte and there's a CL2, the CL22 warehouse is in Charlotte we're able to deliver a lot of our own inventory. So we're a last mile delivery driver or delivery provider for Amazon. So we don't have to pay to ship in to Amazon. We pay somebody $15 an hour to drive a truck with 12 pallets and they're 20 minutes from our warehouse. So as far as the inbound shipping costs and those expenses, those don't really hurt us too badly.   Bradley Sutton: So that whole, so you ship everything then from your manufacturing to your warehouse and then so that that quote unquote landed cost that ends up being your cost to Amazon as well. Essentially, yeah, how did you even know that that was possible to do?   Ben: Several years ago we were about to stock out of. As you know, we sell a lot of fourth quarter products and kind of joke toy products, and we're about to stock out of one that we sold between 800 to 1000 units a day, which is a fairly substantial issue. So we actually loaded up a cargo van and drove the cargo van to Amazon, talked to us our way through the front gates to deliver it and they took it and so we did that once. Then we did it again and we got through again the third time. They're like no, you can't do this and so like, okay, but somehow we have to be able to do this. So we looked into Carrier Central and figure out how we could become a last mile carotter, which is incredibly easy. It takes about 15 minutes to fill out a form and then you have to show that you can back in and out of a parking spot Incredibly easy. So in that January we bought a truck and the rest is history from there. But it was. It came about because we were about to stock out and panic and we're like well, what's the worst that can happen?   Bradley Sutton: So then theoretically you can also do this service for other people, that you would be the carrier and then other people can just store their product here at warehouse and then you would deliver. But for now you just pretty much do it for yourself. Is there like was there any kind of minimums? Like, hey, you have to have a dock high truck, you have to, it has to be this size, it has to be order, you know, like it has to be at least X number of pallets, or what kind of requirements was it.   Ben: So basically it had to be palletized and it required a dock high truck, and I forget there was. There's a code you have to send them that you get for just having a truck, so it doesn't really matter, you're going to have it anyway. But dock high and palletized products. And what we did was we looked up what the largest truck that we could buy without having to have a CDL was, which in North Carolina, is a 26 foot box truck, and so that holds 12 pallets.   Bradley Sutton: Did you have to have, like a company that's a registered trucking company or something?   Ben: Nope, I actually had a friend who was trying to do this for some of their products because they were just the same issue where they're about to stock out and Amazon wasn't checking them in fast enough. And one of the benefits of what we do is and this is I don't know how long this will stay that way, so I'm probably going to jinx myself by saying it, but our stuff gets checked in faster than anybody else's. So, like this year, we had stuff that we delivered in December that was checked in three days late.   Bradley Sutton: We were able to pick that exact DC to get the stuff into when you're creating your transfer shipments.   Ben: There are a number of softwares that you can use that let you pick and direct where you want it to go to.   Bradley Sutton: But what is that? So that's not something that you can do on your own, just in seller central.   Ben: It. Well, yes and no, it's not something that you can directly do, but typically if you're sending case packs in, they're going to try to send that to the largest distributor center nearest you or distribution center nearest to you. At least that's what we've seen Even before, like when we weren't using a software for it. We're sending about 65 to 70% of our case packs all went to Charlotte, so they're still trying to keep stuff. As far as the case packs that, they're just sending them to the nearest large distribution center. At least that's how it worked out for us.   Bradley Sutton: Now, have you looked into, or do you know yet, how this change to their shipping program is going to affect you, if any at all, with this whole thing where people now have to pay if they're only sending it to one location? I mean, even if that's the case, it's still got to be better. I'm assuming that you'd still choose that.   Ben: Yeah, it'll cost us more now, but it's still better to deliver to ourselves. The bigger issue, honestly, was the minimum stock levels. Because we're able to deliver so quickly and because we know that Amazon is checking in so quickly, we've been able to run very, very, very lean, and that's going to get.   Bradley Sutton: They're going to punish you now, right?   Ben: So now we're going to have to put. Over the last month we've been having to send way more inventory than we ever had before in because we have to meet the minimum stock requirements to not get charged, though I had the fees there, so that's honestly the bigger issue for us.   Bradley Sutton: Have you ever taken a look at in Helium 10, at our inventory heat maps to see what they do with your inventory day by day and then how long it takes them to distribute? Because sure, you can get it checked in, but if everything just sits there in Charlotte for a week and then all of a sudden somebody's in Portland and their buy box says yeah, two weeks delivery date, then that might be conversion issue for certain geographic areas. Are they getting your inventory out to the country pretty fast?   Ben: Usually within two weeks, but it is something where there's definitely some gaps, where we have been not fulfilling the West Coast, for example, is efficiently, as we probably could be.   Bradley Sutton: Now, what about the fact that you're I mean I'm assuming you manufacture your stuff in China, India or where you?   Ben: manufacture it. So we have manufacturing in China, Mexico, India, Canada, the US and I want to say Vietnam as well.   Bradley Sutton: So what about the stuff coming from Asia, the fact that you're not, that you're sending it to you in the middle, not completely in the middle, but is it coming to the East Coast port first, or is it coming to California?   Ben: We send a lot of it through Savannah Georgia.   Bradley Sutton: Yeah, okay, and so, even if it wasn't going to your warehouse, is that where you're routing it? In the old days, if you were going directly to Amazon, it would still go to the East Coast first.   Ben: We always sent directly to our warehouse just for having the flexibility. For a lot of our products there are varying pack sizes and we'll repackage as needed in the warehouse to make sure that we're filling the ones that we need to. So we've always sent it to ourselves first For that reason. Then also just from a flexibility standpoint as far as inventory management, where if you send it from China you're basically going to have to send in 90 to 120 days to make sure that you're covered or just have constant orders going. If we send it to our warehouse first, we can keep the Amazon fees lower for storage by storing it. For what amounts to about? I think last time we calculated it we're paying like $6.50 a pallet or $7 a pallet, something like that, to store it at our warehouse. So the amount of money that we're saving off of the Amazon fees by storing it to ourselves and then sending in smaller shipments versus sending in the bulk ones that a lot of people do.   Bradley Sutton: All right, makes sense. Yeah, I was worried a little bit at least. Like, wait a minute, you know like some of your savings might be gone if you're still having a bring things into the port and like California. And then you got to ship it all the way Right, stick it on trains or trucks to go all the way to North Carolina. But the fact that it's coming into already on the East Coast, that doesn't make it too bad. Okay, so that's pretty cool.   Ben: Honestly, that's one of the things that we're looking into for 2024 is seeing if we want to find a 3PL out on the West Coast so we can send some inventory there for the heat map issues that you were bringing up, where we can send stuff to the West Coast DCs from there and then keep doing everything else from Charlotte so that we can make sure that we're covering the country. And also, if there's a way to bring stuff in and have it on the West Coast already, then it just makes things easier.   Bradley Sutton: Now what other you know? We've been talking about Amazon USA. What other Amazon marketplaces are you selling on worldwide? And what about other domestic here in the USA marketplaces like Walmart, tik Tok, etc.   Ben: Honestly, we haven't pushed that hard on the non-domestic Amazon sites just because our logic has kind of been well, the US is the largest market. If we're able to successfully sell something here, we're going to be more successful than selling something in another market. So we would rather come up with a new product to sell in the US versus taking the time and energy to push externally. But that is something that started to change over the last year. We are in Canada, we're in the UK and we're going to expand through Europe over the next year as far as Amazon, and then we have our own Shopify sites for all of our brands, and then we do a good bit through Walmart as well.   Bradley Sutton: What's your strategy, like you know, going into 2024, now that margins are decreasing, I mean, are you raising? Are you planning to raise prices? Have you raised prices? Trying to cut costs in unique ways? Pull back on advertising? How does somebody you know, because it's not like you know, this is just something that you're facing, like we talked about earlier. A lot of people are facing it, and some worse. Why do you think, other than the shipping thing, you haven't been hit as hard as others. And what's the plan to you know? It's not like costs are going to go down anytime soon. So how are you going to? You know, stay above water.   Ben: Yeah Well, I mean, one of the things is, before we started the podcast, you and I were discussing how you were just in China and like going and meeting with your manufacturers and actually having those conversations, you can get better rates, you can get better terms, you can get a lot of benefits. You can also see what they can and can't do and find a lot of products that you can make with the same manufacturer. And the more things you buy from one manufacturer, the better rates you're going to get on each of those orders. So going directly to your manufacturers and talking to them is a way that you can massively improve your, your costs and also the terms you have. Like, with some of our, some of our manufacturers, we don't pay until 90 days after the products has come to our warehouse.   Bradley Sutton: How long have you been with those manufacturers?   Ben: I like to ask for some Wow yeah.   Bradley Sutton: And have you visited them there in where they're at and got out to meet and stuff like it?   Ben: And met their family, took their kids presents like or we're very close with them. But it's something that you can like you, that's something that you can build. And again, even if it's somebody that you aren't close with, the more that you can, more you buy from them, the more likely they are to give you better rates, better terms etc. So that's one thing. As far as the advertising goes, one of the things we started really pushing over the last probably six months is just kind of figuring out what are where our product deserves to be ranked based off of price, quality, everything else compared to our competition on specific keywords, and adjusting our advertising based off of that. So if we look and we say like, okay, we're really the fourth best product on this keyword, we're not going to push heavily for our with our advertising to try and get to the number one spot, because eventually we're just going to drop back down to the number four or we're going to have to keep spending a ton of money. So we've adjusted our ad spend to match where we feel like we should be on that keyword and if we drop below that then we'll raise it. But if we're there we'll leave it basically where it is, and that's actually significantly improved our profitability, because we're not spending as much to rank up on something that we won't stick. Because you're not going to stick at the top, then why are you trying to get there? It's not going to, you're just wasting money.   Bradley Sutton: So are you like you know? Obviously, like you said, you know, price is an easy, easy one to know. If you quote unquote deserve to be there. You're looking at, like conversion rates by keyword and search, career performance or things like that, or what are some other factors other than just strictly price?   Ben: Yeah. So we'll buy every single product and bring it to our warehouse and do comparison tests so we'll look and see like okay, this one, like, let's say, we're selling a paper plate we can see like, okay, if we put sauce on this for an hour, it leaks through Ours doesn't. So for the sauce we rank better than them, or the size that it takes or the amount of weight they can hold. It can hold as far as food, things like that, where you're just testing to see the quality of your product versus theirs. So it's not just the quality of the listing and conversion, it's also the quality of what you're actually offering to the customer.   Bradley Sutton: That's interesting. I've never heard of somebody doing that. Where it's like at the keyword level, how do we stack up so that we deserve you know to. You know like, like a product could do really well, like in that situation, for like a keyword like heavy duty plates, or you know big meals or some, or for you know watery foods or something like that, whereas maybe another one would be, you know, floral looking plates, where it's more aesthetic and you could rank or you could rate, I should say, differently for each keyword.   Ben: Exactly and it also helps you figure out which way you want to direct your, the copy and photos and everything that you're putting out for the listing, as you see like, because I mean, everybody is doing competitor research before to figure out, okay, how can I say that I'm better than this one? But if you don't keep doing that throughout it, you're going to get passed off. But also, if you look at it on a keyword level, like we're doing, you're able to save a lot of money on advertising by not bidding on things you shouldn't.   Bradley Sutton: Now, speaking of listing optimization, you know that was one thing that we focused on the last episode I remember. You know you talked about. You've got some listings that are 100% puns and a different, you know, and that helps with your conversion and stickiness of customers. What are you like? Are you guys using AI? That's something that's just kind of blown up, probably since the last time we talked. What other listing optimization strategies you're doing in the last year?   Ben: Yeah, and, like you said, ai is massive. I mean the ability to identify a customer avatar immediately, to put the reviews in and pull whatever, extract whatever data you need to from it with like quickly, efficiently, and to have essentially a professional copywriter write your listings for you. One of the things that I enjoy doing, which has led to some good results and some terrible results is to pick like a few famous copywriters or famous advertisers that I find interesting and then have them have a conversation about the product. So if you say, like these four people discuss paper plates and why someone would buy them, and then they go through and the AI talks like those people and has a conversation, and you can see people who are way smarter than me discussing how they would sell it, why they would sell or what they think people would be directly interested in and how they would position it, and so I like doing that. Also for coming up with brand names If you have like the top branders in the world, you can just say have these people discuss what my brand should be if I'm selling X product. So kind of expanding outside of just saying write me a bullet point with the including these keywords with 250 characters or less and yada, yada, yada. Trying to like, think outside the box a bit more, to be more unique, because at this point anybody can use AI. It's trying to figure out ways to use it in ways that other people aren't yet and especially trying to get add to what the AI is doing, add emotional language to it, because AI is okay at emotional, but not great. So if you can put something in that appeals directly to the customer while still using the the pitches from the AI, we've had really good success with that.   Bradley Sutton: Now what, if anything is, would you say, is the biggest difference when you're taking one product from Amazon and making a listing on Walmart, Like, have you seen something that definitely works and something that you always have to change because it's completely different on Walmart, or is the general structure always pretty much the same and you're just doing the little things that you know, the little requirements that Walmart has, in order to differentiate it?   0:21:40 - Yeah, I mean we are trying to obviously match what Walmart says, but it just seems like on Walmart you want to be way more direct. Like, keyword stuffing doesn't work as well there. It seems like there, at least for us. It hasn't May for other people. But just being more readable and fluent with the way that we create the listings has led to better results versus just trying to stuff too many keywords into it as we possibly can.   Bradley Sutton: What else are you doing differently Something we haven't talked about in this episode or the last one, I mean, you know to manufacturing in USA and keeping respectable profit margins. Having 70 employees, this is not something that, you know, like any Amazon seller can achieve. There's got to be some more other unique things that have helped you reach this level. What do you think those are?   Ben: Now you're putting me on the spot. I think the you know that I have three main partners that I've worked with from the start and I think one of the things that we've done really well is division of labor and creating the SOPs and the backbone for everything that we need in order to run the business, so that we don't have to be involved in the day to day as much as we used to and had to at the start. So we are able to look into things like Amazon fee changes. Look into things like okay, how can we get to China and improve our costs and fees there. Like having the flexibility by building a powerful team to and like our team is. I mean, I would say our VA's are probably smarter than me, so they're better at the job that I am at this point. So like being able to get to that point where you're able to have the flexibility to scale mentally going forward has been massive and we actually like, from the start, the way that we kind of divided it was, we had one of my partners was focused on incoming products. The other was focused on running the warehouse. My role was mostly building the products on the marketing side, and then we had one person whose role was essentially figuring out how we're going forward. His job has always been to push things forward, to figure out what we need to do and then having him he is very, very good at systems so he'll be able to come in and look at what we've done and see the systems we built and say, no, you all are idiots, change these three things. That's going to be much better.   Ben: So, like, being willing to constantly, always, constantly be improving on what you're doing Is one aspect of it, but also always looking forward. So figuring out, like, how do we dodge whatever the next big thing is and I mean, if you look at the and I know you know Steve Simonson, but like whenever he's talking, he's always talking about, okay, what's happening in China now and how is that going to impact things? A year for now, it's two years, or now five years or now.   Bradley Sutton: So even just looking ahead at stuff like that, where You're able to make decisions that mean that you're not going to be Sure changing yourself in the long run for a bigger game, now, I think something that successful sellers also have to know how to do is when to pull the plug on on products and everybody and this is one of those things that there's not one size fits all, everybody has their own criteria. How do you guys decide what to what to retire as far as the product goes? Is it strictly just you know a profit margin? Is there a certain sales velocity that you need to to maintain? Is it you know? If the reviews dip below a certain you know point, what's your decision-making factors on it?   Ben: Honestly, one of the the biggest things we care about is how annoying it is to deal with. So just just being perfectly honest, because we do have, we do have a very wide catalog at this point Counting our kind of variations. We have over a thousand skews. So when we're looking at things and figuring out what we want to do, if the way, if we're sending it to the warehouse and the warehouse has to touch it four times, even if it's making more money, we may want to cut that faster than something the warehouse doesn't have to touch. So we look into not just the profitability of the product but also the profitability of the product compared to the labor, how labor intensive it is. And Also, if the warehouse people don't like dealing with it, then and we're not making much money on it and why keep dealing? Why keep doing it? So that that is one of the big things. But beyond that it is Almost exclusively profit, profitability. Like I don't really care if I'm selling something a hundred, a hundred units a day, if I'm making $12 a day on it. I would rather sell one thing for $12 and a hundred things on the flip side, what is?   Bradley Sutton: are the triggers where it's like, hey, we need to Launch this product, or we need to launch this you know new thing for this brand, or hey, we need to launch a new variation? Are you guys just? Do you have a department that's just constantly looking at new opportunities per brand, or or you're looking for certain signals in a market? How's that work?   Ben: Yeah. So I mean we do look at every single review that we get and and. So if we see a lot of reviews come against saying I wish this were larger, I wish this were a different color, like the obvious things like that Are things that we that play into it, or we're getting negative feedback saying there are all these issues, then solving the issues is a very easy way to improve on that. But the the other aspects of it are Just. If we look and we see a competitor come in and they're doing something different and it looks better, it's doing better, it's taking sales away from us, then we figure out, okay, how do we beat that? What can we do differently? So a lot of it is competitor and customer driven, as opposed to Keyword or sales velocity driven you know you talked about.   Bradley Sutton: You know you've Use helium 10 for years and your team has what. What is the number one thing you're using helium 10 now for? And if you were to Join our product team for a few days let's say you were to you were to be in charge of our product team what would be on your wish list on, like, how you would add something to helium-10 that we don't have right now. That would make your lives as on the Amazon side, yeah, easier the conversion rate trends for that keyword For each individual product.   Ben: So if you're looking at it, you can see like, okay, this one is selling this number this month a day, but being able to go in and figure out if their conversion rate is moving up and down month over month, as opposed to just sales moving up and down month over month, because I think that the Conversion rate is just getting more and more important and at the keyword level, not just the overall conversion rate, but even at the keyword level.   Bradley Sutton: Yeah, yeah, I'm dead. That's definitely the top of my list as well. You know, once Amazon, you know, make search query performance available in the API, then then that's like yeah, to me that's like a must-have for sure. All right, so now I knew you. You know you were like a nationally ranked tennis player back in a. You still get on the courts every now and then. What were your main hobbies last year of? You know like, hey, you need to get away from the Amazon world and just, you know, enjoy yourself. Yeah, what were you doing?   Ben: So the US National Whitewater Training Center is in Charlotte so I learned how to whitewater kayak so I got a membership there. It's a closed course that they controlled the the flow of the water, so it could be anywhere from a class 1 to a class 5, depending on the day that you're out there with the rappers they're going to be. So that was my kind of fun. It was a 10-minute drive from our warehouse. So go Do some kayaking and then they have Like. On Thursdays they had concerts and stuff so you can go Hang out and be around people.   Bradley Sutton: Now Is that just a local hobby for you, but or or? Now that you know I knew you travel sometimes too, or have you know when you travel? Have you ever gone real like a whitewater kayaking?   Ben: I have once and it's way more terrifying. That's what I was about to say.   Bradley Sutton: That would be a little bit scary if you're just doing a controlled environment one thing, but then to Be out there Okay.   Ben: Yeah, when it's big stuff of a controlled water flow, if you flip over it's like, okay, I can handle this. If it's not controlled, we're the rocks. I don't know what's happening. I'm about to die, so that's not quite as good. But one of the things I've tried to do Well traveling is trying to try and go fishing Everywhere I go.   Bradley Sutton: What were some of your cool places you've been to in 2023?   Ben: Yeah, so I went to Fiji for the first time, Wow did you stay in over water like a over? Sadly, no, that was. I was not on an island that was conducive to that, so I'll have to. They'll have to be added to my next trip.   Bradley Sutton: That's on my bucket list, fiji I've never been there.   Ben: Yeah, it's, it's a beautiful place. I went to Estonia To the ambition event there, which I'd never, never been to Really Eastern Europe before, so that was a lot of fun to get to go and meet a lot of the sellers there and get to explore An area in a culture that I'd never gotten to experience. So I always enjoy getting to do stuff like that. Try to think of one more. I started in Greece in college and I got to go back there this year, so I'm going to go back and see what I saw in college and appreciated a bit more as an adult, from a historical perspective. Yeah, as opposed to the 21 year old kid who's just like if alcohol here, I need all of it.   Bradley Sutton: Yes, your priorities are a little bit different at that age, I think it's like getting to go on an adult trip there was.   Ben: It was a nice change.   Bradley Sutton: You know, before we get into your final strategy of the day, if people wanted to reach you or find you on the interwebs, how can they find you out there?   Ben: Facebook is probably the easiest. It's just Benjamin Weber and I think I don't have a picture of myself there. I think it's a picture of the Frank Lloyd Wright falling waters house. So if you, if you see a Benjamin Weber with a house, that's probably me.   Bradley Sutton: Now we're at the stage where we asked for your 30 or 60 second tip. You already gave us a doozy, you know, with that, looking at the how you rank at the keyword level as far as how you deserve to rank. So do you have another one for us?   Ben: I mean, obviously everybody's talking about AI now, but using that within your product development to expand on what you're doing. So one of the things that we used to do with our Entire staff was, every day, as a kind of learning, mental strength, mental training exercise Say what are 10 things that you would pay $50 to never have to deal with again. Then we look to see if we can make products out of those, and so we had this massive list of Thousands of these. Now we do that with AI. So we're going into AI and saying what are problems like, let's say you're in the kitchen category. You would say what are 1020, however many things you want to say things that people would pay 30 dollar, 10, what are 10 problems that people would pay $30 to solve In the kitchen, so they don't have to deal with that every time they're doing it and then see what results come back from that and look at the products that come from it. So it's a way to get essentially consumer research via questions with AI, versus having to go in and look things up. So just using the, the AI as a creativity exercise can be Incredibly huge for coming up with new product ideas, and that's where the last, like seven products that we've made have come from us Just typing questions like that into AI, and there are things that no one is selling on the market right now.   Bradley Sutton: All right. Well, ben, thank you so much for joining us Again. You've definitely given us some insightful tips and you've got some very unique things that nobody else is doing, you know, like being your own Amazon last mile carrier, and everything is less, less great, and so I'll love to see what you do in 2024, and then we'll bring you back in 2025 and see how things are going.   Ben: It sounds good. Thanks for having me.

This week Paula has multiple games added to her retirement list, while Josh has delved into Todd Howard's wonderful world of marketing BS. Together we have a chat about playing sequels, and whether it's worth playing an entire series to get up to speed. Then of course, Josh attempts to follow up with a perfect guess after last week when Paula nailed the game and achieved a maximum score! HowLongToBeat forums - https://howlongtobeat.com/forum Discord – https://discord.gg/v5F26Dk Email - hltbpodcast@gmail.com Music – Ian Edward (intro/outro) and Abatage (incidental) Graphic design – M4thew and Pokepaw 00:00:00 - Intro 00:01:09 - Beaten 00:28:11 - Retired 00:38:50 - Playing 01:01:07 - Preparing For A Sequel 01:19:18 - Guess The Game Games Mentioned: Josh: Journey [PS5], Metal: Hellsinger [PC], Starfield [PC], Baldur's Gate 3 [PC], Elite Dangerous [PC], GTA Online [PC]  Paula: A Short Hike [PC], Lover Pretend [Switch], Townscaper [PC], Ben There, Dan That![PC], Café Enchanté [Switch]

We open some incredible gifts given to us by the sweet people of Burleson before getting into Now Trending in Ben without Ben - There's an insane new trend in Dallas that will soon affect our pocketbooks

Whether you are a man or a woman, everyone has energetic cycles happening internally that match up with the cycles of the outside world. When you really look at it, everything in our world is cyclical. Cyclical living is all about aligning your actions with the cycle that you are in at the moment and scheduling things based as much as possible on that desire for alignment. Today, co-hosts Ben and Paige Easter share productivity tips based on maximizing your energetic cycles and discuss how the menstrual cycle could actually be viewed as empowering women with a simple mindset shift. Using the natural cycles within your body to your advantage is a key component of creating your freedom. Take a look around and see where this concept of cycles fits in with your life. What is the world doing and what is your body doing? How is your energy, your appetite, your drive to connect or sleep, etc.? Don't miss out on this enlightening episode as Ben and Paige unravel the mysteries of cycles, empowering you to embrace your cyclical nature and thrive in all aspects of life.Quotes“Everything in our world is cyclical.” (3:11-3:13 | Paige)“Man or woman, old or young, we're still having energetic cycles that are happening in our bodies.” (16:06-16:11 | Ben)“It's not that you can't do anything at any time. It's just that the cost of doing that thing goes up if it's out of alignment with the natural phase of our reality.” (21:41-21:53 | Ben)“There actually is a very real physiological thing that happens when your body loses resources and you have to regenerate them afterwards in order to get yourself back to baseline.” (30:04-30:13 | Ben)“I want to encourage everyone to notice where they are, where their energy is. Start taking account of what is happening around you.” (30:17-30:26 | Paige) LinksConnect with Ben and Paige:Website: https://lucidshiftcoaching.com/Lucid Shift Coaching IG: https://www.instagram.com/lucid_shift_coaching/Project Candlelight: https://airtable.com/shr5p0P2793RtRk2kPodcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Buddha said that attachment is the root of all suffering. When you get too wrapped up in #perfectionism and #peoplepleasing due to your attachment to a certain outcome or a desire to maintain a certain identity, you are setting yourself up for potential suffering. You cannot control every outcome. And by being so caught up thinking about the future, you may miss out on all the good things around you in the present. Today, co-hosts Ben Easter and Clayton Olson discuss #detachment and how to overcome your #fearoffailure to let go of the fantasy of control.The truth is that you cannot know the future in advance, so there is no use being so attached to certain outcomes. Ben explains that if you think about life like a game, the whole purpose of a game is not necessarily to win but to learn how to win. The enjoyment comes from overcoming challenges and it would not be as fun if those challenges did not exist. Life is much the same way in that you will likely not feel as successful without having to first overcome challenges. Clayton shares that one of the main problems with getting hung up on certain outcomes is that it can cause tunnel vision and you may miss out on other opportunities as well as set yourself up for sadness when the outcome differs from your expectations.By embracing non-attachment, you open yourself up to feeling more gratitude in the present. Even situations that do not go the way you had hoped can still end up working in ways that lead you to your goal. You may not be able to control every outcome for your future, but you can control how you react and how you choose to feel about the outcome you do reach. Quotes“The Buddha says all life is suffering because of that attachment, because we're attached to either the things that we want or the things that we don't want.” (6:34-6:43 | Ben)“There's something really beautiful about having a challenge that is in your way to try to accomplish some goal. And I think thinking about life this way is really, really useful.” (10:11-10:21 | Ben)“Where did you learn this distortion that you need to do all these things in order to experience peace?” (21:57-22:02 | Clayton)“Begin to question the fantasy that you've created.” (34:42-34:45 | Clayton)LinksConnect with Clayton:Website: https://claytonolsoncoaching.com/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtKW9swe4-j596iCIh2_nrA LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/claytonrolson/ IG: https://www.instagram.com/claytonolsoncoaching/Connect with Ben:Website: https://lucidshiftcoaching.com/Lucid Shift Coaching IG: https://www.instagram.com/lucid_shift_coaching/Project Candlelight: https://airtable.com/shr5p0P2793RtRk2kPodcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

“There's so many people out there that have money mindset problems because they strongly believe that what they should be doing is giving away what they have for the sake of other people,” explains co-host Paige Easter. Also, the wife of host Ben Easter, Paige, returns for part two of the Money Mindset series. Today, they discuss changing your relationship with money to provide yourself with true financial freedom.While analyzing the classic “Robin Hood” story, Paige and Ben find that it overemphasizes “need” as a higher value than creating. If we actually stole from the rich to give to the poor, then there would be less resources for those who create systems for societies to function. Instead, Paige and Ben encourage listeners to use their money to benefit themselves but also invest in the causes they care about. By taking care of ourselves, we can create the value to help the world.Having a financial mindset shift can lead to great benefits. Learn more about value creation, the mistrust around sales tactics, and how investing can have positive outcomes.Quotes“The only way that we can give to the needy is if we have first figured out a way to survive.” (7:09-7:14 | Ben)“There's so many people out there that have money mindset problems because they strongly believe that what they should be doing is giving away what they have for the sake of other people.” (10:42-10:52 | Paige)“There's this really big incentive to sell in a way that is emphasizing the generation of income for a person, and not the generation of positive relationships.” (14:58-15:08 | Paige)“By keeping yourself from providing a service and having the experience of fulfillment that you want in your reality, you are also keeping other people from getting the beautiful benefit of the work that you do in the world.” (24:32-24:44 | Paige)“One of the things that I really love spending my money on our money is investing in, like learning and education. And there's such a, an amount of gratitude that comes from one that I have the resources, and two, that I can exchange them in three, that the person who created that content is available for me to consume. And when I'm putting my money into that, then I'm creating more space for other people in the world to be creating that kind of value that I can then go and consume, and have kind of a reason for going out and creating value for other people so that I can have access to all these really exciting things. And I love this as kind of a framework for how freedom can work in a really concrete way.” (25:39-26:25 | Paige) “As we create abundance in the things that we really care about, we get more energy, more time, and more value to create those things in the world.” (28:28-28:37 | Ben)“Asking people to invest in the service or product that you provide is actually in service to them. Because when you give it away for free, they don't value it as much. And then they might not actually extract the benefit of it.” (28:57-29:15 | Paige) LinksConnect with Paige Easter:Website: https://lucidshiftcoaching.com/Lucid Shift Coaching IG: https://www.instagram.com/lucid_shift_coaching/Podcast production and show notes provided by HiveCast.fm Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Leasing is one of the hardest aspects of property management. What if you had a way to offload some or all of your tasks related to leasing? Today, property management growth expert Jason Hull chats with Ben from Sunroom. This service allows property managers to offload leasing to leasing professionals who care about property managers, owners, and tenants. You'll Learn… [01:26] Offloading Leasing: What is Sunroom? [09:01] ShowMojo, Tenant Turner, vs. Sunroom, oh my! [016:35] Better ways to do Property Showings [020:23] How Sunroom Vets Tenants Better [24:21] Integrating with Other PM Software  [31:30] Net Promoter Scores for Property Management and Leasing [37:12] Learning to LET GO as a PM Entrepreneur Tweetables “Some of y'all entrepreneurs are control freaks. Let's be real, and you need to let go of some of this stuff and let somebody else do it a little bit better.” “We have a lot of egos as entrepreneurs. We think our way is the best way all the time, and we need to see that maybe somebody else could do this better.” “Property managers tend to do best if they just convince owners to do pets. You're going to get more tenants, you're going to get more money.” “One of the biggest time sucks for a property management company is dealing with prospective tenants.” Resources DoorGrow and Scale Mastermind DoorGrow Academy DoorGrow on YouTube DoorGrowClub DoorGrowLive TalkRoute Referral Link Transcript [00:00:00] Ben: So what we do is we partner with property management companies and become their leasing arm. So if you're a newer property management company, you're focused on growing doors and you just mainly want to focus on that, right? One of the most important things is you got to get leasing. If you don't get leasing, you're not going to lease the doors quickly, which then your owner investors are not going to be happy about that.   [00:00:22] Jason Hull: Welcome DoorGrow Hackers to the # DoorGrowShow. So if you are a property management entrepreneur that wants to add doors, make a difference, increase revenue, help others, impact lives, and you're interested in growing in business and life, and you're open to doing things a bit differently then you are a DoorGrow Hacker. DoorGrow Hackers love the opportunities, daily variety, unique challenges and freedom that property management brings. Many in real estate think you're crazy for doing it. You think they're crazy for not bebecause you realize that property management is the ultimate, high trust gateway to real estate deals, relationships, and residual income. At DoorGrow, we are on a mission to transform property management business owners and their businesses. We want to transform the industry, eliminate the bs, build awareness, change perception, expand the market, and help the best property management entrepreneurs win. I'm your host property management growth expert, Jason Hull, the founder and CEO of DoorGrow. Now let's get into the show.    [00:01:19] Jason Hull: All right. Ben, welcome to the #DoorGrowShow.    [00:01:24] Ben: Thanks for having me, Jason.    [00:01:26] Jason Hull: Good to have you. So Ben, why don't we start by you giving us a little bit of your background, qualify yourself. You've done some cool stuff and I'm in the market where you did some of this cool stuff. We just realized in the green room that we're practically neighbors in Austin, market downtown, and I'm up in Round Rock. Ben, tell us a little bit about your background and how you got into the, I guess technology space.   [00:01:49] Ben: Yeah, sure. Yeah, definitely. First of all, I mean we-- me and my co-founder Zach, we started working on Sunroom in right around 2017. And, the way that we had originally had the idea was, just being a renter for a decade and having a lot of interesting experiences trying to look for a place to lease. But prior to starting Sunroom, Zach and I had started a company called Favor Delivery, which is a small little delivery company here in Texas that grew to become the market leader in delivery. And we sold to H-E-B in early 2018.    [00:02:27] Jason Hull: And for people that aren't familiar with H-E-B, because I moved from California just before the pandemic because I wanted to get away from California and the taxes and it's poor political culture. But anyway, so I moved here, Austin and H-E-B was all over the place. I'm like, what a weird name. What is this place? But it's one of the, like America's top grocery chains. It's consistently rated as like one of the biggest and the best. So for those that are not in Texas, they are probably not familiar with H-E-B, but H-E-B is the, like one of the leading grocery stores, and it dominates everything.    [00:03:05] Jason Hull: Yeah.   [00:03:06] Jason Hull: I'm sure in grocery sales, it beats out Walmart, like it beats out any of the stuff that I'd heard about before and I'd never heard of H-E-B. And they offer delivery service.    [00:03:15] Ben: Yeah. H-E-B is an impressive company. And the crazy thing is they've been around for 115 years.   [00:03:21] Ben: Wow.    [00:03:21] Ben: They are the top employer in Texas. And when they acquired us, it was the only acquisition they've ever had in their history as a company. And even crazier than that, when we combined workforces at the time, we had the largest workforce of independent contractors. We grew to, now they're at a hundred thousand delivery drivers in Texas.    [00:03:44] Ben: Oh, wow.    [00:03:44] Ben: And H-E-B had a similar amount of employees. So when we combined workforces, it just became this really massive workforce supporting grocery and delivery of all foods. So yeah, it was a cool marriage that we had there.   [00:04:00] Jason Hull: Very cool. Yeah. Very cool. That's interesting history. So I've seen the Favor name when I'm doing delivery from H-E-B, so I was like what's this relationship?    [00:04:11] Ben: Yeah. So I can elaborate a little bit more too about, how we picked Sunroom. We had, like I said, I mean my co-founder Zach and I, we're actually best friends from high school and so we go way back. I think what you were saying about you wanting to support property manager entrepreneurs, I think that's a good mission because I just tip my hat off to any entrepreneurs who get any businesses working because we definitely know how hard that is. But anyways, our journey towards Sunroom was just having a lot of, I would call interesting experiences as a renter. And then we started calling-- once we were interested in the rental space-- we started making a lot of phone calls to, different rental listings. And we started asking the agents and property managers, "Hey, why are you doing this?" "why are you doing these leases?" And, we kept hearing the same thing, which was like, "oh, we don't-- I don't really want to be doing this lease. I'm just doing this lease. I'm helping this investor client buy more homes and so now I'm looped into to renting this place." And every once in a while you'd come across a property manager who really loved leasing, but a lot of the property managers we talked to too would be like, "yeah, I'm really focused on growing my door count. And these things are just something we have to do to get more properties in the door." And Zach and I saw that as an opportunity of: wow. No wonder why the experience is not that great for renters. A lot of the folks who are doing these leasing are not that excited about doing it. And so then that's how we started working on Sunroom.    [00:05:29] Jason Hull: Cool. So let's talk about then what-- you talked about the problem that you saw in the marketplace and experience wasn't super good, but a lot of owners and maybe even property managers aren't even super excited about taking care of the tenant experience. So it's not like their highest priority. Like, "I want to get more doors, I want to have more properties managed," so they're like, "what's my competitive advantage?" So when they're picking tools and software, they're usually-- they're trying to figure out: "how do I get some sort of leg up on the competition," so to speak, or "how can this lower my operational cost?" and these kind of things. One of the biggest time sucks for a property management company is dealing with prospective tenants.    [00:06:13] Jason Hull: Yeah.    [00:06:14] Jason Hull: These are not people that are paying them and they call them the most, and--   [00:06:17] Jason Hull: yeah.   [00:06:18] Jason Hull: --This is like the "garbage of phone calls," I've heard one of my guests call it.   [00:06:21] Jason Hull: Yeah.    [00:06:22] Jason Hull: So tell me about what does Sunroom do and how does it do it, and what's the benefit.    [00:06:27] Ben: Yeah, sure. So what we do is we partner with property management companies and become their leasing arm. So if you're a newer property management company, you're focused on growing doors and you just mainly want to focus on that, right? One of the most important things is you got to get leasing. If you don't get leasing, you're not going to lease the doors quickly, which then your owner investors are not going to be happy about that. And also I would argue equally as important is that renter does have a great experience because, that is really the beginning of your relationship with them, and what we've noticed of working with a lot of different property managers is that, when the renter goes into the home and they're really happy with their experience that led up to that point, they're a lot more-- how do I put this? They're a lot more quiet when they get into the home, right? They're just happy overall, which is going to reduce your maintenance requests and honestly going to make it more likely that they renew the next year, right? because that is just really first, and I would just say first impressions are, everything in life a lot of times.    [00:07:27] Ben: And so I think, leasing really is that first impression for that property manager. To come back around to what we do, yeah, we partner with the property management companies and make it so that they don't even need to have any leasing agents on staff. And we can really do the entire process of getting the home leased. But at the same time, we give the property manager the power over key decisions, right? Things like actually approving the applications, that's still going to be up to the property manager to make sure they choose the right applicant. And obviously if they want to use their lease that they prefer, there's all different ways that we allow them to customize what they want their leasing experience to be like. But at the end of the day, we're really doing the legwork for them and we have a combination of people and tech to do that.    [00:08:12] Ben: Got it. So    [00:08:14] Jason Hull: this combination of people and tech... are you able to do this in every market or is this like a local thing that needs to be done    [00:08:21] Ben: locally?    [00:08:23] Ben: Yeah, great question.   [00:08:24] Ben: So we started out just doing this in Austin and have partnered with several different property managers here. In town. But now we're expanding across the us. And I believe we're up to seven different markets at the moment. But pretty rapidly expanding to cover more markets.   [00:08:41] Ben: Got it. What's    [00:08:42] Jason Hull: the biggest limitation in expansion for those that you don't cover yet?    [00:08:46] Ben: We call ourselves a leasing only brokerage, so we're actually-- we're a real estate brokerage in each of these states. And so that's a blocker to getting set up in a lot of these places is actually establishing our brokerage in each one of these states.   [00:08:59] Ben: Got it.    [00:09:00] Jason Hull: Okay. Cool. I think a lot of property managers, they're aware of certain pools like ShowMojo and Tenant Turner and Rently and Knock Rentals and Turbo Tenant, so how does Sunroom differentiate from all these tools and these systems are already out there?   [00:09:20] Ben: Yeah, so some of those systems and tools you mentioned, I do think those-- they do improve the renter experience and at the same time. They do make it so that it's a little less work for the property manager to lease those properties. But at the end of the day, if you're a property management owner you're still going to need a leasing agent on your team. Or you're going to have to overextend the property manager that you have in order to use those, utilize those tools. Sunroom just takes it the next step where we have similar tools and systems. Obviously I'm biased, but I would argue they're better than those, but--   [00:09:55] Ben: You should argue that.    [00:09:57] Ben: We take it a step further. You don't even really need to have a leasing agent on staff in order to really execute everything you need to do for leasing. Whereas all these other tools or systems they're definitely completely reliant on still having somebody there behind the scenes catching the errors or all all the holes in those systems. And, if anybody has tried to. Integrate those different systems and tools, what they'll find is that they were built in a way that they had a focused goal. And there's a lot of different holes in that system. And I'm sure as operators see that, I think that's a big difference with what we're building, is that what we build, we actually use to operate. And so we're able to see all the different gaps and holes that those systems leave. And really between our systems and our team, we're able to fill in the gaps that those systems leave out.   [00:10:46] Jason Hull: All right. So I think people listening by now are like, "the wheels are turning a little bit," and they're like, "okay, how's this actually play out?" So could you walk us through step by step what-- how this process works with the property manager and the tenant from beginning to    [00:11:01] Ben: finish? Yeah, sure. So it usually starts within one of the property managers, property management softwares, right?   [00:11:09] Ben: We see commonly property managers are using App Folio or Buildium, so let's use App Folio for example. You have a property manager on your team that you have a home where the renter didn't renew. And it's a property that you're going to need to get leased. At that moment, if you were partnered with us, you would open up the Sunroom portal. We would already essentially have that home synced within our system. Because we're able to really pull data from App Folio and the Buildiums of the world. From there, they just really submit the property to us and say, "Hey, this home's coming up for lease." we would normally already have all of their settings. As a part of our onboarding, we're going to get them all set up in our system. So things like knowing what their tenant criteria is. Things like knowing when is this home actually available? When would you like us to touch the property? And then as soon as they submit the property to us, we actually will go out and touch the property. So we have boots on the ground. Those boots on the ground are going to get professional photography. They're going to set up a self showing lock system if that's what the property manager would like to. And then we're going to actually install a yard sign as well. And, we take pictures to really document everything that we do there. And then, we'll take it a step further, we'll get the marketing description written and then we'll get it listed online, and we do that entire process in an average about 48 hours.    [00:12:28] Ben: Nice.    [00:12:29] Jason Hull: Awesome. Yeah, that's very cool. So you actually have people come out-- swarm of people, and they get all this stuff done, right? In the description, getting it listed, doing all this stuff. Okay.    [00:12:39] Jason Hull: Yeah,    [00:12:40] Ben: and that's where our background in Favor obviously comes into play is that, I think if you think about Favor, there's a great consumer experience where the customer can order food, but then there's all these boots on the ground that actually go get the food and make sure that all happens in a timely manner. Leasing is similar in the sense that you need to have a great consumer experience for the renter to be able to see what they're shopping for and do the things they they need to do to see if they want to, lease that property. But then you're going to need boots on the ground to actually, handle the listing side of things.   [00:13:09] Ben: Very cool.    [00:13:10] Jason Hull: So is this totally Uber-like in that you're just pulling anybody in, or I'm sure you have criteria for the photographers and for all these different people that you're bringing in to do these    [00:13:22] Ben: little pieces.    [00:13:23] Ben: Yeah. Yeah. We don't just hire any random person. I'd say it's definitely not Uber-like in that I think, we use-- it's technology enabled so that we can do those things quickly and can measure how fast we do them, right? I think just the fact that we know we get those properties set up in an average of 48 hours, I think is...    [00:13:42] Ben: Yeah.   [00:13:42] Ben: ...more than your average property manager would know, but we know that the tasks we're doing are tech enabled, but no we care a lot about those people that we choose and we try to find folks that have a lot of experience with real estate photography and then we teach them the other aspects of what we're trying to get done at that property.   [00:14:00] Jason Hull: Awesome. Yeah. Very cool. When a property is going to become vacant, are they able to leverage a system or does it have to be totally empty and rent ready and everything    [00:14:11] Ben: else?    [00:14:12] Ben: No. So yeah, no, they're able to use the system. It sounds like you're asking about pre-leasing.    [00:14:19] Ben: Yeah.   [00:14:20] Ben: Okay. Yes, pre-leasing can be really important I think in some markets. Yeah, that's definitely something we support. And let's say it's tenant occupied and we need to act and do an escorted showing, we have different agents on the ground that we partner with that are some of the most active in the area touring homes and renters. And so we'll tap into that network to do some.   [00:14:40] Jason Hull: Got it. Okay. Now what if they want get the property listed, they want to get photos, but there's a bunch of ugly furniture in there and ugly stuff. Do you guys let maybe-- BoxBrownie I've had on the show before-- digital editors and they're like, removing all this    [00:14:55] Ben: stuff?   [00:14:55] Ben: Yeah.    [00:14:56] Ben: Take the photos.   [00:14:56] Ben: Yeah, we do have digital editing in that regard, but depending on the degree of how much that home is messed up. That's also something that we do is that if we go out to a home and we think it's not show ready we'll document that and share it back with the property manager. And I think we've seen property managers really love that aspect of what we do because oftentimes they have a tough time holding the make ready folks accountable or let's say they're doing a renovation on the property. In particular, I can't tell you how many times that a property manager said, "Oh yeah, this was supposed to be done. And then when we went out there we were able to collect evidence that it wasn't right. That's also part of our system is that if the home is not actually ready to be marketed, and then, we're going to gather that information, share it back with the property manager, and then essentially remind them until that's resolved and as soon as it's resolved, then we can make the listing active. But it's a pretty valuable system and checks and balances that we have in place there.    [00:15:55] Jason Hull: Got it. So you'll communicate with them. Then the property manager can send out maintenance, get things taken care of, dealt with, and then report back to you and you're checking in with them, "Hey, is this ready yet? Is this ready yet?" And then they're like, "we got it ready." And then...    [00:16:08] Jason Hull: exactly.    [00:16:08] Jason Hull: Proceed.    [00:16:10] Jason Hull: Exactly.    [00:16:10] Jason Hull: So you've sent up the people, you've got the photos, you got like maybe a lockbox on, you got the yard sign, you've got the description. It's posted online. It's probably pushed out to multiple channels.   [00:16:19] Jason Hull: That's right.    [00:16:20] Jason Hull: Then next come the showings, right? And scheduling and all this. So how does that work and are you doing one-off showings? Are you doing open house model? What would it be found to be the most efficient? What comes next?    [00:16:35] Ben: Yeah. Yeah. So what we do is we usually set these properties up with a self showing system, and then renters are able to go tour the properties seven days a week from 8:00 AM to 8:00 PM and, we also have, a support team available those same hours, so 84 hours, we're ready to quickly text back any renters or answer any phone calls if, folks are having a tough time actually, accessing the home for any particular reason. Our system is really good. I'd say renters have a really good experience touring homes. Like any system, we're dealing with real world stuff. Sometimes maybe it could be a really humid day and maybe the maybe the door frame swells a bit or something, right? So maybe the door gets a little stuck. So the renter needs a little help to understand how to get in. Those are all things that I think us, having support team there available to talk to them and actually pick up the phone. I think is a really important thing. So that's just one of the many ways that we support tours. But I'd say one of the most important pieces of tours is actually collecting that tour feedback and sharing it with the owner after the fact. And so we have a really great system in place for that as well where a lot of renters will leave feedback just right within the place that they tour. And then we're actually able to take that feedback and then give it to display it on a webpage where then the property manager is able to share that webpage directly with their owner so they can actually watch the tours that are coming in and the tour feedback in real time. And we white label that for them. So you can imagine as a property manager, you just share this white label page with your logo and the owner's able to get a bird's eye view of how their home is performing on the market.    [00:18:21] Ben: Got it.    [00:18:22] Jason Hull: So could this be a scenario that the owner says, "I don't need to do this," and like the property manager says, "you need to do this. Like it'll get you more rent. People will have an issue with this place if you don't fix this or change this," and the owner's like, "no." And then they say, "look at the page, here's the white label page. It's got our brand, our logo, XYZ property management, and it says like, consistently feedback. Like the floor is too gross, or whatever."   [00:18:47] Ben: Yeah, "I would rent this home, but does it come with a fridge?" Just one way I've seen owners trying to cut some costs is like not putting refrigerators in the home. And then they see, three out of the five renters that tour the home mentioned "Hey, there's no fridge."    [00:19:00] Ben: "have to buy a fridge and I'll go somewhere else."   [00:19:03] Ben: Yeah, exactly. And that page really helps the property manager make their case to the owner and also show to them like, "Hey, we really are showing this property and this really is what the renters are saying.   [00:19:14] Ben: Cool.    [00:19:15] Jason Hull: Yeah, that's really cool. I like the feedback loops. So then, what's the next steps? You're doing showings, you're doing tours. Then I guess people are being pushed to apply when they're doing these tours by the system?    [00:19:27] Ben: Yeah, so we have a system, both to pre-qualify renters and to actually have them apply. As soon as they apply we're able to display those applications to the property manager. And we use the same page that we use to display tour feedback and also tracking the tours and the leads and everything. We use that same page then to actually show the applications to the property managers and to their owners. Because I know every property manager seems to have a different deal with each owner, right? Some of 'em, they want to run the application past their owner beforehand, or sometimes they're just the ones reviewing it. But either way, we display that information there so that both the property manager and the owner, are able to review the application before they decide to approve or not.   [00:20:14] Ben: Got it. So    [00:20:14] Jason Hull: they can either show this white label page that has the list of all the applicants or could they just say, "here's the one we recommend," and show that person's information?   [00:20:22] Jason Hull: Yeah.    [00:20:23] Ben: Yeah. It's usually the latter. Because it's trying to make it simpler. Yeah. It's usually just showing the one that they recommend. And at that point, we would've already done all of the vetting for that application. Even the manual steps of doing a verification of rental history, for example or a verification of employment. And we've actually seen just our application processing service. We've seen that to be so popular that we actually broke that out as something that a property manager could partner with us just on application processing, and that's also cool because we have a lot of tech to catch fraudulent renters. I'm sure you've probably heard about how fraud is on the rise especially with us entering recession. And I think it's just more likely that renters are going to try to fake pay stubs. Even some go as far as trying to fake their identity in different ways to try to get approved for a home that really are beyond their means. And so we've really, we've invested a lot into our application processing system. Doing things like being able to get their pay stubs directly from their payroll provider instead of having a way for them to upload their pay stubs, which could be photoshopped or something like that.    [00:21:35] Ben: Yeah.    [00:21:35] Ben: And then let's say a renter doesn't even have a job, or let's say a renter's, a self-employed or something, we have a way of actually pulling bank statements directly from their bank, instead of just receiving those bank statements and getting it uploaded. All that tech helps to really reduce the amount of fraud. And as for property managers as well, it's less work to actually investigate all those documents.   [00:21:59] Jason Hull: That's just technology and stuff a property manager can't do directly. They don't have the ability to pull directly from the bank their pay stubs, and it's not going to say, "here, let me give you my login to my bank account," and to pull directly from the employer. They don't usually have that ability really effectively either. There needs to be technology involved.   [00:22:18] Ben: Yeah.    [00:22:19] Ben: So we--   [00:22:20] Ben: --so what    [00:22:20] Jason Hull: about--    [00:22:20] Ben: oh, go ahead.    [00:22:20] Ben: I was just going to say, yeah, we recognize that you know most of what we've been talking about here is called our full service leasing, right? Where we actually become the leasing arm. But let's say, you've got leasing agents on your team and you think they're rock stars. You're happy with what's going on with your leasing. We could plug in and just do the application processing. We call that service, we call that Sunscreen, is what we call it. The idea is the quirky tagline that I came up with is, "Don't get burned by bad renters."   [00:22:47] Jason Hull: I like it. Little bit of sunscreen.    [00:22:51] Ben: Yeah, exactly.   [00:22:52] Ben: Okay.    [00:22:53] Jason Hull: So one of the questions I think some people will be asking is, what about pets? It's like a whole nother beast. Outside, inside pets and running pets and having pets, all this kind of stuff. Property managers tend to do best if they just convince owners to do pets. You're going to get more tenants, you're going to get more money. How do you deal with the pet side of    [00:23:11] Ben: things?    [00:23:12] Ben: Yeah, so at this point I'm sure most property managers have heard of pet screening.com. I think they're a great company. And so we actually integrate their data into our system. So if you're already signed up for pet screening.com. You can provide the pet screening.com login, and then we're able to pull that information into the application packet. So it's something that the owner and the property manager can consider as a part of the overall application. And, obviously pet screening.com does a really good job verifying things like our emotional support animal documentation. Is that legit? There's fraud around ESA documents. And that's just one of the pieces that they do. But yeah, that's something that we recommend whenever anyone is accepting pets.   [00:23:57] Ben: Very    [00:23:58] Jason Hull: cool. I like pet screening.com that I've had them on the show. I had another company that may be interesting to integrate with too on the show called our pet policy.com and they take things a step further on the protection side of things after the screening. So they go step beyond. So that might be interesting for you to take a look at integrating with as well.    [00:24:20] Jason Hull: Yeah.   [00:24:20] Jason Hull: Ourpetpolicy.com, they seem like a good group of people over there as well. So real quick, going back, you had mentioned AppFolio, Buildium, do you integrate with Rent Manager? Do you integrate with I don't know, there's some other things and some of these tools    [00:24:35] that    [00:24:35] Ben: people are using?   [00:24:37] Ben: Yeah. Great question. So it's pretty easy for us to get key information plugged into these softwares. And the reason is when someone partners with us, if you think about it, we really need to touch that property management software right when the home is when the home's coming up for lease, right? It needs to be listed. And then once the home gets leased, that's when that information needs to get back in the property management software again. So usually the way that our structure is, it doesn't really matter too much, which property management software you're. The system would be the same, where you would essentially create a user for us.   [00:25:15] Ben: So then once the home is getting leased, we know who's signing the lease. We're going to get their information set up within whatever property management software you use and make sure that it's set up for ongoing rent payments and things like that. It essentially, if you're using a property management software, but then you're going to use someone for leasing. But then once the home gets leased, it's going to be as if you had leased it through those other systems. And it's seamless in that way.    [00:25:39] Ben: Yeah. Very cool. So    [00:25:40] Jason Hull: you're PM    [00:25:41] Ben: software agnostic.    [00:25:42] Ben: Exactly. Yes. That's a much more succinct way of saying it. Thanks.   [00:25:47] Jason Hull: So that just means I've been doing this probably a long time. All right. So you've, you mentioned your solution. You've got the sunscreen that can be, pulled out just separately or if they're using the full leasing service. You've done the pre-qualification, you've got the applicant they can send over the white label thing to the owner. If the owner's like, "I really need to see what info you got." And you've tested out their pay stubs and their bank--   [00:26:11] Jason Hull: right    [00:26:12] Jason Hull: --stuff, and you've maybe connected the pet screening.com. What happens next? You've got    [00:26:17] Ben: a good applic--    [00:26:18] Ben: Yes. Yeah, so the property manager, the owner accepts the application. And at that point, we're going to reach out to the renter, say, "congrats, you've been accepted. Please now pay the security deposit." And as soon as they pay security deposit, then the owner or the property manager is able to connect their bank account, and that money will just automatically get deposited in whatever account that you specify. And then from a lease perspective, from really from the beginning of the process, we would've asked that you provide the preferred lease that you would like for us to use. We're going to get that lease drafted up and we're going to send it over to both the renter and the property manager. For some property managers, they like to review one last time before it gets sent to the renter. So we can fulfill that ask. And then the lease is going to get signed. And as soon as the lease gets signed, we will then dispatch our people back out to the property, do one final walkthrough, and also remove our yard sign and remove any other things that we had, any lock boxes or things like that we got setup. But we do one thing where we will leave a combo lockbox out at the property so that we can facilitate the renter actually moving in. So that's really the final and last step for our system, is facilitating to the renter actually getting the keys so that they have a smooth move in. And then the last step after all of that is we're going to survey the renter and make sure they had a great experience through the whole the whole leasing process.   [00:27:51] Jason Hull: And what's-- before we move on, because I'm curious like what difference you're noticing with these surveys, but let's say they don't accept somebody. What's the process? What happens to the rejects, so to speak? The tenants that didn't pass because a lot of times they're following up and bugging the property manager, "Hey, did you accept me? What's going on?" This sort of thing. What do you do?    [00:28:11] Ben: Yeah. So first of all, we shield the property manager from having to deal with all of that stuff. And I think for the position we're in, I think the natural thing is I think we would do what any other good property manager would do. We'd see if there's any other listings within that property manager that the renter would qualify for. First and foremost, we're going to recommend that of " There are these other listings for the same property manager" or, " do you like that?" And if the renter is not interested in any of those homes, then I think we would look broader to other listings that that are amongst our partners and say, "Hey, renter, maybe it would be better if you lease this property."   [00:28:48] Jason Hull: Yeah. That helps get the other properties filled. That's great.    [00:28:53] Ben: Yeah.    [00:28:53] Ben: Okay.    [00:28:53] Ben: And the renter's really happy too, because they don't have to pay an application fee again, so they're able to reuse their application.    [00:29:00] Jason Hull: Nice. Now what if you have two property managers in the same market and you get an applicant for one, are they completely segregated from being able to apply it to the other, or if they're in the Sunroom system,    [00:29:13] Ben: they can...   [00:29:14] Ben: Great question. Yeah. So we don't want to restrict where renters can apply, right? because that just doesn't make sense. But we have come across the scenario, it's been rare where renters have applied to multiple properties. And so what's really cool about our system is that we have a little disclaimer for the property manager where they can see, "hey, this renter's actually applied for multiple properties," and that way it's clear to them of " Hey, look, this renter is serious about your property, they are, they're hedging their bets," which, that's a common scenario especially in a hot market is if property managers are collecting multiple applicants on a single property, you can bet that the renters-- they know that. And so they're also applying to multiple properties. So I think we do our best to try to mitigate those scenarios. And I think one of the best ways to mitigate those scenarios is really just processing applications quickly and then, and working to get the renter and answer quickly around if they're accepted or denied. And, in most cases, I think renters are willing to tell you which one's their first choice. And so if you're able to process the application really quickly and drive it to decision, it doesn't happen too often where the owner comes back and wants to accept the renter and they've already decided to go somewhere else. It does occasionally, we try to mitigate that.    [00:30:28] Ben: Got it.    [00:30:28] Jason Hull: Okay, cool. So going back to the other path, I'm actually drawing this all out. I've got like a flow    [00:30:34] Ben: chart going on here.    [00:30:36] Ben: Sounds good. Keep    [00:30:37] Jason Hull: track.    [00:30:38] Jason Hull: So you surveyed the renter at the end, like you've got somebody in the property.    [00:30:43] Jason Hull: Yeah.   [00:30:43] Jason Hull: They've got a lockbox there. I think that's very cool. They can just go and "Can I move in on this day?" "Yep, here's the lockbox. You've got a code or however it works." And they can go get in.    [00:30:52] Jason Hull: Yeah.   [00:30:52] Jason Hull: And you don't have to show up. They can be there with their new U-Haul when they need to be there. That's super annoying, I think for property managers sometimes. And then afterwards you survey the renter. So I'm curious about the results of this. What's been the shift that people have noticed in the experience? This is why you started this in the beginning. You weren't having a great experience. Some people probably were like, "Drive to our office and you might get a key." Some people are like, "we can meet you maybe this day." It was like a mess. So what sort of feedback are you seeing on these surveys and what sort of shift are property management companies that are working with you noticing with your process versus trying to do this on their    [00:31:30] Ben: own?   [00:31:30] Ben: Yeah, great question. We collect what I would I consider a very important metric and I'm curious if it's come up before in this podcast. It's something called a net promoter score. Yeah. Have you discussed that before? I'm happy to--   [00:31:44] Ben: we    [00:31:44] Jason Hull: haven't really focused on that. But yeah, I think a lot of people are familiar. So net promoter score is when it says "on a scale of maybe zero to 10 or one to 10, how likely are you to recommend this company?" So a lot of people see this, the quick survey on software, different things like this.    [00:32:00] Ben: Yeah, that's right. And so when the net promoter score rank actually comes out, the scale is actually a minus a hundred to a plus 100. You could Google about how that works, but you're right. As a renter, what we would be asking them is, "how likely are you to recommend leasing a property to a friend through Sunroom or through x property management company?" And what we found is we just have a really good net promoter score. So if you could google this around, but the average net promoter score amongst property managers is a seven. And that's not on the zero to 10 scale. That's on the minus a hundred to the plus 100 scale, and. For the renters who lease a property through us, we have a 52 net promoter score.    [00:32:42] Ben: Nice.    [00:32:43] Ben: Yeah. So it's like what I said at the very beginning these renters are just a lot happier when they get in the home. For the property managers, they're seeing less really noisy renters when they first move in. I think that's a common thing that property managers are used to is that when a renter first moves in, that can be when they're talking the most or they're the noisiest. And so I think just anecdotally, property managers have said that, "Hey, these renters are just happier. They're just not causing as much commotion when they first move. And some of that has to do with our process too, right? Allowing renters to even self tour homes, it's a no pressure thing where they're able to really understand what they're buying before they move in. So I believe that helps as well.    [00:33:24] Jason Hull: This is the nerd in me coming out. So there's this really book called _Innovating Analytics_. And they put out this idea, basically the idea of the next generation of net promoter. They have used a lot of data to showcase and it's a little dry, but there's a lot of data to showcase the fundamental flaws of net promoter score, which is, has advantages over doing nothing, right? But then they talk about a new sort of score, which is the word of mouth index. And so we've incorporated that a bit into our business. It basically asks a second question, "how likely are you to discourage others from utilizing that?" Because what they found, just because somebody is not a true promoter, as they categorize them on the high end, like they choose like maybe a seven, eight, or nine or something, does not mean they're actually going to go hurt your business. And so a lot of big companies, they found were spending a lot of money to try and mitigate the people and pay attention to people and help the people they thought were detractors or people that would hurt their business when most of them really wouldn't. Just because it was a two or a three. They found that does not necessarily mean they're actually going to go actively try and destroy your business or hurt you. They just aren't going to tell people about it, because some people just don't want to talk about other businesses. Right? . So then asking a secondary question, how likely are you to tell others not to use this business or whatever. Then it gives you the true people to focus on mitigating or solving challenges for. Really interesting idea, but then they talk about the challenge of mainlining, where if they answer one question one way, first question, they'll answer it the same way, but it's backwards. Because they're just in the mode of answering questions like a zombie and they'll do it the wrong way or read it the wrong way. We've even seen this, so you have to put some questions in between and so it just complicates. But it's a really interesting book. You and I can geek out sometime and show you how I built this out so that it would work effectively, but it helps us identify which people are actually detractors that we need to take care of and focus on, and which people, they never rate anything positively and they're just, but they're quiet, which is fine.    [00:35:25] Jason Hull: Oh that's    [00:35:25] Ben: fascinating. I'll have to check that out.   [00:35:28] Jason Hull: I know, it's pretty nerdy. So_ Innovating Analytics_ is by Larry Freed F R E E D which is an interesting book. Cool. We've asked a lot of questions. You've explained the process. I think we've covered how it works unless we missed anything. But what else do people, property managers coming to you, what other concerns or things could we address here on the podcast before we wrap that they might have? Or what are the big FAQ questions that they ask before they're willing to explore giving up the leasing arm their business?    [00:36:00] Ben: Yeah. Yeah. I think a lot of the questions just evolve around how they can still control the process. And so we've invested an incredible amount into giving them those controls, right? Like I think the key is, the way we look at it is look like we're going to be the best at doing this leasing legwork. It's all we do. And we've built technology to really hold ourselves accountable to really high standards. But at the end of the day, like we still want you to have control over who's the right tenant for this property? Or, "how would you like the that application process to go?" For example. And I think we've worked hard to streamline the areas and that, we just realized, hey, this is the best way to do this. But also we recognize that hey, these property managers, they have pride to process for a reason, right, for their particular market that might be the right thing to do. And so we've invested a lot in creating different settings and things like that, that can make it so that they get to use it the way they would like.    [00:37:03] Ben: Cool. So it's    [00:37:04] Jason Hull: really a lot of the big concerns are just about the flexibility. "Do I have to go all in and use everything that you offer?"   [00:37:10] Jason Hull: Right.   [00:37:11] Jason Hull: "Or can I do, some of this and maybe I'll give up pieces later--" because some of y'all entrepreneurs are control freaks. Let's be real.    [00:37:18] Jason Hull: Yes.    [00:37:18] Jason Hull: And you need to let go of some of this stuff and let somebody else do it a little bit better. We have a lot of egos, entrepreneurs. We think our way is the best way all the time and we need to see that maybe somebody else could do this    [00:37:31] Ben: better.    [00:37:31] Ben: But we've also, from    [00:37:32] Jason Hull: experience--   [00:37:33] Jason Hull: I'm guessing you're going to say that Sunroom probably does it better than what most property managers are doing.    [00:37:39] Ben: Better NPS scores?    [00:37:41] Ben: Yeah. I would just say that, some of the property managers that we've seen are the most excited to partner with us are definitely probably the ones listening to your podcast or it's the ones that want to grow. And, we have some great examples of that, right? There's one property manager that we started working with in Austin a couple years ago, and they started with 300 doors. And now I believe they're up to 800 doors. And so by them being able to just, focus on other things, they were able to grow pretty quickly. And because we recognize this and we're starting to set up in these new markets, we actually just this week launched a new program specifically for trying to find these property management companies that are really focused on growth. And so we actually launched this new growth program. That we just put on our website where property managers can apply for the program. And essentially this program if we accept them will actually give them-- and they partner with us-- we'll give them $10,000 to grow their business. And they can, they could use that money for-- or I'd say up to 10,000-- they can use that money for helping them grow. And really the only terms of it is that you're willing to partner with us on leasing to do that. And so we have different ideas of really how to use that money to grow. I know a lot of entrepreneurs already have those ideas and so that's why we yeah, we set up this new program.   [00:39:02] Jason Hull: Awesome. We should chat because we're really good at growing property management companies and yeah, I think there would be a good-- there. We'll chat later. We've also negotiated with most of the top vendors where we've got a hit list, but a lot of the top vendors we're negotiating best in class discounts just for our mastermind members.   [00:39:21] Ben: There you go.    [00:39:21] Jason Hull: So maybe that's something you and I can do with the Sunroom as well. So    [00:39:25] Jason Hull: Yeah .   [00:39:26] Jason Hull: If you're open, that's--   [00:39:27] Jason Hull: yeah. Cool.    [00:39:28] Jason Hull: We've got some big players on board already for some of these things, but I think it'd be really cool to see this is something new and I think it's innovative and it seems really exciting. So we'll we'll chat afterwards, cool. Is there anything else you want people to know before we go and if The last thing maybe is how do they find you? And how do they get in touch and how do they start working with Sunroom?    [00:39:49] Ben: Yeah. Just go to our website, Sunroomleasing.com. Fill out a little form. Be happy to have, someone from our sales team reach out and have a conversation and kind of explain more of these details about what we do. I'm an engineer at heart, so I think for some people, maybe I went into too much detail. But at the same time, knowing I've talked to a lot of property managers they love the details. If you want even more details yeah, go to our website, sunroomleasing.com. Reach out to us and someone from our sales team would love to dig into those details with you.    [00:40:18] Jason Hull: Perfect. I think the last big question everybody would have is be, is going to be what does it cost? Is this affordable? Can we do this? That sort of question. So--   [00:40:29] Jason Hull: yeah.   [00:40:29] Jason Hull: Anything to say about that?    [00:40:31] Ben: Yeah, so we're going to charge, similar to what I would say like other leasing agents would. So we're going to charge like a percentage of first month's rent. That percentage of first month's rent that we charge. It's going to be different depending on the market and depending on what kind of volume that you have. Normally, the way we are setting this up is that we usually make it so that the property manager can still make good money on leasing while still utilizing us for all of it. Property managers can charge a percentage of first month's rent to their owners. That could be different by market. We're usually going to charge, call it 10- 20% less than that so that they're able to still make money on the leasing, but still know that they have a best in class service for that happening. And so that's just for full service. For Sunscreen, that's actually free for property managers to use. And we just charge the renter an application fee. And so that's really the easiest way. If we said a lot of stuff today, people are like, "wow that's a little scary to adopt that big of a, have a company owning leasing." a great way to start to just build a relationship with us and start seeing what we could do would be to start utilizing our application processing system, which, really, it's going to be a really a low risk thing. Even if want to test out having us do one application on one listing or something, we'd be happy to do that.   [00:41:48] Ben: That's the    [00:41:49] Jason Hull: gateway drug. A little bit of Sunscreen, and then you're going to be like, "I want a whole room. I want the Sunroom now."   [00:41:54] Jason Hull: There you go. There you go.    [00:41:55] Jason Hull: "I don't want to deal with this anymore. I'm tired of putting the Sunscreen on. Yeah. Okay.    [00:41:59] Jason Hull: There you go.    [00:42:00] Jason Hull: Cool.    [00:42:01] Jason Hull: Yeah.    [00:42:01] Jason Hull: All right. Ben, it's been great having you on the show. Check out Sunroomleasing.com and then if you come up with some major developments or big shifts or changes, we'd love to have you back on the show. So thanks for being    [00:42:12] Ben: here.    [00:42:13] Ben: Thanks so much, Jason. And yeah, we'll have to meet up in Austin sometime.    [00:42:16] Ben: All right.    [00:42:18] Jason Hull: All right. Cool. Thanks, Ben.    [00:42:20] Jason Hull: Alright. Everybody, if you've been listening to this, we appreciate you listening to our podcast. We would really appreciate it if you left us a review in exchange. If you got value from this, that would mean a lot to us at DoorGrow and my team. We have been innovating and creating a lot of new stuff at DoorGrow. We've got some really cool stuff coming out. So if you have not been familiar with DoorGrow for a while, we've got some really cool things coming down that we are working on. You should get connected to do a sales call. Check us out at doorgrow.com. Reach out to us. You can reach out to us on any social media. And we would love to connect with you and share with you. We just released the DoorGrow Code, which is the first roadmap that really showcases how to go from zero to a thousand doors in as short of time period as possible. It shows you which things you need to do at which stage, at which door levels, and what questions you have, what major problems you have at each stage, and what you need to do in order to do things in the right order to get to the next level.   [00:43:22] Jason Hull: So if you've been at a similar door count for the last year or maybe two years or three years, maybe even kind feeling stuck or maybe even backsliding a little bit because of property selling off or whatever. We have clients that are adding a lot of doors. Andrew Rocha just chimed in on one of our mastermind calls. He's one of our clients. He added like 50 doors in the last month. We've got clients. One of our clients added 310 doors in a year. We've got another client that added a hundred in gosh, they've doubled their doors. Like we've got clients that are growing really rapidly and they're not spending any money on advertising. I want you to be clear, like our methods are not focused on SEO, pay per click, content marketing, pay-per-lead lead services, social media marketing. Our methods are what really work in the marketplace, and most of them are zero cost, like they cost nothing. It just costs time and effort, and it actually takes less time and less effort than doing cold lead marketing like seo, pay per click, content marketing, social media marketing, or pay per lead services that exist in the property management space. So I highly recommend you check this out if you're wanting to grow. And we are now helping really significantly. We've built out the best systems and processes and we've been stacking the best coaches in the industry. If you've heard of certain coaches in the industry, we might have them on as experts in our program. We'll be announcing more of that later, but we've got some of the best in the industry that we've brought on as coaches. So it's not the Jason Show. I've got an amazing team of people coaching and we have systems for operations. We have systems for process. We have systems for sales, and our clients are crushing it. Nobody in the marketplace is doing all that DoorGrow's doing or can compete with us. And so if you think you know DoorGrow and you've looked at us or judged us in the past, it might be time to take a new look because your competitors might be working with us or they might work with us, and you're going to wish that it had been you.   [00:45:33] Jason Hull: So until next time, to our mutual growth. Bye everyone.    [00:45:37] Jason Hull: You just listened to the #DoorGrowShow. We are building a community of the savviest property management entrepreneurs on the planet in the DoorGrowClub. Join your fellow DoorGrow Hackers at doorgrowclub.com. Listen, everyone is doing the same stuff. SEO, PPC, pay-per-lead content, social direct mail, and they still struggle to grow!    [00:46:05] Jason Hull: At DoorGrow, we solve your biggest challenge: getting deals and growing your business. Find out more at doorgrow.com. Find any show notes or links from today's episode on our blog doorgrow.com, and to get notified of future events and news subscribe to our newsletter at doorgrow.com/subscribe. Until next time, take what you learn and start DoorGrow Hacking your business and your life.

I was hoping they'd be funny in real-life, because their games are, and I'm absolutely delighted to say they are. I'm still genuinely warmed that they're best friends in real-life and have been since school. I'd hoped as much - it's why I asked them to be on the Podcast together (the first double-header!) - but I didn't realise how fundamental to everything their friendship would be.   They are Dan Marshall and Ben Ward, the eponymous heroes and funny men behind the Dan and Ben series. See them in such daring adventures as Ben There, Dan That; Time Gentleman, Please; and Lair of the Clockwork God - the latter of which was one of my favourite games of 2020.    Dan Marshall is also known for superb burglary platformer The Swindle, among other smaller games like Gun Monkeys and Behold the Kickmen. And while these are games he didn't ostensibly make with Ben Ward, they are still concepts and ideas he absolutely ran past him and asked for his feedback on - and apparently he's hard to please!   The two of them are never happier than when giggling over ridiculous ideas encamped in a pub. Or, while on a writing retreat, which is what they actually call it, spending a week in a cottage somewhere that has a hot tub. What began with writing comics while they were supposed to be working in class has flourished into a lifelong friendship and collaboration. I hope you enjoy listening to them as much as I did.  

Show Notes:Links:MicromortNoblesse obligeJosh's dotfilesGitHub Code SpacesFull Transcript:Ben:Yeah. I've been holding out for the new MacBook Pros. The M1 is pretty tempting, but I want whatever comes next. I want the 16-inch new hotness that's apparently supposed to be launching in November, but I've been waiting for it so patiently for so long now.Josh:Will they have the M2?Ben:Yeah, either or that or M1X. People are kind of unsure what the odds are.Starr:Why do they do that? Why did they make an M1 if they can't make an M2? Why do they have to keep... You just started, people. You can just have a normal naming scheme that just increments. Why not?Josh:M1.1?Ben:That would be awesome.Starr:Oh, Lord.Josh:Yeah, it would.Ben:M1A, Beachfront Avenue.Starr:So last week we did an Ask Me Anything on Indie Hackers, and that was a lot of fun.Josh:It was a lot of fun.Starr:I don't know. One of the most interesting questions on there was some guy was just like, "Are you rich?" I started thinking about it. I was like, "I literally have no idea." It reminded me of when I used to live in New York briefly in the '90s or, no, the early '00s. There was a Village Voice article in which they found... They started out with somebody not making very much money, and they're like, "Hey, what is rich to you?" Then that person described that. Then they went and found a person who had that level of income and stuff and they asked them, and it just kept going up long past the point where... Basically, nobody ever was like, "Yeah, I'm rich."Josh:Yeah. At the end, they're like, "Jeff Bezos, what is rich? What is rich to you?"Starr:Yeah.Josh:He's like, "Own your own star system."Starr:So, yeah, I don't know. I feel like I'm doing pretty good for myself because I went to fill up my car with gas the other day and I just didn't even look at the price. The other day, I wanted to snack, so I just got a whole bag of cashews, and I was just chowing down on those. I didn't need to save that. I could always get another bag of cashews.Ben:Cashews are my arch nemesis, man. I can't pass up the cashews. As far as the nut kingdom, man, they are my weakness.Starr:I know. It's the subtle sweetness.Ben:It's so good. The buttery goodness.Starr:Yeah, the smoothness of the texture, the subtle sweetness, it's all there.Ben:That and pistachios. I could die eating cashews and pistachios.Josh:There you go. I like pistachios.Ben:Speaking of being rich, did you see Patrick McKenzie's tweet about noblesse oblige?Josh:No. Tell me.Ben:Yeah, we'll have to link it up in the show notes. But, basically, the idea is when you reach a certain level of richness, I guess, when you feel kind of rich, you should be super generous, right? So noblesse oblige is the notion that nobility should act nobly. If you have been entrusted with this respect of the community and you're a noble, then you ought to act a certain way. You got to act like a noble, right? You should be respectful and et cetera. So Patio was applying this to modern day, and he's like, "Well, we should bring this back," like if you're a well-paid software developer living in the United States of America, you go and you purchase something, let's say a coffee, that has basically zero impact on your budget, right? You don't notice that $10 or whatever that you're spending. Then just normalize giving a 100% tip because you will hardly feel it, but the person you're giving it to, that'll just make their day, right? So doing things like that. I was like, "Oh, that's"-Josh:Being generous.Ben:Yeah, it's being generous. Yeah. So I like that idea.Josh:That's cool.Ben:So-Starr:So it's okay to be rich as long as you're not a rich asshole.Ben:Exactly. Exactly. That's a good way to bring it forward there, Starr.Starr:There you go. I don't know. Yeah. I think there's some historical... I don't know. The phrase noblesse oblige kind of grates at me a little bit in a way that I can't quite articulate in this moment, but I'll think about that, and I will get back with you.Josh:Wait. Are you saying you don't identify as part of the nobility?Starr:No.Ben:I mean, I think there's a lot of things from the regency period that we should bring back, like governesses, because who wants to send your child to school in the middle of a COVID pandemic? So just bring the teacher home, right?Starr:Yeah. That's pretty sexist. Why does it have to be gendered? Anyway.Ben:Okay, it could be a governor, but you might get a little misunderstanding. All of a sudden, you've got Jay Inslee showing up on your doorstep, "I heard you wanted me to come teach your kids."Josh:I don't know. I'll just take an algorithm in the home to teach my kids, just entrust them to it.Starr:Yeah. Oh, speaking of bringing things back, I told y'all, but I'll tell our podcast listeners. On Sunday, I'm driving to Tacoma to go to somebody's basement and look at a 100-year old printing press to possibly transport to Seattle and put in my office for no good reason that I can think of. It just seems to be something that I'm doing.Josh:Do you like that none of us actually asked you what you were intending to do with it? I was like, "Yeah, just let me know when you need to move it. I'm there." I just assumed you were going to do something cool with it, but ... Yeah.Starr:I appreciate that. I appreciate the support. I'm going to make little zines or something. I don't know.Josh:Yeah. If I get a lifetime subscription to your zine-Starr:Okay, awesome.Josh:... that would be payment.Starr:Done. Done.Josh:Cool.Ben:Yeah, sign me up, too. I'll be there.Starr:Well, I appreciate that.Ben:I mean, who could resist that invitation, right, because you get to... If you get to help with moving that thing, you get to see it, you get to touch it and play with it, but you don't have to keep it. It's somebody else's problem when you're done with the day, so sounds great to me.Starr:There you go. Well, I mean, if you read the forums about these things, this is one of the smaller ones, so people are just like, "Ah, no big deal. No big deal. It's okay." But I was happy to hear that there's no stairs involved.Ben:That is the deal-breaker. Yeah.Josh:Yeah. But it-Ben:If you ever get the friend helping you to move their piano, you always ask, "Okay, how many flights of steps," right?Starr:Yeah. Oh, I just thought of something I could do with it. I could make us all nice business card to hand out to nobody.Ben:Because we're not going anywhere.Josh:I just think of my last six attempts at having business cards. They're all still sitting in my closet, all six boxes of-Starr:I know. People look at you like, "What, really, a business card? What?"Josh:Yeah, like all six generations.Starr:Yeah.Ben:I hand out one or two per year. Yeah, just random people and like, "Hey, here's my phone number." It's an easy way to give it to somebody.Josh:Just people on the street?Ben:Exactly. Like a decent fellow, "Here you go." Thank you.Josh:Yeah.Starr:It's like, "I've got 1000 of these. I got to justify the cost somehow."Josh:We got to move these.Starr:We could start invoicing our customers by snail mail. I could print a really nice letterhead.Ben:I think we have a few customers who would be delighted to receive a paper invoice from us because then they would have an excuse to not pay us for 90 days.Starr:Yeah.Josh:Isn't owning a printing press like owning a truck, though? Once people know you have it, everyone wants to borrow it.Starr:It's going to be pretty hard to borrow for a 1000-pound piece of iron.Josh:Well, they're going to want to come over and hang out in your basement and do their printing. This is the Pacific Northwest, like-Starr:It's their manifestos.Josh:Yeah. They got to print their manifestos, lists of demands.Starr:They don't want the establishment at Kinko's to be able to see.Josh:Right.Ben:I don't know. It's got to put you on a special kind of watch list, though, if you have a printing press in your home, right? All of a sudden, some people are really interested in what you're up to.Josh:It's like a legacy watch list.Ben:I'm just flashing back to, yeah, in the 1800s when cities, towns would get all-Starr:There you go.Josh:Well, yeah, because they're like-Ben:The mob would come out and burn down the printing press building and stuff.Josh:If you wanted to be a propagandist back then, you had to buy a printing press and then you get put on a watch list. That just never went away. They're still looking for those people. They just don't find as many of them these days.Starr:Yeah. It's so inefficient. It's not the super efficient way of getting the word out, though, I hear, unless you want to be one of those people handing out leaflets on the side of the road.Josh:Well, you could paper windshields in parking lots.Starr:Oh, there you go. Yeah.Josh:Yeah, that's how they used to do it.Starr:No, look at my beautifully hand-crafted leaflet that you're going to throw in the gutter.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Ben:I think you just settled on what your next adventure's going to be after Honeybadger. You're ready to put this business aside and focus on printing up flyers for your local missing cat.Starr:There you go. There you go. Band flyers, that's big business.Josh:But you could get into fancy paper. That's a whole thing up here. It's pretty cool, actually.Starr:Yeah. I don't know. Really, I was like, "Oh, it'd be cool to have a big thing to tinker with." I'm learning about myself that I like having just a big physical project going on, and I'm pretty... Like, I built this backyard office, and that took up two years of my time. Ever since then, I don't have a big physical thing to work on, so I'm thinking this might fill that niche, that niche, sorry. I read a thing that's like don't say niche, Americans. Niche.Ben:I don't know, Starr. Maybe you should think of the children and then think about 50 years from now when you're dead and Ida's cleaning out the house and she's all like, "Why is there this printing press?"Starr:Oh, there you go.Josh:Have to move it.Starr:They'll just sell it with the house.Ben:There you go.Starr:Yeah. I mean, the funny thing is, is that it is wider than the doorway, so I would either have to dissemble it partially or take out the door. I put the door in, so I know how to take it out, so there is a good chance the door's coming out because I have less chance of messing something up if I do that one. But we'll see.Ben:Echo that.Starr:Well, thank you.Josh:You should've put one of those roll-up doors in there.Starr:I should've, yeah.Josh:Those are cool.Starr:What was I thinking?Josh:You really did not plan ahead for this.Starr:Yeah. I mean, walls are really only a couple of thin pieces of plywood, and you can just saw through it.Josh:Just a small refactor.Starr:Yeah.Josh:Yeah.Starr:And that would-Josh:Did y'all see that someone listened to every episode of this podcast in a row?Starr:I know. I feel so bad. I feel so bad for them.Josh:Speaking of-Starr:We're sorry. We're so sorry.Ben:I was feeling admiration. I'm like, "Wow, that's impressive," like the endurance of it.Starr:I just think we would've made different decisions.Ben:I don't know. But not-Josh:Maybe it's pretty good. I haven't gone back and gone through it all and never will, but-Ben:Well, I mean, not only did they say they listened to every episode, but then they were eager for more. They were like, "When are you getting done with your break?" So I guess-Starr:There you go.Ben:... that net it was positive, but-Josh:We must not be too repetitive.Ben:Must not.Starr:Stockholm syndrome.Josh:We're sorry.Ben:Well...Starr:I'm sorry. I don't have anything informative to add, so I'm just going to be shit-posting this whole episode.Ben:Well, I've had an amazing week since we last chatted. I kept reflecting on how I couldn't remember anything that I did over the past whatever months. Well, this past week, I can remember a whole bunch of things that I did. I've been crazy busy and getting a bunch of little things knocked out. But today, today was the capstone of the week because I rolled over our main Redis cluster that we use for all of our jobs, all of the incoming notices and whatevers. Yeah, rolled over to a new Redis cluster with zero downtime, no dropped data, nobody even noticed. It was just smooth as-Starr:Oh my God.Josh:I saw that.Starr:Awesome.Ben:It's going pretty good.Starr:Just like butter?Ben:Just like butter.Starr:They slid right out of that old Redis instance and just into this new... Is it an AWS-managed type thing?Ben:Yeah, both of them were. They all went on the new one, but... Yeah.Josh:It's, what, ElastiCache?Ben:Yep. Smooth like a new jar of Skippy.Josh:I saw that you put that in our ops channel or something.Ben:Yeah. Yeah, that's the topic in our ops channel.Josh:So it's the subject or the topic, yeah. We're making ops run, yeah, like a jar of Skippy.Starr:Why isn't that our tagline for our whole business?Ben:I mean, we can change it.Starr:I don't know why that's making me crack up so much, but it is.Josh:Skippy's good stuff.Starr:Oh my gosh.Josh:Although we-Ben:Actually-Josh:... usually go for the Costco natural brand these days.Ben:Well, we go for the Trader Joe's all-natural brand that you have to actually mix every time you use it. I prefer crunchy over creamy, so, actually, my peanut butter's not that smooth, but... You know.Josh:Yeah.Ben:It's okay. But, yeah, I love our natural peanut butter, except for the whole churning thing, but you can live with that.Starr:We're more of a Nutella family.Ben:Ooh, I do love a Nutella.Josh:Ooh, Nutella.Ben:Mm-hmm (affirmative), that's good stuff.Josh:We made pancakes the other day, and I was putting Nutella on pancakes. I did this thing, like I made this... We have one of those griddles, like an electric griddle, and so I made this super long rectangular pancake, and then I spread Nutella on the entire thing, and then I rolled it so that you have this-Starr:You know what it's called, Josh.Josh:What is it called?Starr:That's called a crepe.Josh:So it's a crepe, but it's made out of a pancake.Starr:It's a Texas crepe.Ben:Texas crepe.Josh:Yeah, a Texas-Starr:A Texas crepe.Ben:Yes.Josh:Is it really a Texas crepe because that's... Yeah, so, I-Starr:Oh, no, I just made that up.Ben:That sounds perfect, yeah.Josh:Well, it is now.Ben:Yeah, it is now.Josh:It is now, and I highly recommend it. It's pretty amazing.Ben:Throw some Skippy on there and, man, now it's a... That's awesome.Josh:Peanut butter's also good on pancakes.Starr:That's why people listen to us, for our insights about business.Ben:Yeah, there was this one time, speaking of pancakes and peanut butter...Josh:How did we get on pancakes? Like, oh, yeah, ops.Ben:This one time, I went over to dinner at some person's house, and I didn't know what dinner was going to be, but we got there and it was breakfast for dinner, which I personally love. That's one of my favorites.Starr:I knew that about you.Ben:So they're like, "Oh, I'm sorry. Hope you don't think it's weird, but we're having breakfast for dinner." I'm like, "No, no, I love it." So eggs and bacon and waffles, and so I'm getting my waffle and I'm like, "Do you have some peanut butter," and they're like, "Oh my goodness, we thought you would think that was way too weird, and so we didn't have the peanut butter." They whipped it out from in the counter. It's like, "Oh, shew, now we can have our peanut butter, too." I'm like, "Oh, yeah, peanut butter on waffles, yeah."Josh:Everyone had their hidden peanut butter.Ben:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Josh:Yeah.Starr:And that's how you level up a friendship.Ben:There you go. So, yeah, the week was good. The week was good. Bugs got fixed, things got deployed, and, yeah, just a whole-Josh:Yeah, you had a bunch of PRs and stuff for little things, too, which-Ben:Yeah. And got some practice with the whole delegating thing, got Shava doing some stuff, too. So, yeah, just all-around super productive week.Josh:Nice. I got Java to run in a Docker container, so my week's going pretty good.Ben:And that took you all week?Starr:What do those words mean? I don't...Josh:Yeah.Starr:Was your audio cutting out? I don't know. I just heard a bunch of things I don't understand.Josh:Well, for your own sake, don't ask me to explain it.Starr:Yeah, it's like better not looked at.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Why would you subject yourself to that sort of torture, Josh?Josh:Oh, well, because running Java on an M1 Mac is even worse.Starr:Oh my Lord.Josh:Well, actually, running it, period. But, yeah, like just our Java package. I mean, I've spent half this podcast ranting about our packaging, so I don't need to get too deep into it. But every time I release this thing, it's like it just doesn't work because I've forgotten my... I've changed my system, and Java and Maven package repository are just like that. So I figure if I can make some sort of reproduceable development environment using Docker, then in two years everything will just be smooth as a jar of Skippy.Ben:Skippy. Yeah, yeah.Starr:Well, I had a chance to-Josh:I reckon.Starr:I had a chance to dig into some numbers, which is one of my favorite things to do, and so... I don't know. There was this question that was just bothering me, which was... Well, let me just back up. So we've had some success, as you guys know, in the past year. We've almost doubled our rate of new user sign-ups, not new user sign-ups, like conversion to paid users. We've doubled our paid user conversion numbers, rate, whatever you call it. And so, obviously, revenue from users has gone up as well, but since we are a... Our plans are basically broken down by error rates, right? So what happens when people upgrade is they get too many errors for their plan. It says, "Hey, you should upgrade if you want to keep sending us errors," and they do.Starr:I had this weird situation where it's like I wasn't sure... In our system, revenue from users was coming just from whatever plan they picked when they signed up, and so I was wondering, "Well, what if they sign up, and then a week later they upgrade? That's going to be counted under upgrade revenue instead of new user revenue," which, really, it really kind of should be. So I got to digging, and I found that it doesn't really make that big of a difference. Some people do upgrade pretty quickly after converting, but they don't... It's not really enough to really change things.Josh:Yeah.Starr:Then, also, just sort of offhand, I took a little sneak peek. I've been running this experiment to see if lowering our error quota for our basic, our free plan, it would increase conversions. So I took a little sneak peek at the data. It's too soon to know for sure, but so far the conversion rate, I think, is going to end up being higher, which is what I would expect, so that's good, and-Josh:Nice.Starr:Yeah. And when we're done, I'm going to look at sign-ups just to make sure that they are still in line.Ben:Yeah. Anecdotally, I've seen a smaller window from trial to paid conversion. Well, not trial, but freemium to paid conversion. I've seen people who are signing up, getting on the basic plan, and then within some short time period they're actually going to a team plan.Josh:Oh, that's good to know.Ben:That's happening more often than it was, so... Yeah. So that's-Josh:Cool.Ben:I'm just saying the same thing Starr said but without real data.Josh:Yeah.Starr:Yeah, it's awesome. Yeah, we need a little bit more time to see how things pan out, too, because it's... One thing I figured out that I will share with our readers, our readers, I'm used to doing the blog posts, I'll share with our listeners that I figured out that you really have to pay attention to, on free plans especially, is comparing conversion rates between time periods. So if you make a change and then you wait for a month of data to come in and you're like, "Okay, let's look at the conversion rate for the past month after the change with the conversion rate for the time period before the change," that is really an apples to oranges comparison because on the one hand you've had people who have maybe had a year to upgrade versus people who've had a month to upgrade. So you have to be really careful to make it apples to apples, right, where you only compare... If you have a month worth of users on one side, you compare it to a month worth of users on the other side, and you only count the conversions that happened in that time period.Josh:Makes sense.Starr:Yeah. So, anyway, that's just my little freebie data analysis thing for our listeners.Josh:We should have Starr's weekly data science tip.Starr:Starr's data corner.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Love it.Josh:Yeah. We could move the podcast to segments. We've never done segments. We could introduce segments if we need to spice things up on FounderQuest.Ben:Yeah. Totally. Well, speaking of spicing things up, I had a brilliant idea this morning.Starr:Oh, I want to hear it.Ben:Yeah. So one of the things that I keep an eye on is how much we spend on hosting because that's a good chunk of our expenses. We always want to make more money, and one way to make more money is to have fewer expenses. So I had this brilliant idea on how to cut expenses. We can chop our AWS bill in half by just not running everything redundant.Starr:There you go.Josh:Brilliant.Starr:Would you say the AWS is the sixth Honeybadger employee?Ben:Yeah, pretty much.Josh:Yes. That's a good way to put it, actually.Starr:Yeah.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Well, in the early days, before we were paying ourselves a full salary, I remember we budgeted 25% for Starr, 25% for Ben, 25% for Josh, and 25% for hosting.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Yeah, I don't think we ever exceeded the 25%, which is good. That would be a bit high. So, yeah, AWS is like our sixth employee.Starr:Yeah, it's funny because do we even have other expenses?Josh:No.Ben:I mean, salaries is definitely the biggest one, and our health insurance is not cheap either.Starr:Yeah.Ben:Advertising.Starr:I was thinking like marketing, advertising. Yeah.Ben:Yeah. Advertising and marketing, that's the next one.Starr:That's the next 25%.Josh:Can we make AWS our seventh and eighth employee, too?Ben:Eventually may. Yeah, I did some... Oh. Oh. So I told you my great success that I had this morning. Well, your comment just now about AWS made me think about the one failure, just amazingly huge failure that I had also this week, migrating a bunch of data from Redis to DynomoDB. So we have this situation where it's one of those seemed like a good idea at the time kind of thing where we're doing a bunch of counting of people and individuals that hit errors, and we're counting that in Redis. I'm like, "Okay, great," because Redis has this INCRBY and it's easy and it's atomic and, boom, you're done, and I just never paid much attention to it until a few weeks ago, and I was like, "Yo, you know what? That's actually a lot of data in there, and we're keeping that forever, and so it's probably better to put it someplace that's not Redis." So I'm like, "Ah, I know. I'll do DynamoDB because it has an increment thing and...Josh:Yeah.Ben:So I put a table together, and I wrote a migration script, and I migrated a bunch of data. It took two days. It's great. Everything is beautiful. Had buckets of data inside DynomiteDB, and then I went to go query it, and I'm like, "Oh, I can't query it that way because I don't have the right index." Well, that sucks. All right. So you can't create a local index on DynomiteDB without recreating the table. I'm like, "Okay, well, that sucks. I just lost two days worth of data migration but oh well." So dump the table, recreated it with the index, and started redoing the data migration, and I'm like, "Yeah, it might take two days, no problem." So I check on it every half-day or so, and it's not going to be getting done after two days. Three days go by, and I'm checking the work backlog, and I was like, "It's just flat."Ben:Turns out because of that local index, now Dynamo can't really write fast enough because the way they do the partition throttling and stuff because we have some customers who have huge chunks of data. So their partitions are too big for Dynamo to write very quickly. Hot partition keys is the problem. So I just gave up. I'm like, "All right, fine." Drop the table again, recreated it, and now we're just double writing so that, eventually, given six months from now or so, it'll be there and I can replace that thing in Redis.Josh:Nice.Ben:So this is my life, the ups and the downs. So, yeah.Josh:And just waiting six months.Ben:And just waiting six months.Josh:Yeah. That's funny, but that is kind of a pattern in the business. In some cases, we need to just wait for the data to populate itself, and we just have to basically wait our retention period because data tends to turnover and then we can drop the old database or whatever.Ben:Yeah. Yep. But, luckily, nobody noticed my big fail, so it's all good. It didn't impact the customers.Josh:I didn't notice.Ben:So, yeah, busy weekend.Starr:I noticed, but I didn't say anything because I wanted to be nice.Ben:Thank you, Starr. Appreciate that.Starr:Yeah, I [inaudible].Josh:Starr was over there just quietly shaking her head.Ben:Just judging. Just judge-Starr:No, sorry.Ben:So, Josh, I'm going to get back to this Java thing because I'm curious. I remember, I don't know, a year ago or something, we're kind of like, "Maybe we should just not when it comes to Java anymore." So I'm curious what prompted this renewed activity to do a new release.Josh:Well, I don't know. I figured... I don't know. Didn't we say we were just not going to do any releases?Ben:Yeah, it just-Josh:It's not high on my list of development. We're not spending a bunch adding stuff to it, but there are dependency updates that have been getting merged in. I merged the Dependabot PRs and stuff. There's something else. There might be some small PR or something that someone submitted that was sitting there on release, and I just can't handle just unreleased code sitting on the pane. So it's just one of those things that's been sitting on my backlog halfway down the list just gnawing at me every week, so I figured I'd dive in and at least get some sort of quick release, relatively quick release process down so we can just continue to release dependency updates and stuff, like if there's a security update or something, so...Ben:Yeah.Josh:Some people still do use it, so I want to make sure they're secure.Ben:Make sure they're happy. Yeah.Josh:Yeah. But, yeah, that's a good point. We are not treating all platforms as equal because we just don't have the resource, so we need to focus on the stuff that actually is making us money.Ben:Yeah. Yeah, it's tough when very few of our customers are actually using that for it to get a whole lot of priority.Josh:That said, we have already put a lot into it, so as far as I know, it works well for the people that have used it.Starr:So are y'all encouraging our customers to do more Java?Josh:Yes, switch to Java. Then switch to SentryBen:Ride a wave.Josh:... or something.Ben:So I've been contemplating this new laptop showing up, right, whenever Apple finally releases it and I get to get my hot little hands on it. I've been thinking, well, the one big downside to getting a new laptop is getting back to a place where you can actually work again, right, getting all your things set up. Some people are smart, like Josh, that have this DOT file, this repo, on GitHub, and they can just clone that, and they're off to the races. I'm not that smart. I always have to hand-craft my config every time I get a new machine. But I'm thinking-Josh:Oh. Take the time.Ben:So, yeah, I'm not looking forward to that part, but GitHub has released Codespaces, and so now I'm thinking, "Ooh, I wonder if I could get all our repos updated so that I could just work totally in the cloud and just not even have a development set-up on my machine." Probably not, but it's a fun little fantasy.Josh:Well, then you could have any little... You could work on your iPad.Ben:Yeah.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Yeah, I don't even need a laptop. Then I could save the company money. That's brilliant, Josh.Josh:Yeah. You could work at the library.Starr:Yeah. It's like, "So your main ops guy, I see he's primarily working from a five-year-old iPad."Ben:At a library.Starr:In a library.Josh:An iMac.Starr:When he gets paged, he has to run to the nearest Starbucks and get that wifi.Josh:Yeah. I got to say, having your DOT files all ready to go and all that is pretty good. Also, I've got my Brewfile, too, so all of my Homebrew stuff is automated in that.Ben:Well, that's clever. I never even thought of that.Josh:It does make it very quick to bootstrap a new machine.Ben:Yeah. Maybe I should take this as initiative to actually put my stuff into DOT files repo and get to that point.Josh:Careful, though, because you might... I've had four computers between your current one and now, so you might end up switching more often because it's easier to do it.Ben:Appreciate that warning. That's good.Josh:Yeah. Speaking of the M1s, I love the M1 MacBook Air that I have. But the battery has been... I don't know what happened, but the battery was fantastic, I don't know, first few months. Ever since then, it's been kind of like it hasn't been lasting. I've been surprised at how fast it's draining, and I go and look at, whatever, the battery health stuff, and it says that health is down to 86% and the condition says it's fair, which does not make me feel warm and fuzzy.Josh:It has 50 cycles, so I think it might be defective, and that sucks because otherwise this machine is maybe one of the best Macs I've had. I guess... Yeah. I've had a few compatibility issues with the architecture, but it's not too bad. I mean, I'm not a Java developer at least, so...Ben:Yeah, I think you need to take that in for a service because that is way soon for that kind of degradation.Josh:Yeah. I might need to do something.Ben:That's a bummer.Josh:Yeah. I don't know. I might have to ship it in because I think our local Portland Apple Store is shuttered currently.Ben:All those protests?Josh:Yeah. It's got eight fences around it and stuff. Downtown Portland's a little rough these days.Starr:Yeah.Ben:Well, I mean, you can always take the trip out to Seattle.Josh:Yeah. Oh, yeah. Or there's other... I forget. There's an Apple Store that's not too far outside of Portland. It's where I bought this, so I could take it down there.Starr:Yeah. I'm sad now because I bought my second MacBook from that store in Portland.Josh:Yeah? It's a good store.Ben:Speaking of you coming out to Seattle, I was thinking the other day that maybe we should do a company-wide get-together sometime soon. Be fun to see everybody again in-person.Josh:It would be. Now that we're all vaxxed, we're all super vaxxed. I don't know that Starr is even down for that, though. I'm just looking at Starr.Starr:I don't know. Like, I-Josh:You don't look like you're too stoked on that idea.Starr:I don't know. I'm just-Josh:What with Delta lurking.Starr:The problem is, Josh, is that you have not been reading nursing Twitter.Josh:Uh-huh (affirmative).Starr:So I don't know. Yeah, it's doable. Currently, I think the CDC just released a thing that said vaccine efficiency of preventing COVID infections... It's very good still at preventing bad, I don't know, disease, health problems, whatever, keeping people out of the hospital. It's very good at that. With Delta, it's about 65% effective at preventing infections, and so if you get infected, you can transmit it to other people.Josh:Right.Starr:Yeah. So it's not impossible. It's just like we're just back to this fricking calculus where every possible social interaction you just have to run it through your spreadsheet and your risk analysis and... Ugh.Josh:Yeah.Ben:It's like, "Are you worthy of the hassle? No. Sorry, can't make it."Starr:Yeah. Yeah. It's like, "Okay, so what's the probability that meeting with you is going to send my child to the hospital? Okay, that's low enough. Sure."Josh:Yeah.Starr:It's just such a weird world.Josh:Wouldn't it be funny if when you get into your car in the morning, it reads out the probability of you dying in a car accident?Starr:Oh, yeah. Do you know about millimorts?Josh:No.Starr:Oh, you should go Google millimorts. A millimort is a one in a million chance that you will die, and so there's tables and stuff that you can find online that have different activities and what the number of millimorts is about them. So you can compare, and you can be like, "Okay, so going skydiving has this many millimorts as driving so many miles in a motorcycle."Josh:That's awesome. Okay, we have to link this in the show notes because I want to remember to look this up-Starr:Okay. I'll go find it.Josh:... so that I can depress people.Starr:I think there was a New York Times article, too.Ben:Yeah, I totally have to see this because I just signed up for a motorcycle training course and I'm going to get my endorsements so that I know exactly what kind of risks... Though that's probably part of the course, where they try to scare you out of actually getting your endorsement. They probably...Josh:By the way, I'm really glad my morbid humor or my morbid joke landed because for a minute there-Starr:Oh, I'm sorry, it's a micromort.Josh:Oh, a micromort. Okay.Starr:I was like, "Isn't milli 1000?"Josh:Minimort, like-Starr:Milli is 1000.Josh:Yeah.Starr:Yeah, that grated at me. I know. My old chemistry teachers are just giving me an F right now.Ben:Yeah, I got to see that.Josh:Well, I'm sure you'll be all right, Ben. I mean, the risk of a motorcycle is much higher than a car, but you just can't think about that all the time because the fun... I'm sure the fun is much...Ben:[inaudible].Josh:It's worth it.Ben:It's worth every hazard. Yeah.Josh:Yeah. The risk is worth the reward.Ben:Yesterday, I just hit 250 miles on the odometer on my scooter, so loving that. It's a lot of fun.Josh:That's cool.Starr:That's a lot of miles for a scooter.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Starr:I guess you just love to scoot.Ben:I love to scoot. Well, there you go, Starr. There's our happy ending after that slight dip there.Starr:That slight delay into reality.Josh:I like the dark humor. I don't know. It's always a gamble, though, with depending on... Yeah. But I think, Starr, you're always down to get dark.Starr:Oh, yeah. I'm down with the darkness. All right. Well, should we wrap it up?Ben:Let's wrap it.Starr:Okay. This has been a very witchy episode of FounderQuest, so if you liked it, go give us a review and... Yeah, if not, just keep listening to us. Make it a hate listen. You got to have a couple of those in your line-up. 

About Ben KehoeBen Kehoe is a Cloud Robotics Research Scientist at iRobot and an AWS Serverless Hero. As a serverless practitioner, Ben focuses on enabling rapid, secure-by-design development of business value by using managed services and ephemeral compute (like FaaS). Ben also seeks to amplify voices from dev, ops, and security to help the community shape the evolution of serverless and event-driven designs.Twitter: @ben11kehoeMedium: ben11kehoeGitHub: benkehoeLinkedIn: ben11kehoeiRobot: www.irobot.comWatch this episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/B0QChfAGvB0 This episode is sponsored by CBT Nuggets and Lumigo.TranscriptJeremy: Hi, everyone. I'm Jeremy Daly.Rebecca: And I'm Rebecca Marshburn.Jeremy: And this is Serverless Chats. And this is a momentous occasion on Serverless Chats because we are welcoming in Rebecca Marshburn as an official co-host of Serverless Chats.Rebecca: I'm pretty excited to be here. Thanks so much, Jeremy.Jeremy: So for those of you that have been listening for hopefully a long time, and we've done over 100 episodes. And I don't know, Rebecca, do I look tired? I feel tired.Rebecca: I've never seen you look tired.Jeremy: Okay. Well, I feel tired because we've done a lot of these episodes and we've published a new episode every single week for the last 107 weeks, I think at this point. And so what we're going to do is with you coming on as a new co-host, we're going to take a break over the summer. We're going to revamp. We're going to do some work. We're going to put together some great content. And then we're going to come back on, I think it's August 30th with a new episode and a whole new show. Again, it's going to be about serverless, but what we're thinking is ... And, Rebecca, I would love to hear your thoughts on this as I come at things from a very technical angle, because I'm an overly technical person, but there's so much more to serverless. There's so many other sides to it that I think that bringing in more perspectives and really being able to interview these guests and have a different perspective I think is going to be really helpful. I don't know what your thoughts are on that.Rebecca: Yeah. I love the tech side of things. I am not as deep in the technicalities of tech and I come at it I think from a way of loving the stories behind how people got there and perhaps who they worked with to get there, the ideas of collaboration and community because nothing happens in a vacuum and there's so much stuff happening and sharing knowledge and education and uplifting each other. And so I'm super excited to be here and super excited that one of the first episodes I get to work on with you is with Ben Kehoe because he's all about both the technicalities of tech, and also it's actually on his Twitter, a new compassionate tech values around humility, and inclusion, and cooperation, and learning, and being a mentor. So couldn't have a better guest to join you in the Serverless Chats community and being here for this.Jeremy: I totally agree. And I am looking forward to this. I'm excited. I do want the listeners to know we are testing in production, right? So we haven't run any unit tests, no integration tests. I mean, this is straight test in production.Rebecca: That's the best practice, right? Total best practice to test in production.Jeremy: Best practice. Right. Exactly.Rebecca: Straight to production, always test in production.Jeremy: Push code to the cloud. Here we go.Rebecca: Right away.Jeremy: Right. So if it's a little bit choppy, we'd love your feedback though. The listeners can be our observability tool and give us some feedback and we can ... And hopefully continue to make the show better. So speaking of Ben Kehoe, for those of you who don't know Ben Kehoe, I'm going to let him introduce himself, but I have always been a big fan of his. He was very, very early in the serverless space. I read all his blogs very early on. He was an early AWS Serverless Hero. So joining us today is Ben Kehoe. He is a cloud robotics research scientist at iRobot, as I said, an AWS Serverless Hero. Ben, welcome to the show.Ben: Thanks for having me. And I'm excited to be a guinea pig for this new exciting format.Rebecca: So many observability tools watching you be a guinea pig too. There's lots of layers to this.Jeremy: Amazing. All right. So Ben, why don't you tell the listeners for those that don't know you a little bit about yourself and what you do with serverless?Ben: Yeah. So I mean, as with all software, software is people, right? It's like Soylent Green. And so I'm really excited for this format being about the greater things that technology really involves in how we create it and set it up. And serverless is about removing the things that don't matter so that you can focus on the things that do matter.Jeremy: Right.Ben: So I've been interested in that since I learned about it. And at the time saw that I could build things without running servers, without needing to deal with the scaling of stuff. I've been working on that at iRobot for over five years now. As you said early on in serverless at the first serverless con organized by A Cloud Guru, now plural sites.Jeremy: Right.Ben: And yeah. And it's been really exciting to see it grow into the large-scale community that it is today and all of the ways in which community are built like this podcast.Jeremy: Right. Yeah. I love everything that you've done. I love the analogies you've used. I mean, you've always gone down this road of how do you explain serverless in a way to show really the adoption of it and how people can take that on. Serverless is a ladder. Some of these other things that you would ... I guess the analogies you use were always great and always helped me. And of course, I don't think we've ever really come to a good definition of serverless, but we're not talking about that today. But ...Ben: There isn't one.Jeremy: There isn't one, which is also a really good point. So yeah. So welcome to the show. And again, like I said, testing in production here. So, Rebecca, jump in when you have questions and we'll beat up Ben from both sides on this, but, really ...Rebecca: We're going to have Ben from both sides.Jeremy: There you go. We'll embrace him from both sides. There you go.Rebecca: Yeah. Yeah.Jeremy: So one of the things though that, Ben, you have also been very outspoken on which I absolutely love, because I'm in very much closely aligned on this topic here. But is about infrastructure as code. And so let's start just quickly. I mean, I think a lot of people know or I think people working in the cloud know what infrastructure as code is, but I also think there's a lot of people who don't. So let's just take a quick second, explain what infrastructure as code is and what we mean by that.Ben: Sure. To my mind, infrastructure as code is about having a definition of the state of your infrastructure that you want to see in the cloud. So rather than using operations directly to modify that state, you have a unified definition of some kind. I actually think infrastructure is now the wrong word with serverless. It used to be with servers, you could manage your fleet of servers separate from the software that you were deploying onto the servers. And so infrastructure being the structure below made sense. But now as your code is intimately entwined in the rest of your resources, I tend to think of resource graph definitions rather than infrastructure as code. It's a less convenient term, but I think it's worth understanding the distinction or the difference in perspective.Jeremy: Yeah. No, and I totally get that. I mean, I remember even early days of cloud when we were using the Chefs and the Puppets and things like that, that we were just deploying the actual infrastructure itself. And sometimes you deploy software as part of that, but it was supporting software. It was the stuff that ran in the runtime and some of those and some configurations, but yeah, but the application code that was a whole separate process, and now with serverless, it seems like you're deploying all those things at the same time.Ben: Yeah. There's no way to pick it apart.Jeremy: Right. Right.Rebecca: Ben, there's something that I've always really admired about you and that is how strongly you hold your opinions. You're fervent about them, but it's also because they're based on this thorough nature of investigation and debate and challenging different people and yourself to think about things in different ways. And I know that the rest of this episode is going to be full with a lot of opinions. And so before we even get there, I'm curious if you can share a little bit about how you end up arriving at these, right? And holding them so steady.Ben: It's a good question. Well, I hope that I'm not inflexible in these strong opinions that I hold. I mean, it's one of those strong opinions loosely held kind of things that new information can change how you think about things. But I do try and do as much thinking as possible so that there's less new information that I have to encounter to change an opinion.Rebecca: Yeah. Yeah.Ben: Yeah. I think I tend to try and think about how people ... But again, because it's always people. How people interact with the technology, how people behave, how organizations behave, and then how technology fits into that. Because sometimes we talk about technology in a vacuum and it's really not. Technology that works for one context doesn't work for another. I mean, a lot of my strong opinions are that there is no one right answer kind of a thing, or here's a framework for understanding how to think about this stuff. And then how that fits into a given person is just finding where they are in that more general space. Does that make sense? So it's less about finding out here's the one way to do things and more about finding what are the different options, how do you think about the different options that are out there.Rebecca: Yeah, totally makes sense. And I do want to compliment you. I do feel like you are very good at inviting new information in if people have it and then you're like, "Aha, I've already thought of that."Ben: I hope so. Yeah. I was going to say, there's always a balance between trying to think ahead so that when you discover something you're like, "Oh, that fits into what I thought." And the danger of that being that you're twisting the information to fit into your preexisting structures. I hope that I find a good balance there, but I don't have a principle way of determining that balance or knowing where you are in that it's good versus it's dangerous kind of spectrum.Jeremy: Right. So one of the opinions that you hold that I tend to agree with, I have some thoughts about some of the benefits, but I also really agree with the other piece of it. And this really has to do with the CDK and this idea of using CloudFormation or any sort of DSL, maybe Terraform, things like that, something that is more domain-specific, right? Or I guess declarative, right? As opposed to something that is imperative like the CDK. So just to get everybody on the same page here, what is the top reasons why you believe, or you think that DSL approach is better than that iterative approach or interpretive approach, I guess?Ben: Yeah. So I think we get caught up in the imperative versus declarative part of it. I do think that declarative has benefits that can be there, but the way that I think about it is with the CDK and infrastructure as code in general, I'm like mildly against imperative definitions of resources. And we can get into that part, but that's not my smallest objection to the CDK. I'm moderately against not being able to enforce deterministic builds. And the CDK program can do anything. Can use a random number generator and go out to the internet to go ask a question, right? It can do anything in that program and that means that you have no guarantees that what's coming out of it you're going to be able to repeat.So even if you check the source code in, you may not be able to go back to the same infrastructure that you had before. And you can if you're disciplined about it, but I like tools that help give you guardrails so that you don't have to be as disciplined. So that's my moderately against. My strongly against piece is I'm strongly against developer intent remaining client side. And this is not an inherent flaw in the CDK, is a choice that the CDK team has made to turn organizational dysfunction in AWS into ownership for their customers. And I don't think that's a good approach to take, but that's also fixable.So I think if we want to start with the imperative versus declarative thing, right? When I think about the developers expressing an intent, and I want that intent to flow entirely into the cloud so that developers can understand what's deployed in the cloud in terms of the things that they've written. The CDK takes this approach of flattening it down, flattening the richness of the program the developer has written into ... They think of it as assembly language. I think that is a misinterpretation of what's happening. The assembly language in the process is the imperative plan generated inside the CloudFormation engine that says, "Here's how I'm going to take this definition and turn it into an actual change in the cloud.Jeremy: Right.Ben: They're just translating between two definition formats in CDK scene. But it's a flattening process, it's a lossy process. So then when the developer goes to the Console or the API has to go say, "What's deployed here? What's going wrong? What do I need to fix?" None of it is framed in terms of the things that they wrote in their original language.Jeremy: Right.Ben: And I think that's the biggest problem, right? So drift detection is an important thing, right? What happened when someone went in through the Console? Went and tweaked some stuff to fix something, and now it's different from the definition that's in your source repository. And in CloudFormation, it can tell you that. But what I would want if I was running CDK is that it should produce another CDK program that represents the current state of the cloud with a meaningful file-level diff with my original program.Jeremy: Right. I'm just thinking this through, if I deploy something to CDK and I've got all these loops and they're generating functions and they're using some naming and all this kind of stuff, whatever, now it produces this output. And again, my naming of my functions might be some function that gets called to generate the names of the function. And so now I've got all of these functions named and I have to go in. There's no one-to-one map like you said, and I can imagine somebody who's not familiar with CloudFormation which is ultimately what CDK synthesizes and produces, if you're not familiar with what that output is and how that maps back to the constructs that you created, I can see that as being really difficult, especially for younger developers or developers who are just getting started in that.Ben: And the CDK really takes the attitude that it's going to hide those things from those developers rather than help them learn it. And so when they do have to dive into that, the CDK refers to it as an escape hatch.Jeremy: Yeah.Ben: And I think of escape hatches on submarines, where you go from being warm and dry and having air to breathe to being hundreds of feet below the sea, right? It's not the sort of thing you want to go through. Whereas some tools like Amplify talk about graduation. In Amplify they aim to help you understand the things that Amplify is doing for you, such that when you grow beyond what Amplify can provide you, you have the tools to do that, to take the thing that you built and then say, "Okay, I know enough now that I understand this and can add onto it in ways that Amplify can't help with."Jeremy: Right.Ben: Now, how successful they are in doing that is a separate question I think, but the attitude is there to say, "We're looking to help developers understand these things." Now the CDK could also if the CDK was a managed service, right? Would not need developers to understand those things. If you could take your program directly to the cloud and say, "Here's my program, go make this real." And when it made it real, you could interact with the cloud in an understanding where you could list your deployed constructs, right? That you can understand the program that you wrote when you're looking at the resources that are deployed all together in the cloud everywhere. That would be a thing where you don't need to learn CloudFormation.Jeremy: Right.Ben: Right? That's where you then end up in the imperative versus declarative part where, okay, there's some reasons that I think declarative is better. But the major thing is that disconnect that's currently built into the way that CDK works. And the reason that they're doing that is because CloudFormation is not moving fast enough, which is not always on the CloudFormation team. It's often on the service teams that aren't building the resources fast enough. And that's AWS's problem, AWS as an entire company, as an organization. And this one team is saying, "Well, we can fix that by doing all this client side."What that means is that the customers are then responsible for all the things that are happening on the client side. The reason that they can go fast is because the CDK team doesn't have ownership of it, which just means the ownership is being pushed on customers, right? The CDK deploys Lambda functions into your account that they don't tell you about that you're now responsible for. Right? Both the security and operations of. If there are security updates that the CDK team has to push out, you have to take action to update those things, right? That's ownership that's being pushed onto the customer to fix a lack of ACM certificate management, right?Jeremy: Right. Right.Ben: That is ACM not building the thing that's needed. And so AWS says, "Okay, great. We'll just make that the customer's problem."Jeremy: Right.Ben: And I don't agree with that approach.Rebecca: So I'm sure as an AWS Hero you certainly have pretty good, strong, open communication channels with a lot of different team members across teams. And I certainly know that they're listening to you and are at least hearing you, I should say, and watching you and they know how you feel about this. And so I'm curious how some of those conversations have gone. And some teams as compared to others at AWS are really, really good about opening their roadmap or at least saying, "Hey, we hear this, and here's our path to a solution or a success." And I'm curious if there's any light you can shed on whether or not those conversations have been fruitful in terms of actually being able to get somewhere in terms of customer and AWS terms, right? Customer obsession first.Ben: Yeah. Well, customer obsession can mean two things, right? Customer obsession can mean giving the customer what they want or it can mean giving the customer what they need and different AWS teams' approach fall differently on that scale. The reason that many of those things are not available in CloudFormation is that those teams are ... It could be under-resourced. They could have a larger majority of customer that want new features rather than infrastructure as code support. Because as much as we all like infrastructure as code, there are many, many organizations out there that are not there yet. And with the CDK in particular, I'm a relatively lone voice out there saying, "I don't think this ownership that's being pushed onto the customer is a good thing." And there are lots of developers who are eating up CDK saying, "I don't care."That's not something that's in their worry. And because the CDK has been enormously successful, right? It's fixing these problems that exists. And I don't begrudge them trying to fix those problems. I think it's a question of do those developers who are grabbing onto those things and taking them understand the full total cost of ownership that the CDK is bringing with it. And if they don't understand it, I think AWS has a responsibility to understand it and work with it to help those customers either understand it and deal with it, right? Which is where the CDK takes this approach, "Well, if you do get Ops, it's all fine." And that's somewhat true, but also many developers who can use the CDK do not control their CI/CD process. So there's all sorts of ways in which ... Yeah, so I think every team is trying to do the best that they can, right?They're all working hard and they all have ... Are pulled in many different directions by customers. And most of them are making, I think, the right choices given their incentives, right? Given what their customers are asking for. I think not all of them balance where customers ... meeting customers where they are versus leading them where they should, like where they need to go as well as I would like. But I think ... I had a conclusion to that. Oh, but I think that's always a debate as to where that balance is. And then the other thing when I talk about the CDK, that my ideal audience there is less AWS itself and more AWS customers ...Rebecca: Sure.Ben: ... to understand what they're getting into and therefore to demand better of AWS. Which is in general, I think, the approach that I take with AWS, is complaining about AWS in public, because I do have the ability to go to teams and say, "Hey, I want this thing," right? There are plenty of teams where I could just email them and say, "Hey, this feature could be nice", but I put it on Twitter because other people can see that and say, "Oh, that's something that I want or I don't think that's helpful," right? "I don't care about that," or, "I think it's the wrong thing to ask for," right? All of those things are better when it's not just me saying I think this is a good thing for AWS, but it being a conversation among the community differently.Rebecca: Yeah. I think in the spirit too of trying to publicize types of what might be best next for customers, you said total cost of ownership. Even though it might seem silly to ask this, I think oftentimes we say the words total cost of ownership, but there's actually many dimensions to total cost of ownership or TCO, right? And so I think it would be great if you could enumerate what you think of as total cost of ownership, because there might be dimensions along that matrices, matrix, that people haven't considered when they're actually thinking about total cost of ownership. They're like, "Yeah, yeah, I got it. Some Ops and some security stuff I have to do and some patches," but they might only be thinking of five dimensions when you're like, "Actually the framework is probably 10 to 12 to 14." And so if you could outline that a bit, what you mean when you think of a holistic total cost of ownership, I think that could be super helpful.Ben: I'm bad at enumeration. So I would miss out on dimensions that are obvious if I was attempting to do that. But I think a way that I can, I think effectively answer that question is to talk about some of the ways in which we misunderstand TCO. So I think it's important when working in an organization to think about the organization as a whole, not just your perspective and that your team's perspective in it. And so when you're working for the lowest TCO it's not what's the lowest cost of ownership for my team if that's pushing a larger burden onto another team. Now if it's reducing the burden on your team and only increasing the burden on another team a little bit, that can be a lower total cost of ownership overall. But it's also something that then feeds into things like political capital, right?Is that increased ownership that you're handing to that team something that they're going to be happy with, something that's not going to cause other problems down the line, right? Those are the sorts of things that fit into that calculus because it's not just about what ... Moving away from that topic for a second. I think about when we talk about how does this increase our velocity, right? There's the piece of, "Okay, well, if I can deploy to production faster, right? My feedback loop is faster and I can move faster." Right? But the other part of that equation is how many different threads can you be operating on and how long are those threads in time? So when you're trying to ship a feature, if you can ship it and then never look at it again, that means you have increased bandwidth in the future to take on other features to develop other new features.And so even if you think about, "It's going to take me longer to finish this particular feature," but then there's no maintenance for that feature, that can be a lower cost of ownership in time than, "I can ship it 50% faster, but then I'm going to periodically have to revisit it and that's going to disrupt my ability to ship other things," right? So this is where I had conversations recently about increasing use of Step Functions, right? And being able to replace Lambda functions with Step Functions express workflows because you never have to go back to those Lambdas and update dependencies in them because dependent bot has told you that you need to or a version of Python is getting deprecated, right? All of those things, just if you have your Amazon States Language however it's been defined, right?Once it's in there, you never have to touch it again if nothing else changes and that means, okay, great, that piece is now out of your work stream forever unless it needs to change. And that means that you have more bandwidth for future things, which serverless is about in general, right? Of say, "Okay, I don't have to deal with this scaling problems here. So those scaling things. Once I have an auto-scaling group, I don't have to go back and tweak it later." And so the same thing happens at the feature level if you build it in ways that allow you to do that. And so I think that's one of the places where when we focus on, okay, how fast is this getting me into production, it's okay, but how often do you have to revisit it ...Jeremy: Right. And so ... So you mentioned a couple of things in there, and not only in that question, but in the previous questions as you were talking about the CDK in general, and I am 100% behind you on this idea of deterministic builds because I want to know exactly what's being deployed. I want to be able to audit that and map that back. And you can audit, I mean, you could run CDK synth and then audit the CloudFormation and test against certain things. But if you are changing stuff, right? Then you have to understand not only the CDK but also the CloudFormation that it actually generates. But in terms of solving problems, some of the things that the CDK does really, really well, and this is something where I've always had this issue with just trying to use raw CloudFormation or Serverless Framework or SAM or any of these things is the fact that there's a lot of boilerplate that you often have to do.There's ways that companies want to do something specifically. I basically probably always need 1,400 lines of CloudFormation. And for every project I do, it's probably close to the same, and then add a little bit more to actually make it adaptive for my product. And so one thing that I love about the CDK is constructs. And I love this idea of being able to package these best practices for your company or these compliance requirements, excuse me, compliance requirements for your company, whatever it is, be able to package these and just hand them to developers. And so I'm just curious on your thoughts on that because that seems like a really good move in the right direction, but without the deterministic builds, without some of these other problems that you talked about, is there another solution to that that would be more declarative?Ben: Yeah. In theory, if the CDK was able to produce an artifact that represented all of the non-deterministic dependencies that it had, right? That allowed you to then store that artifacts as you'd come back and put that into the program and say, "I'm going to get out the same thing," but because the CDK doesn't control upstream of it, the code that the developers are writing, there isn't a way to do that. Right? So on the abstraction front, the constructs are super useful, right? CloudFormation now has modules which allow you to say, "Here's a template and I'm going to represent this as a CloudFormation type itself," right? So instead of saying that I need X different things, I'm going to say, "I packaged that all up here. It is as a type."Now, currently, modules can only be playing CloudFormation templates and there's a lot of constraints in what you can express inside a CloudFormation template. And I think the answer for me is ... What I want to see is more richness in the CloudFormation language, right? One of the things that people do in the CDK that's really helpful is say, "I need a copy of this in every AZ."Jeremy: Right.Ben: Right? There's so much boilerplate in server-based things. And CloudFormation can't do that, right? But if you imagine that it had a map function that allowed you to say, "For every AZ, stamp me out a copy of this little bit." And then that the CDK constructs allowed to translate. Instead of it doing all this generation only down to the L one piece, instead being able to say, "I'm going to translate this into more rich CloudFormation templates so that the CloudFormation template was as advanced as possible."Right? Then it could do things like say, "Oh, I know we need to do this in every AZ, I'm going to use this map function in the CloudFormation template rather than just stamping it out." Right? And so I think that's possible. Now, modules should also be able to be defined as CDK programs. Right? You should be able to register a construct as a CloudFormation tag.Jeremy: It would be pretty cool.Ben: There's no reason you shouldn't be able to. Yeah. Because I think the declarative versus imperative thing is, again, not the most important piece, it's how do we move ... It's shifting right in this case, right? That how do you shift what's happening with the developer further into the process of deployment so that more of their context is present? And so one of the things that the CDK does that's hard to replicate is have non-local effects. And this is both convenient and I think of code smell often.So you can pass a bucket resource from another stack into a piece of code in your CDK program that's creating a different stack and you say, "Oh great, I've got this Lambda function, it needs permissions to that bucket. So add permissions." And it's possible for the CDK programs to either be adding the permissions onto the IAM role of that function, or non-locally adding to that bucket's resource policy, which is weird, right? That you can be creating a stack and the thing that you do to that stack or resource or whatever is not happening there, it's happening elsewhere. I don't think that's a great approach, but it's certainly convenient to be able to do it in a lot of situations.Now, that's not representable within a module. A module is a contained piece of functionality that can't touch anything else. So things like SAM where you can add events onto a function that can go and create ... You create the API events on different functions and then SAM aggregates them and creates an API gateway for you. Right? If AWS serverless function was a module, it couldn't do that because you'd have these in different places and you couldn't aggregate something between all of them and put them in the top-level thing, right?This is what CloudFormation macros enable, but they don't have a... There's no proper interface to them, right? They don't define, "This is what I'm doing. This is the kind of resources I can create." There's none of that that would help you understand them. So they're infinitely flexible, but then also maybe less principled for that reason. So I think there are ways to evolve, but it's investment in the CloudFormation language that allows us to shift that burden from being a flattening inside client-side code from the developer and shifting it to be able to be represented in the cloud.Jeremy: Right. Yeah. And I think from that standpoint too if we go back to the solving people's problems standpoint, that everything you explained there, they're loaded with nuances, it's loaded with gotchas, right? Like, "Oh, you can't do this, you can't do that." So that's just why I think the CDK is so popular because it's like you can do so much with it so quickly and it's very, very fast. And I think that trade-off, people are just willing to make it.Ben: Yes. And that's where they're willing to make it, do they fully understand the consequences of it? Then does AWS communicate those consequences well? Before I get into that question of, okay, you're a developer that's brand new to AWS and you've been tasked with standing up some Kubernetes cluster and you're like, "Great. I can use a CDK to do this." Something is malfunctioning. You're also tasked with the operations and something is malfunctioning. You go in through the Console and maybe figure out all the things that are out there are new to you because they're hidden inside L3 constructs, right?You're two levels down from where you were defining what you want, and then you find out what's wrong and you have no idea how to turn that into a change in your CDK program. So instead of going back and doing the thing that infrastructure as code is for, which is tweaking your program to go fix the problem, you go and you tweak it in the Console ...Jeremy: Right. Which you should never do.Ben: ... and you fix it that way. Right. Well, and that's the thing that I struggle with, with the CDK is how does the CDK help the developer who's in that situation? And I don't think they have a good story around that. Now, I don't know. I haven't talked with enough junior developers who are using the CDK about how often they get into that situation. Right? But I always say client-side code is not a replacement for a managed service because when it's client-side code, you still own the result.Jeremy: Right.Ben: If a particular CDK construct was a managed service in AWS, then all of the resources that would be created underneath AWS's problem to make work. And the interface that the developer has is the only level of ownership that they have. Fargate is this. Because you could do all the things that Fargate does with a CDK construct, right? Set up EC2, do all the things, and represent it as something that looks like Fargate in your CDK program. But every time your EC2 fleet is unhealthy that's your problem. With Fargate, that's AWS's problem. If we didn't have Fargate, that's essentially what CDK would be trying to do for ECS.And I think we all recognize that Fargate is very necessary and helpful in that case, right? And I just want that for all the things, right? Whenever I have an abstraction, if it's an abstraction that I understand, then I should have a way of zooming into it while not having to switch languages, right? So that's where you shouldn't dump me out the CloudFormation to understand what you're doing. You should help me understand the low-level things in the same language. And if it's not something that I need to understand, it should be a managed service. It shouldn't be a bunch of stuff that I still own that I haven't looked at.Jeremy: Makes sense. Got a question, Rebecca? Because I was waiting for you to jump in.Rebecca: No, but I was going to make a joke, but then the joke passed, and then I was like, "But should I still make it?" I was going to be like, "Yeah, but does the CDK let you test in production?" But that was a 32nd ago joke and then I was really wrestling with whether or not I should tell it, but I told it anyway, hopefully, someone gets a laugh.Ben: Yeah. I mean, there's the thing that Charity Majors says, right? Which is that everybody tests in production. Some people are lucky enough to have a development environment in production. No, sorry. I said that the wrong way. It's everybody has a test environment. Some people are lucky enough that it's not in production.Rebecca: Yeah. Swap that. Reverse it. Yeah.Ben: Yeah.Jeremy: All right. So speaking of talking to developers and getting feedback from them, so I actually put a question out on Twitter a couple of weeks ago and got a lot of really interesting reactions. And essentially I asked, "What do you love or hate about infrastructure as code?" And there were a lot of really interesting things here. I don't know, maybe it might be fun to go through a couple of these and get your thoughts on them. So this is probably not a great one to start with, but I thought it was interesting because this I think represents the frustration that a lot of us feel. And it was basically that they love that automation minimizes future work, right? But they hate that it makes life harder over time. And that pretty much every approach to infrastructure in, sorry, yeah, infrastructure in code at the present is flawed, right? So really there are no good solutions right now.Ben: Yeah. CloudFormation is still a pain to learn and deal with. If you're operating in certain IDEs, you can get tab completion.Jeremy: Right.Ben: If you go to CDK you get tab completion, which is, I think probably most of the value that developers want out of it and then the abstraction, and then all the other fancy things it does like pipelines, which again, should be a managed service. I do think that person is absolutely right to complain about how difficult it is. That there are many ways that it could be better. One of the things that I think about when I'm using tools is it's not inherently bad for a tool to have some friction to use it.Jeremy: Right.Ben: And this goes to another infrastructure as code tool that goes even further than the CDK and says, "You can define your Lambda code in line with your infrastructure definition." So this is fine with me. And there's some other ... I think Punchcard also lets you do some of this. Basically extracts out the bits of your code that you say, "This is a custom thing that glues together two things I'm defining in here and I'll make that a Lambda function for you." And for me, that is too little friction to defining a Lambda function.Because when I define a Lambda function, just going back to that bringing in ownership, every time I add a Lambda function, that's something that I own, that's something that I have to maintain, that I'm responsible for, that can go wrong. So if I'm thinking about, "Well, I could have API Gateway direct into DynamoDB, but it'd be nice if I could change some of these fields. And so I'm just going to drop in a little sprinkle of code, three lines of code in between here to do some transformation that I want." That is all of sudden an entire Lambda function you've brought into your infrastructure.Jeremy: Right. That's a good point.Ben: And so I want a little bit of friction to do that, to make me think about it, to make me say, "Oh, yeah, downstream of this decision that I am making, there are consequences that I would not otherwise think about if I'm just trying to accomplish the problem," right? Because I think developers, humans, in general, tend to be a bit shortsighted when you have a goal especially, and you're being pressured to complete that goal and you're like, "Okay, well I can complete it." The consequences for later are always a secondary concern.And so you can change your incentives in that moment to say, "Okay, well, this is going to guide me to say, "Ah, I don't really need this Lambda function in here. Then I'm better off in the long term while accomplishing that goal in the short term." So I do think that there is a place for tools making things difficult. That's not to say that the amount of difficult that infrastructure as code is today is at all reasonable, but I do think it's worth thinking about, right?I'd rather take on the pain of creating an ASL definition by hand for express workflow than the easier thing of writing Lambda code. Because I know the long-term consequences of that. Now, if that could be flipped where it was harder to write something that took more ownership, it'd be just easy to do, right? You'd always do the right thing. But I think it's always worth saying, "Can I do the harder thing now to pay off to pay off later?"Jeremy: And I always call those shortcuts "tomorrow-Jeremy's" problem. That's how I like to look at those.Ben: Yeah. Yes.Jeremy: And the funny thing about that too is I remember right when EventBridge came out and there was no CloudFormation support for a long time, which was super frustrating. But Serverless Framework, for example, implemented a custom resource in order to do that. And I remember looking at a clean stack and being like, "Why are there two Lambda functions there that I have no idea?" I'm like, "I didn't publish ..." I honestly thought my account was compromised that somebody had published a Lambda function in there because I'm like, "I didn't do that." And then it took me a while to realize, I'm like, "Oh, this is what this is." But if it is that easy to just create little transform functions here and there, I can imagine there being thousands of those in your account without anybody knowing that they even exist.Ben: Now, don't get me wrong. I would love to have the ability to drop in little transforms that did not involve Lambda functions. So in other words, I mean, the thing that VTL does for API Gateway, REST APIs but without it being VTL and being ... Because that's hard and then also restricted in what you can do, right? It's not, "Oh, I can drop in arbitrary code in here." But enough to say, "Oh, I want to flip ... These fields should go from a key-value mapping to a list of key-value, right? In the way that it addresses inconsistent with how tags are defined across services, those kinds of things. Right? And you could drop that in any service, but once you've defined it, there's no maintenance for you, right?You're writing JavaScript. It's not actually a JavaScript engine underneath or something. It's just getting translated into some big multi-tenant fancy thing. And I have a hypothesis that that should be possible. You should be able to do it where you could even do it in the parsing of JSON, being able to do transforms without ever having to have the whole object in memory. And if we could get that then, "Oh, sure. Now I have sprinkled all over the place all of these little transforms." Now there's a little bit of overhead if the transform is defined correctly or not, right? But once it is, then it just works. And having all those little transforms everywhere is then fine, right? And that incentive to make it harder it doesn't need to be there because it's not bringing ownership with it.Rebecca: Yeah. It's almost like taking the idea of tomorrow-Jeremy's problem and actually switching it to say tomorrow-Jeremy's celebration where tomorrow-Jeremy gets to look back at past-Jeremy and be like, "Nice. Thank you for making that decision past-Jeremy." Because I think we often do look at it in terms of tomorrow-Jeremy will think of this, we'll solve this problem rather than how do we approach it by saying, how do I make tomorrow-Jeremy thankful for it today-Jeremy? And that's a simple language, linguistic switch, but a hard switch to actually make decisions based on.Ben: Yeah. I don't think tomorrow-Ben is ever thankful for today-Ben. I think it's tomorrow-Ben is thankful for yesterday-Ben setting up the incentives correctly so that today-Ben will do the right thing for tomorrow-Ben. Right? When I think about people, I think it's easier to convince people to accept a change in their incentives than to convince them to fight against their incentives sustainably.Jeremy: Right. And I think developers and I'm guilty of this too, I mean, we make decisions based off of expediency. We want to get things done fast. And when you get stuck on that problem you're like, "You know what? I'm not going to figure it out. I'm just going to write a loop or I'm going to do whatever I can do just to make it work." Another if statement here, "Isn't going to hurt anybody." All right. So let's move to ... Sorry, go ahead.Ben: We shouldn't feel bad about that.Jeremy: You're right.Ben: I was going to say, we shouldn't feel bad about that. That's where I don't want tomorrow-Ben to have to be thankful for today-Ben, because that's the implication there is that today-Ben is fighting against his incentives to do good things for tomorrow-Ben. And if I don't need to have to get to that point where just the right path is the easiest path, right? Which means putting friction in the right places than today-Ben ... It's never a question of whether today-Ben is doing something that's worth being thankful for. It's just doing the job, right?Jeremy: Right. No, that makes sense. All right. I got another question here, I think falls under the category of service discovery, which I know is another topic that you love. So this person said, "I love IaC, but hate the fuzzy boundaries where certain software awkwardly fall. So like Istio and Prometheus and cert-manager. That they can be considered part of the infrastructure, but then it's awkward to deploy them when something like Terraform due to circular dependencies relating to K8s and things like that."So, I mean, I know that we don't have to get into the actual details of that, but I think that is an important aspect of infrastructure as code where best practices sometimes are deploy a stack that has your permanent resources and then deploy a stack that maybe has your more femoral or the ones that are going to be changing, the more mutable ones, maybe your Lambda functions and some of those sort of things. If you're using Terraform or you're using some of these other services as well, you do have that really awkward mix where you're trying to use outputs from one stack into another stack and trying to do all that. And really, I mean, there are some good tools that help with it, but I mean just overall thoughts on that.Ben: Well, we certainly need to demand better of AWS services when they design new things that they need to be designed so that infrastructure as code will work. So this is the S3 bucket notification problem. A very long time ago, S3 decided that they were going to put bucket notifications as part of the S3 bucket. Well, CloudFormation at that point decided that they were going to put bucket notifications as part of the bucket resource. And S3 decided that they were going to check permissions when the notification configuration is defined so that you have to have the permissions before you create the configuration.This creates a circular dependency when you're hooking it up to anything in CloudFormation because the dependency depends on the resource policy on an SNS topic, and SQS queue or a Lambda function depends on the bucket name if you're letting CloudFormation name the bucket, which is the best practice. Then bucket name has to exist, which means the resource has to have been created. But the notification depends on the thing that's notifying, which doesn't have the names and the resource policy doesn't exist so it all fails. And this is solved in a couple of different ways. One of which is name your bucket explicitly, again, not a good practice. Another is what SAM does, which says, "The Lambda function will say I will allow all S3 buckets to invoke me."So it has a star permission in it's resource policy. So then the notification will work. None of which is good or there's custom resources that get created, right? Now, if those resources have been designed with infrastructure as code as part of the process, then it would have been obvious, "Oh, you end up with a circular pendency. We need to split out bucket notifications as a separate resource." And not enough teams are doing this. Often they're constrained by the API that they develop first ...Jeremy: That's a good point.Ben: ... they come up with the API, which often makes sense for a Console experience that they desire. So this is where API Gateway has this whole thing where you create all the routes and the resources and the methods and everything, right? And then you say, "Great, deploy." And in the Console you only need one mutable working copy of that at a time, but it means that you can't create two deployments or update two stages in parallel through infrastructure as code and API Gateway because they both talk to this mutable working copy state and would overwrite each other.And if infrastructure as code had been on their list would have been, "Oh, if you have a definition of your API, you should be able to go straight to the deployment," right? And so trying to push that upstream, which to me is more important than infrastructure as code support at launch, but people are often like, "Oh, I want CloudFormation support at launch." But that often means that they get no feedback from customers on the design and therefore make it bad. KMS asymmetric keys should have been a different resource type so that you can easily tell which key types are in your template.Jeremy: Good point. Yeah.Ben: Right? So that you can use things like CloudFormation Guard more easily on those. Sure, you can control the properties or whatever, but you should be able to think in terms of, "I have a symmetric key or an asymmetric key in here." And they're treated completely separately because you use them completely differently, right? They don't get used to the same place.Jeremy: Yeah. And it's funny that you mentioned the lacking support at launch because that was another complaint. That was quite prevalent in this thread here, was people complaining that they don't get that CloudFormation support right away. But I think you made a very good point where they do build the APIs first. And that's another thing. I don't know which question asked me or which one of these mentioned it, but there was a lot of anger over the fact that you go to the API docs or you go to the docs for AWS and it focuses on the Console and it focuses on the CLI and then it gives you the API stuff and very little mention of CloudFormation at all. And usually, you have to go to a whole separate set of docs to find the CloudFormation. And it really doesn't tie all the concepts together, right? So you get just a block of JSON or of YAML and you're like, "Am I supposed to know what everything does here?"Ben: Yeah. I assume that's data-driven. Right? And we exist in this bubble where everybody loves infrastructure as code.Jeremy: True.Ben: And that AWS has many more customers who set things up using Console, people who learn by doing it first through the Console. I assume that's true, if it's not, then the AWS has somehow gotten on the extremely wrong track. But I imagine that's how they find that they get the right engagement. Now maybe the CDK will change some of this, right? Maybe the amount of interest that is generating, we'll get it to the point where blogs get written with CDK programs being written there. I think that presents different problems about what that CDK program might hide from when you're learning about a service. But yeah, it's definitely not ... I wrote a blog for AWS and my first draft had it as CloudFormation and then we changed it to the Console. Right? And ...Jeremy: That must have hurt. Did you die a little inside when that happened?Ben: I mean, no, because they're definitely our users, right? That's the way in which they interact with data, with us and they should be able to learn from that, their company, right? Because again, developers are often not fully in control of this process.Jeremy: Right. That's a good point.Ben: And so they may not be able to say, "I want to update this through CloudFormation," right? Either because their organization says it or just because their team doesn't work that way. And I think AWS gets requests to prevent people from using the Console, but also to force people to use the Console. I know that at least one of them is possible in IAM. I don't remember which, because I've never encountered it, but I think it's possible to make people use the Console. I'm not sure, but I know that there are companies who want both, right? There are companies who say, "We don't want to let people use the API. We want to force them to use the Console." There are companies who say, "We don't want people using the Console at all. We want to force them to use the APIs."Jeremy: Interesting.Ben: Yeah. There's a lot of AWS customers, right? And there's every possible variety of organization and AWS should be serving all of them, right? They're all customers. And certainly, I want AWS to be leading the ones that are earlier in their cloud journey and on the serverless ladder to getting further but you can't leave them behind, I think it's important.Jeremy: So that people argument and those different levels and coming in at a different, I guess, level or comfortability with APIs versus infrastructure as code and so forth. There was another question or another comment on this that said, "I love the idea of committing everything that makes my solution to text and resurrect an entire solution out of nothing other than an account key. Loved the ability to compare versions and unit tests, every bit of my solution, and not having to remember that one weird setting if you're using the Console. But hate that it makes some people believe that any coder is now an infrastructure wizard."And I think this is a good point, right? And I don't 100% agree with it, but I think it's a good point that it basically ... Back to your point about creating these little transformations in Pulumi, you could do a lot of damage, I mean, good or bad, right? When you are using these tools. What are your thoughts on that? I mean, is this something where ... And again, the CDK makes it so easy for people to write these constructs pretty quickly and spin up tons of infrastructure without a lot of guard rails to protect them.Ben: So I think if we tweak the statement slightly, I think there's truth there, which isn't about the self-perception but about what they need to be. Right? That I think this is more about serverless than about infrastructure as code. Infrastructure as code is just saying that you can define it. Right? I think it's more about the resources that are in a particular definition that require that. My former colleague, Aaron Camera says, "Serverless means every developer is an architect" because you're not in that situation where the code you write goes onto something, you write the whole thing. Right?And so you do need to have those ... You do need to be an infrastructure wizard whether you're given the tools to do that and the education to do that, right? Not always, like if you're lucky. And the self-perception is again an even different thing, right? Especially if coders think that there's nothing to be learned ... If programmers, software developers, think that there's nothing to be learned from the folks who traditionally define the infrastructure, which is Ops, right? They think, "Those people have nothing to teach me because now I can do all the things that they did." Well, you can create the things that they created and it does not mean that you're as good at it ...Jeremy: Or responsible for monitoring it too. Right.Ben: ... and have the ... Right. The monitoring, the experience of saying these are the things that will come back to bite you that are obvious, right? This is how much ownership you're getting into. There's very much a long-standing problem there of devaluing Ops as a function and as a career. And for my money when I look at serverless, I think serverless is also making the software development easier because there's so much less software you need to write. You need to write less software that deals with the hard parts of these architectures, the scaling, the distributed computing problems.You still have this, your big computing problems, but you're considering them functionally rather than coding things that address them, right? And so I see a lot of operations folks who come into serverless learn or learn a new programming language or just upscale, right? They're writing Python scripts to control stuff and then they learn more about Python to be able to do software development in it. And then they bring all of that Ops experience and expertise into it and look at something and say, "Oh, I'd much rather have step functions here than something where I'm running code for it because I know how much my script break and those kinds of things when an API changes or ... I have to update it or whatever it is."And I think that's something that Tom McLaughlin talks about having come from an outside ground into serverless. And so I think there's definitely a challenge there in both directions, right? That Ops needs to learn more about software development to be more engaged in that process. Software development does need to learn much more about infrastructure and is also at this risk of approaching it from, "I know the syntax, but not the semantics, sort of thing." Right? We can create ...Jeremy: Just because I can doesn't mean I should.Ben: ... an infrastructure. Yeah.Rebecca: So Ben, as we're looping around this conversation and coming back to this idea that software is people and that really software should enable you to focus on the things that do matter. I'm wondering if you can perhaps think of, as pristine as possible, an example of when you saw this working, maybe it was while you've been at iRobot or a project that you worked on your own outside of that, but this moment where you saw software really working as it should, and that how it enabled you or your team to focus on the things that matter. If there's a concrete example that you can give when you see it working really well and what that looks like.Ben: Yeah. I mean, iRobot is a great example of this having been the company without need for software that scaled to consumer electronics volumes, right? Roomba volumes. And needing to build a IOT cloud application to run connected Roombas and being able to do that without having to gain that expertise. So without having to build a team that could deal with auto-scaling fleets of servers, all of those things was able to build up completely serverlessly. And so skip an entire level of organizational expertise, because that's just not necessary to accomplish those tasks anymore.Rebecca: It sounds quite nice.Ben: It's really great.Jeremy: Well, I have one more question here that I think could probably end up ... We could talk about for another hour. So I will only throw it out there and maybe you can give me a quick answer on this, but I actually had another Twitter thread on this not too long ago that addressed this very, very problem. And this is the idea of the feedback cycle on these infrastructure as code tools where oftentimes to deploy infrastructure changes, I mean, it just takes time. In many cases things can run in parallel, but as you said, there's race conditions and things like that, that sometimes things have to be ... They just have to be synchronous. So is this something where there are ways where you see in the future these mutations to your infrastructure or things like that potentially happening faster to get a better feedback cycle, or do you think that's just something that we're going to have to deal with for a while?Ben: Yeah, I think it's definitely a very extensive topic. I think there's a few things. One is that the deployment cycle needs to get shortened. And part of that I think is splitting dev deployments from prod deployments. In prod it's okay for it to take 30 seconds, right? Or a minute or however long because that's at the end of a CI/CD pipeline, right? There's other things that are happening as part of that. Now, you don't want that to be hours or whatever it is. Right? But it's okay for that to be proper and to fully manage exactly what's going on in a principled manner.When you're doing for development, it would be okay to, for example, change the Lambda code without going through CloudFormation to change the Lambda code, right? And this is what an architect does, is there's a notion of a dirty deploy which just packages up. Now, if your resource graph has changed, you do need to deploy again. Right? But if the only thing that's changing is your code, sure, you can go and say, "Update function code," on that Lambda directly and that's faster.But calling it a dirty deploy is I think important because that is not something that you want to do in prod, right? You don't want there to be drift between what the infrastructure as code service understands, but then you go further than that and imagine there's no reason that you actually have to do this whole zip file process. You could be R sinking the code directly, or you could be operating over SSH on the code remotely, right? There's many different ways in which the loop from I have a change in my Lambda code to that Lambda having that change could be even shorter than that, right?And for me, that's what it's really about. I don't think that local mocking is the answer. You and Brian Rue were talking about this recently. I mean, I agree with both of you. So I think about it as I want unit tests of my business logic, but my business logic doesn't deal with AWS services. So I want to unit test something that says, "Okay, I'm performing this change in something and that's entirely within my custom code." Right? It's not touching other services. It doesn't mean that I actually need adapters, right? I could be dealing with the native formats that I'm getting back from a given service, but I'm not actually making calls out of the code. I'm mocking out, "Well, here's what the response would look like."And so I think that's definitely necessary in the unit testing sense of saying, "Is my business logic correct? I can do that locally. But then is the wiring all correct?" Is something that should only happen in the cloud. There's no reason to mock API gateway into Lambda locally in my mind. You should just be dealing with the Lambda side of it in your local unit tests rather than trying to set up this multiple thing. Another part of the story is, okay, so these deploys have to happen faster, right? And then how do we help set up those end-to-end test and give you observability into it? Right? X-Ray helps, but until X-Ray can sort through all the services that you might use in the serverless architecture, can deal with how does it work in my Lambda function when it's batching from Kinesis or SQS into my function?So multiple traces are now being handled by one invocation, right? These are problems that aren't solved yet. Until we get that kind of inspection, it's going to be hard for us to feel as good about cloud development. And again, this is where I feel sometimes there's more friction there, but there's bigger payoff. Is one of those things where again, fighting against your incentives which is not the place that you want to be.Jeremy: I'm going to stop you before you disagree with me anymore. No, just kidding! So, Rebecca, you have any final thoughts or questions for Ben?Rebecca: No. I just want to say to both of you and to everyone listening that I hope your today self is celebrating your yesterday-self right now.Jeremy: Perfect. Well, Ben, thank you so much for joining us and being a guinea pig as we said on this new format that we are trying. Excellent guinea pig. Excellent.Rebecca: An excellent human too but also great guinea pig.Jeremy: Right. Right. Pretty much so. So if people want to find out more about you, read some of the stuff you're doing and working on, how do they do that?Ben: I'm on Twitter. That's the primary place. I'm on LinkedIn, I don't post much there. And then I write articles that show up on Medium.Rebecca: And just so everyone knows your Twitter handle I'll say it out loud too. It's @ben11kehoe, K-E-H-O-E, ben11kehoe.Jeremy: Right. Perfect. All right. Well, we will put all that in the show notes and hopefully people will like this new format. And again, we'd love your feedback on this, things that you'd like us to do in the future, any ideas you have. And of course, make sure you reach out to Ben. He's an amazing resource for serverless. So again, thank you for everything you do, and thank you for being on the show.Ben: Yeah. Thanks so much for having me. This was great.Rebecca: Good to see you. Thank you.

Show notes:Links:Threads.comBlueyVogmaskTwistIt’s a Southern ThingIf I had a front porchFull transcript:Josh:How y'all doing?Ben:I'm doing.Starr:Yeah, about the same.Ben:I've been riding my scooter to work all week.Starr:Oh, how's that?Ben:It's a lot of fun. Got a little electric kick scooter and top speed about 25 miles per hour. I was concerned about it being able to get up the hill that I have to go back up on my way home. It does drag a bit on that hill. I only got a single motor. Guess I should have gone with the dual motor. Otherwise it's fun. It's nice to be out in nature, I guess, air quotes, because you're still on the road and you're still a victim of cars and stuff. Being able to see the sun coming up over the hills and down to the valley and while you're just feeling the wind on your face, it's all good.Josh:It sounds nice.Ben:Yeah.Starr:Yeah, sounds awesome. I don't know. It seems terrifying to me, but I'm sure it's a lot of fun.Ben:It helped that I have done a lot of bike riding on roads for the past several years, so I'm already comfortable with the idea of mixing it up with cars and weaving in and out of traffic and realizing that people aren't going to see me and things like that. I think if I had just gone from driving a car straight to riding a scooter in the bike lane, that would be a little more terrifying.Starr:Yeah, that makes sense.Josh:Next you're going to have to upgrade to one of the electric skateboards or a Onewheel or something, just remove the handle bars.Ben:Right, right, right. Get one of those Onewheel things.Josh:This is leading up to-Ben:Totally.Starr:We're just working up to hoverboards. I mean I commute to my backyard office, so maybe I should get a zip-line or something from the main house.Ben:I like that, yeah.Starr:... then I could be extreme.Josh:We want a zip-line at our place out into the forest.Starr:That would be fun.Ben:You could do a zip-line from your deck to the sandbox, send the kids out to play.Josh:The kids would love it. Well, I was thinking more for myself though. Screw the kids. They don't need a zip-line.Starr:There you go. That's actually not a bad idea. We're going to get-Josh:That would be cool though.Starr:... a deck in the fall.Josh:Oh, nice.Starr:I had thought it would be fun to put a fireman pole on one side or something so kids could slide down it. It's raised up a little bit but not that much. It's like a kid's sliding size.Ben:That would be totally awesome. That would-Josh:We have been loving our new deck that we have had for a month and a half or something now. It's a new deck. If you have a really old, rickety deck, a new one is a big upgrade. Also ours is a little bit larger, too, so it's like a bigger house almost.Starr:Oh, that's great. We don't even have a deck it's just like a little stairway.Josh:I think you're going to like it, Starr.Starr:I think so, too. I know, deck life. It's going to be covered. I was just like-Josh:It's just the small things.Starr:I know. All I want is to be able to go out on a nice evening or something and sit and drink a cup of tea and be outside.Ben:And think about all-Josh:I was going to say, where do you drink the sweet tea in the summer if you don't have a front porch?Starr:Yeah, that's the main problem with houses up here in the Northwest is there's not real front porches. We have one that's like a weird nod at a front porch. It's like somebody maybe had seen a front porch once when they were... They were like, "Oh, maybe I'll try and do that from memory," without really knowing what it's supposed to be like.Josh:Some of the ones in Portland have them, but they're boxed in usually, and they're the older houses-Josh:... like the old Craftsmans or whatever.Starr:The stately grand dames.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Ben:Well, here in Kirkland we're destroying all those old houses and putting in-Starr:Thank God.Ben:... townhouses.Josh:Hell, yeah.Ben:I drove by one this morning. This morning was the first morning since I got my scooter that I actually didn't ride the scooter because it was raining and the ground was wet. I was like, "Ah, I don't want to deal with that this morning." So I just drove. I drove past this house that... Well, yesterday it was a house. Today, it's a pile of sticks because they sold the lot, and they're going to split it into probably, I don't know, four lots and put in some townhouses. It's always a sad thing, but people got to have a place to live.Starr:Yeah, it's a shame. They tore down a house on my block, too, except it was a condemned house. It looked like a gingerbread fairy house that you'd find on just a random stroll in the woods where you'd go inside and you'd find just a delicious meal laid out on the table just waiting for you. So I'm a little sad it's gone just for, I guess, the storytelling aspects, the mythology of it. I guess it's probably best not to just have a condemned structure hanging out.Josh:I still do feel like Ida's is missing out with your telling of that story. I feel a little sad for you all.Starr:I know. I know.Ben:You're totally missing the threat possibility there. Like, "Don't misbehave or I'll send you over to the gingerbread house."Starr:Oh my god, yeah. Yeah, lots of great ways to traumatize my child.Ben:Speaking of traumatizing children, I was going through Twitter the other day, and the Washington State Department of Health had a tweet. I don't remember what the tweet was, but they had a GIF embedded in it. It was Stimpy from Ren & Stimpy as a scene from the show. I was like, "That's from the Department of Health? My generation is now in charge."Starr:With the Twitter account at least.Ben:We're now putting in-Josh:Yeah, exactly.Ben:That was the weirdest... It's like, "I'm an adult." That was a weird, weird experience.Josh:It is kind of strange when the people in charge start looking more and more like you until you realize they're just like-Ben:They're just little kids, just like I am.Josh:Then you wonder why the hell they're in charge.Starr:I'm getting like Paul Ryan listening to a Rage Against the Machine vibe from this.Josh:That's what I'd be playing if I was in charge of the Department of Health's-Starr:There we go.Josh:... Twitter account.Starr:I think this week has all been a little bit... I don't know. We're all maybe a little bit having a hard time focusing. I know I have a little bit just. It seems like that happens every spring as soon as the weather gets nice and it stops being nice, then it gets nice and it stops being nice. You're waiting by the door with your kayak. You just got to get the jump on it before everybody else gets to the lake.Josh:Yeah, I think that's a big part of it. Also allergies have been kicking in lately.Starr:Oh my god, yeah.Josh:I was really on top of it this year, but then I ran out of my Zyrtec or whatever. It was on the list to replenish the supply or whatever, but I procrastinated and missed a few days. That's a huge mistake.Starr:Oh, yeah.Josh:That was this week. Now I switched to Claritin, so we'll see how... That's the big news of my week.Starr:Oh my gosh. I'm getting vaccinated later today, my second dose.Josh:Nice.Starr:Yeah.Josh:Congrats.Starr:I think I'm still going to keep wearing the KN95 respirators outside, though, just for the allergies.Josh:It's probably a good call.Ben:I was helping a neighbor with some yard work and doing a bunch of weeding and had the weed whacker out, and there's just dirt flying everywhere. I'm like, "Man, I should really wear a mask." Like, how ironic. I've got like, I don't know, a thousand masks in my house, and I'm not wearing one as I'm doing all this dusty stuff.Josh:That's a good thing to do.Starr:Oh, this is reminding me, I need to stock up before fire season.Ben:A few years ago when we had the really bad fire season, we got some Vogmasks. This was before the world knew that you were supposed to wear masks. Vogmasks are fantastic. They're a fabric mask that have the filtering stuff on the inside and highly recommend. I'll put a link in the show notes.Starr:Cool.Ben:Good stuff. When the pandemic hit, of course, they were out of stock immediately because everybody and their brother wanted one, but they've been back in stock. They're nice masks. They're really nice.Starr:Well, one thing that we have been doing is casually just checking out alternatives to Basecamp for our internal company's message board. I don't know. I feel like we're just perusing the alternatives. Honestly, it's been a little bit difficult finding just a system out there that's just a simple thread and message board without a million complex adjustments for running a forum that has thousands of people. Somebody on Twitter yesterday recommended Threads. I don't know. I think we're currently evaluating that one but no decisions yet.Josh:Is that like Twitter threads? You just-Starr:Oh, yeah, just Twitter threads.Josh:We do all of our communicating but just public threads.Starr:No, we're just going to use Twitter stories. We're just going to take some pics of ourselves in different-Josh:If we're trying to go to the opposite direction of Basecamp, we could just... Well, I guess this is like Basecamp, just do all of our communication via thought leadership.Starr:There you go.Ben:What if we did all of internal communication via TikTok?Starr:Okay, I'm getting this. I'm on board with this. We're just going to be influencers. Whoever's the most influential is going to-Josh:You know what? If our employees don't like it, too bad. You're getting a Twitter account, and it's getting verified.Starr:Yeah, they can interpret our really random TikTok video and try and figure out what it means. That's how they'll discover our disapproval.Ben:On the Basecamp thing, though, it was interesting as I was looking at it this week and realizing that the only thing that we use in Basecamp is messages along with the files. We sometimes attach files to our messages.Josh:Or email forwards.Ben:Yeah, occasionally we do an email forward. But we don't-Starr:Usually we do calendars, but we also have Google calendar.Ben:And Slack.Josh:And Notion.Ben:And notion. So we don't do to-dos. We don't do hill charts. We don't really use the project management side of the project management software that we're using. As I was looking at alternatives this week, I looked at monday.com and ClickUp and, I don't know, a few different ones. They're all these project management things. It's like, well, we don't really manage projects. We do that via chat or via a Zoom call every once in a while or via Notion. We don't use a project management tool for that. So it's like, yeah, all we really need are threads, conversations.Starr:It's the sort of thing where you could just do it in email, but it's nice having that archival ability, the ability to go back and check things out and not have it dependent on, "Oh, maybe I deleted that message by accident or whatever."Josh:Well, you could do it in Slack, but then you end up with the weird history aspect of it, and you'd have to have some sort of... You have to create a channel for it with the rules so it doesn't end up being just a chat. You have to say, "The rule of this channel is every message is a thread or a post or whatever."Starr:You kind of have to do it manually.Josh:Yeah.Ben:I did look at Twist. That was pretty cool, pretty close, but it also has chat. It's like, "well, I don't want a second chat since we already use Slack." We're not going to ditch Slack.Starr:Basecamp has chat, too.Ben:Right, and we don't use that. I guess you could use Twist. Twist is pretty nice.Starr:I think we need threaded messages, we need everything to be archived, and we need some way to see what people have been writing on lately, see what the latest activity is. That's basically it. I don't even use notifications. I get them, but I don't really... Usually by the time I see them... That's not my process. I don't look at my notifications and be like, "Oh, I'd better check this out." I check out the messages at a set set time basically.Ben:Then, like you said, the forum software, like the discourse, and it's just way, way too much. It's like, "Yeah, we get it." We just need a message board. We don't need all the dials and knobs. It's totally a dials and knobs application. I saw it in the settings, and I was like, "Whoa, okay. I'm just going to back away slowly."Starr:It could be fun, I don't know, if we want to be passive aggressive, we could shadow ban people. We could just do all sorts of fun things.Ben:But I suppose we don't have the hard requirements supporting BBCode.Starr:Isn't that a negative requirement? Supporting BBCode, I think that's a detriment. But we do have a chance to maybe, I don't know, maybe... One thing that I've always really... This really annoyed me about Basecamp is that it doesn't support Markdown, and everything we use supports Markdown, so everything I have is in Markdown. So if I write something in my personal notes, it's going to be in Markdown. If I want to transfer that to Basecamp, I got to manually format it, which is just like, "What am I? What is this? Who do you think I am?"Josh:That's my number one gripe with Basecamp, like the editor, is just a WYSIWYG editor that... I constantly... even just when I'm writing and I want to make a list and I just type a dash like I normally... in most things these days, and it just doesn't do anything in Basecamp. Then I remember, "Oh, I have to get my mouse and click on the bullet." It's a huge hassle.Ben:I can imagine your quality of life being dramatically affected by that.Josh:Yeah.Starr:You know we're developers when we're complaining about things like that.Josh:This is why I'm wearing wrist braces.Starr:Or dual wrist braces.Ben:I totally get what you're saying. I want to be able to type star, space, stuff, stuff, stuff and I get a list. Yeah, totally.Starr:It looks like threads.com, it does support Markdown, which is nice. I don't know. I haven't really played around with it a ton. Some aspects of its design, I'm not super happy. I wish the column widths were a little wider and stuff, but also I don't like certain aspects of Basecamp's design. So it's kind of a toss up for me.Ben:I did an export of our Basecamp content, and I got to say their export is fantastic. They give you an HTML page that links to a bunch of other pages per topic or project or team, whatever they call it, and the files are there. It's really well done. So I think if anyone's looking for inspiration on doing exports in their app, they should totally look at Basecamp. They nailed it. It's actually usable. You get this zip file. You open it up and bam, you can just browse through all your stuff.Starr:That's pretty great. I guess I should declare, I think maybe I started this casual looking for alternatives just because I've seen a lot of stuff online about people are angry at Basecamp. It's like, I'm not really angry at them. Well, this isn't really the point. I'm sad and disappointed in them. But also a lot of the reason why I think they have had our business and they had my business, I've stored personal stuff in a personal Basecamp account, it's just because they're trustworthy. That feeling of trustworthiness has gone down a few pegs for me.Starr:Also, I just kind of felt gross logging in there. If you haven't been keeping up with this, part of the deal is they were making fun of people's names and stuff. I don't know. Are they making fun of my name? I've got a weird name. Are they going through my stuff making fun of it? I know they have access to pretty much everything that I put into Basecamp. I don't know. Even if they're not doing that now, are they going to do that in the future? Because it seems like they're going in that direction. I don't know. It seems like they're shutting down people trying to hold them internally accountable for that sort of thing. I don't know. It's just like a gross feeling. I'm just sad about the whole thing.Josh:I personally I kind of doubt that that's like... I got the feeling that the list was more of an artifact from the past, and it had stuck around for too long. I didn't get the feeling that they're condoning that sort of activity really, but I get what you're saying. Also for me, a big factor of it, it's not even just that I'm mad at them or something, they did lose 30% of their company, and they're supporting two products now, one of which is a major infrastructure product but basically is like email. So they have operation overhead and stuff. They did just lose 30% of their company including their, what, head of strategy but basically head of product. So I just wonder, where is the product going from here? It was already, I felt, a little bit stagnating. I don't know. I think they've been working on the next version of it is what I heard. I don't know. It just seems like there are questions about just the stability from that nature, too.Ben:I'm probably in a third place from you two and I probably care the least. I'm like, "Eh, it's a message board. They can make fun of my name." Okay. I had that happen when I was 10. People do that. It's like, "Oh, get on." I have a hard time getting up the energy to care, I guess.Starr:Don't mistake me. I'm not like up in arms about it. This is more like a passive viewing. It's like, "Oh, I got to go on Basecamp and check my things. Uh, I just feel kind of crummy about it." This is-Ben:It's one of those friction things in your life you just don't need. Yeah, absolutely.Starr:Yeah, yeah.Josh:Absolutely.Starr:I'm like, this is a message board. Like, should I be having to deal with this just to go check some messages? It's ridiculous.Josh:I think all of us are really just talking these are passing thoughts we have using the product in light of the drama of the past few weeks.Starr:If we end up staying on it, I'm not going to be super upset. I'll probably get over it. I don't know. It just seems like it might be nice to try something different especially if we can get that sweet Markdown.Ben:I've been surprised that there are so few products that are just about this one use case of the simple messages. I expected there to be tons of things to try and no.Starr:Of course, in our company Notion, there's now a design document-Ben:Of course.Starr:... for a simple-Josh:Because we're going to build our own.Ben:We're going to build our own, of course. What does any good tech team do when they're frustrated with the 20 solutions on the market? They build solution number 21.Starr:Of course.Ben:Maybe we'll build that. The code name for that project is Budgie. I named it Budgie because I went to do the Google search, I'm like, "What's a communicative type of animal? What's a social animal?" I can't remember the search I did, but the first thing that got turned up was like, the most social birds. I don't know. So there's this list of birds, and budgie was the number one bird. So I'm like, "Okay, cool." Then I was like, "Well, what kind of domains are available?" Because of course when you start a project, you have to buy the domain. Before you do anything else, you got to buy that domain. Surprisingly, and perhaps not surprisingly in retrospect, every variant of budgie is taken, of course, budgie.com but also budgie.app and budgieapp.com. I'm like, "Wow. How many...?" And they're all for sale. None of them are actual products. They're all parked, and they're for sale. I'm like, so a bunch of people have had this idea about what's a social animal. I guess budgies are really popular for pets, and so they're looking for the ad opportunities with people looking for, "How do I take care of my budgie?" Anyway, just kind of a diversion.Starr:That's interesting. The first thing that pops into mind when I heard that... I like the name. It's a cute name. There's this really good Australian kids' cartoon called Bluey, and there's an episode where they find a little budgie that's injured, and it dies. So the kids have to come to terms with that. I don't know. It's just like, "Little budgie died."Josh:Bluey is one of the best cartoons ever, by the way.Starr:Yeah, Bluey. Oh, I'm glad you like it, too.Josh:It's so good.Starr:It's super good. It's super good. Basically the whole cartoon is just these kids... They're dogs but they're kids. They're just making up games to play with each other. How it works is the kids watching the show see it and that makes them want to play that game, too. So it's just not dumb TV. It gets them doing stuff outside of the TV, which is kind of nice.Josh:That's a really good analysis of the show. I hadn't thought about that aspect of it, but come to think of it, my kids totally imitate them.Starr:Oh, yeah.Josh:Climbing all over us.Starr:I now have to play every game in that show, and I've got to know them by name and what the rules are.Josh:One of the things we like about it is just they really got the sibling dynamic down. It is like our kids to a tee. It's pretty funny. Now that I think about it, maybe it's like our kids have now become the characters in the show.Ben:It's a good thing I watch the Simpsons.Josh:Oh, no. Actually we do watch the Simpsons.Starr:Is the Simpsons still on?Josh:It's on Disney+.Starr:Oh my gosh.Ben:Yeah, it is still a thing.Josh:They're still making it, too, right?Ben:Mm-hmm (affirmative), yeah.Starr:Wow. I don't know. I don't even know about that.Josh:We don't watch much of the Simpsons with them yet, a three and four-year-old.Josh:I don't know if I'm quite ready for a couple little Bart and Lisas.Ben:You put that off as long as you can. Well, I actually did a little bit of work this week. I was working on something, I don't know what. I noticed one of the tests was running kind of long like it was just stuck. I don't usually watch tests. I don't usually run the tests actually. I just let our CICB run the tests. I don't even worry about it. But this morning for some reason, I don't know, I was working on something, and I happened to be running the tests. I noticed one of the tests was just stuck. Like, that's weird. So I did a little investigation.Ben:It turns out that a number of our tests do some domain name server resolution because, for webhooks, when someone puts in their webhook, we want to verify that the destination is not like a private thing. They're not trying to fetch our EC2 credentials and stuff like that. So it does some checks like, is this is a private IP address? Does this domain name actually resolve, blah, blah, blah? Also for our uptime checks. Obviously, people are putting in domains for that, too. It turns out that, I don't know, maybe it was my machine, maybe it was the internet being dumb, whatever, but the domain name resolution was what was holding up the test. This happens, as you can imagine, in a variety of ways in our tests. This one test that I was running, which was only, I don't know, seven or eight tests, it was taking a minute or two minutes to run. Then I fixed this so that it stopped doing the domain name resolution, and it took two seconds.Josh:Wow.Ben:So a slight improvement to our test suite there. A quality of life improvement.Josh:Did you benchmark overall? Because that's got to be a huge improvement if it's doing that everywhere.Ben:Well, it's not doing that everywhere. I did do a push, so I have to go and check and see what GitHub... see if it dropped that time.Josh:Well, it might have been whatever was wrong with your DNS resolution in the first place that was causing it to be extra slow. Would it be faster if DNS was fast?Ben:Yeah, it could have been. I actually did some tests on my laptop at the time. I'm like, "Is my DNS resolution slow?" No.Josh:So it's-Ben:The test... I don't know what the deal was.Josh:It was just resolving a bunch of actual URLs in the test.Ben:Mm-hmm (affirmative).Josh:Yeah, that's bad. So nice work. You reminded me that I did some work this week, too.Ben:OhJosh:Very important work, I must say. I added a yak to our Slack bot to where-Josh:... if you mention the word "yak" when you're interacting with the Slack bot now it will return... You should do it in Slack, just whatever Badger bot. Say Badger bot yak me, it-Starr:Okay, I'm doing it.Josh:Okay, do it.Starr:Oh, sorry. It was the wrong channel. Hold on.Josh:You got to do it in general, I think.Starr:Come on Badger bot. Oh my god. It's a little text space yak.Josh:Yeah.Starr:Awesome.Josh:This came about because earlier this week I was just passively mentioning in chat that I'm just yak shaving. My entire life is yak shaving. That just got us talking about, why don't we have some representation of that in our chat, in our Slack? Obviously, I had to stop everything I was doing and build that right away. Of course, there were some escaping issues that came up as a result of that, so obviously I had to deploy a few hot fixes.Ben:The whole episode amuses me. I love it. I would do exactly the same thing. But also what amuses me is that we already have, as part of Slack, GIPHY, and you could just dump a picture of a yak in there. But you're like, "No, that's good enough. I must have an ASCII yak.Josh:It's got to be an ASCII yak, yeah.Ben:This is great. I love technology.Josh:I kind of miss Hubot where it would just automatically... if you just mention it. Maybe I should change our Slack bot so that it does that. So if you say "yak," a wild yak appears. By the way, that's what the text at the bottom of the ASCII yak says, a wild yak appears. I just wish it would pop up if someone just mentions it in a chat, like if they're talking about it just because-Josh:It's listening to everything, right?Starr:That would be fine.Ben:We used to have Hubot, and every time you said "ship," it would show the ship-Josh:The ship, the squirrel. But I definitely would like... annoying at times, but overall I'd say it was worth it.Ben:Totally worth it.Starr:Yeah, definitely. I do remember sometimes where things were on fire, and it's just popping up funny GIFs, and it's like, "Not now. Not now Hubot, not now.Ben:Sit in the corner. Should have had that command. Like, "Go away for a while."Josh:Or just make it a separate... Maybe we should just make this a separate bot that you don't have to have any ops channel. Maybe this'll be our next product.Starr:Oh, there you go. It's like when you mention yak, it turns into an Oregon trail-type hunting scene, and you have to shoot the very slow pixel at it.Josh:Mm-hmm (affirmative). I do love this aspect of our business of being... I assume it's like a side effect of being small. I don't know. I'm sure large teams also do this, I didn't spend a day on this, but spend a day just doing something completely useless. I like that we can do that-Ben:Yes, it is.Josh:... and the total lack of responsibility, to be honest.Starr:Is there a total lack of responsibility? I don't know. I don't know.Ben:I think you could argue that there is a total lack of responsibility.Josh:Maybe relatively.Starr:Maybe.Josh:I think we're speaking relatively.Starr:Relatively? Well, there's responsibility to customers. I don't know. Do they count? Nah.Ben:Speaking of being a small company, just because of a recent acquisition of one of our competitors, I had gone to look at what some of our other competitors, what status they were, and I was just blown away with how many employees our competitors have. It's really amazing.Starr:What are they doing with all those people? Are they paying...? Do they have a professional volleyball team or something?Josh:Not in the past year.Starr:Well, they play over Zoom.Josh:It's a professional pong league now.Starr:There you go.Ben:We have five employees. The competitor that has the closest number of employees comes in at a hefty 71. Then the largest number that I found was 147 employees. That's impressive.Josh:With the competitor, the first one that you mentioned with the 70 something employees, and I assume over $100 million in funding, were they the ones that were recently bragging on Twitter about how much more usage they have than everyone else?Ben:I don't know because I don't remember seeing that bragging.Josh:They were. It was kind of funny. Yeah, you would probably be the major player.Starr:That's something I definitely learned throughout the course of running this business is that a company that has tens or, I don't know, hundreds of, did you say $100 million, that's a lot-Josh:It's a lot.Starr:... of funding can do more work than three people even if those three people are very, very good. It's-Ben:That's right.Starr:They can do more work, and that's all right. We're just going to have our little garden patch over here. It doesn't matter if ConAgra is a mile down the road. They can do their thing. We can do our thing.Ben:As long as they don't let their seeds blow into our farmland, right?Starr:Oh, yeah, definitely. Let me just ask you a question. When it comes to buying your strawberries for your traditional summer strawberry shortcake, are you going to go to that wonderfully, just delightful artisanal farm down the road, or are you just going to slide over to ConAgra and, I don't know, get some of their strawberry-shaped objects?Ben:I got to say, I love roadside fruit stands. Those are the best. When cherry season happens here in Washington, going and grabbing a whole mess of cherries from some random person that's propped on the side of a road, I mean it's awesome.Starr:My favorite ones are the ones have no... if you stop and think about it... I used to live in Arkansas. One time I was walking by and there was this roadside fruit stand just with oranges. It was like, "Hold up. Hold up. Oranges don't grow in Arkansas. What is this?" I don't know if he just went to Costco and just got a bunch of oranges or maybe he did the Cannonball Run from Florida straight up-Josh:Road trip.Starr:... and was selling oranges all the way up. There was some explaining to do.Ben:I didn't realize until I was saying it, but it really does sound ridiculous that you're going to go and get some fruit items from some random person on the side of the road. But I love roadside fruit stands. They're great.Starr:Oh, yeah.Josh:I don't know. In this day and age probably, yeah.Josh:Maybe things should be more like that. Maybe that would solve some problems.Ben:Well, coming back to the front porch thing, do you know that country song, If the World Had a Front Porch?"Starr:No, I don't.Ben:Definitely have to link it up in the show notes. It's all about if the world had a front porch like we did back then, then things would be different. People would be more friendly. We'd be chatting with our neighbors. Things would just be overall good.Starr:Yeah, totally.Josh:We'd all know each other.Starr:Is that true? Is that true?Ben:I got to say, I grew up in the Deep South. I did not have a front porch and none of my friends had a front porch because we all lived in the same neighborhood and all the houses were the same, but we were all still pretty friendly-Starr:Oh, there you go.Ben:... even though we didn't have front porches.Starr:Well, I had a front porch and people were assholes, so I think the correlation between front porches and nice people is weak.Ben:The song If I had a front porchJosh:.Isn't it more like a metaphor? I don't know.Starr:You could say the internet's the world's front porch and look how great that's worked out.Josh:If you just build a front porch-Starr:I'm sure it's a nice song. I don't mean to make fun of the song. I'm sure it's a good song.Josh:You build a front porch that the entire population of the world could fit on, just see how that goes. That's what we-Starr:It's like, "Oh, shit. We deforested the Amazon to get the wood for this."Ben:We should name our little message board product Front Porch.Starr:Front porch, ah, that's nice. You could have add-ons to that. Like for upgrades, you could get the rocking chair or the whittling knife.Ben:Yeah, and the sweet tea-Starr:The sweet tea, yeah.Ben:... or the mint julep.Starr:Can I ask you a question? Was sweet tea a thing when you were a kid?Ben:Yes.Starr:Do people refer to it as like, "Oo, sweet tea," as a saying?Ben:No.Starr:Okay, that-Ben:They'd just refer to is as tea.Starr:Okay, thank you.Ben:There was no other tea. It was just that.Josh:But it was sweet.Ben:Yeah, it was sweet, of course.Starr:Yeah, of course. It's-Ben:That's the only tea that existed. None of this Earl Grey hot business, no, no, no.Starr:I just noticed, I don't know, around 2007 everybody started talking about sweet tea. It's like, "What? What's this?" Ben:Yeah, totally. It's a Southern Thing, on YouTube, their channel, is pretty funny. They go into the sweet tea thing quite a bit. If you want some additional context, do some research on that whole aspect. You can go and watch that YouTube channel. I'll have to link it up in the show notes.Starr:Yeah, I'll check that out. Well, would you gentlemen like to wrap it up? I think I've got to start... I'm going to be Southern here. I'm fixing to get ready to think about going to my vaccine appointment.Ben:Jeet yet? You know that joke? Have you heard that?Starr:I haven't heard that joke. What?Ben:It's like, oh man, two southern guys, one's like, "Jeet yet?"Starr:Ah, did you eat yet? Okay, yeah.Ben:"No. Y'want to?"Starr:I haven't been back in a while.Josh:Did you eat yet?Starr:I haven't been back in a while.Ben:Oh, good times. Sometimes I miss the South but not during the summer.Starr:One of my favorite words, I think it might be a local Arkansas word, is tump. It's a verb, tump. It's the action of tipping something over and dumping out its contents. The perfect use case is a wheelbarrow. Like, you tump out the wheelbarrow. I'm sorry. Tump out the wheelbarrow.Ben:Totally.Josh:I am learning so much on this episode, by the way-Starr:There you go.Josh:... about the South.Josh:It's great. I'm learning more about-Josh:This is your second vaccine appointment, right?Starr:Yeah, it's the second one.Josh:Second and final. Well, for now.Starr:So I'm ready for it to hit me. I'm like, "Bring the storm.Josh:Yes, it hit me.Starr:Bring it on."Josh:Mine was like a 48-hour ordeal, but back to normal now. I feel great.Starr:That's good. You got your super powers.Josh:Yeah.Ben:Well, good luck with that.Starr:Thank you. Maybe one day we'll be able to have a conclave in person again, although I might need the support of a therapist or something because just like... I mean I like y'all, but I don't know if I'm over the droplets yet.Ben:You can still wear masks.Starr:Okay, that's good. Thank God, okay. All right, I will talk to y'all later.

If done correctly, a two-headed strategy of driving sales on Amazon and your native website could yield huge dividends. But what does that kind of strategy look like, and how can you create a scenario where one builds off of another?The answer lies in assortment and pathways into the brand experience. Ben Knox is a bit of an expert in this area and he’s here to share his expertise. Ben earned his stripes working on Red Bull’s ecommerce strategy, and now serves as the vice president of ecommerce and growth at Super Coffee. According to Ben, brands need to come up with an assortment strategy that allows customers to get what they want, when and where they want it, but also leads them back to the type of brand experience you want them to have. He also details how beneficial a subscription model can be, if done right. Plus, he gives some tips on how to get the most out of your texting strategies and what is going on in the wild west of customer acquisition.Main Takeaways:Assorted Assets: When you sell on Amazon, as well as natively on your website, you need to decide on an assortment strategy and how each site can build off each other. Whether that is only placing a select assortment of products on Amazon, or having a full assortment across channels, but offering more subscriptions and sales on your website, it’s crucial to have pathways back to your branded channels.Gotta Flex: If you offer subscriptions, you can only achieve true customer success if you offer flexibility. Even if it means that your customers can cancel a subscription ten minutes after they sign up, those are the kinds of options you need to offer. Doing so allows your customers to feel unburdened and that the experience is risk-free, which makes them more inclined to sign up.Text Me: There are benefits to separating your text strategies in order to maintain the relationship you want with your customers. Having separate text numbers for subscription management and branded content will help customers differentiate the experiences they are having and allow you to cultivate a true VIP experience with those who opt into the branded company channel.For an in-depth look at this episode, check out the full transcript below. Quotes have been edited for clarity and length.---Up Next in Commerce is brought to you by Salesforce Commerce Cloud. Respond quickly to changing customer needs with flexible Ecommerce connected to marketing, sales, and service. Deliver intelligent commerce experiences your customers can trust, across every channel. Together, we’re ready for what’s next in commerce. Learn more at salesforce.com/commerce---Transcript:Stephanie:Hey everyone, and welcome back to Up Next In Commerce. This is your host Stephanie Postles, co-founder and CEO at Mission.org. Today on the show, we have Ben Knox joining us. He's the Vice President of ecommerce and growth at Super Coffee. Ben, welcome.Ben:Thanks so much for having me. I'm excited to be here.Stephanie:I'm really excited to have you on. So, you have a very long background in ecommerce. I feel like you're a veteran when I was looking through your profile. And I was hoping you can start there and go into where you've been and how you got here.Ben:Absolutely. I think that's a great foundational question. I started my career at Red Bull at the headquarters in Los Angeles. And looking back on it, couldn't be more thankful of a place to start my career. Obviously, one of the most exciting and powerful brands that CPG has seen in the United States, if not worldwide over the past several decades. So learned a lot there. Started in brand marketing, rotated into corporate strategy, eventually distribution, before finding my way into a special project on ecommerce and at Red Bull at the time And even today, the entirety of ecommerce really relates to Amazon.Ben:For one reason or another, Red Bull only wants to sell merchandise and things like that in a direct consumer way. Everything else is for retail and Amazon would be considered there. So, that was my first experience in ecommerce was leading global Amazon strategy for Red Bull starting in the United States and then, exporting that to Western Europe which was a really exciting opportunity. Great way to learn ecommerce from really the best and brightest, Amazon. Spent a lot of time in Seattle, working with the vendor team there and the related marketing teams. But eventually was really interested in going deeper in particular on direct consumer, paid media, things like that. And so, found my only real opportunity to do that was to leave that great brand, leave the company and join what ended up being several other startups and companies since where I've gotten deeper.Stephanie:Cool. So what does your day to day look like at Super Coffee and what is Super Coffee?Ben:Yeah, absolutely. Super Coffee is an enhanced Coffee Company playing really in almost all consumer packaged goods coffee categories. So, we have bottled coffees, can coffees that really tastes like delicious frappuccinos but don't have any of the calories sugar or carbs and other added positive ingredients, functional ingredients for health. And we also sell similar super espresso product. It's like a double shot espresso, more portable, more on the go, less liquid, same performance.Ben:But also, as of last year, we've moved into ground coffee with added vitamins and antioxidants, k-cup coffee pods and then, previous to that we had been selling creamer, super creamer, similar profile, very decadent, indulgent, but high on health, low on sugar and calories and all that working together as one stop coffee shop for the health minded consumer.Stephanie:That's awesome. And then I saw... so the company was started by three brothers. Right? Was it when you were in college?Ben:Yeah, Jordan as the youngest brother, Jordan DeCicco and his brothers Jake and Jim, his two older brothers, founded the company together. Jordan actually formulated the first Super Coffee in his dorm room and enjoyed it himself and then was sharing it with his former basketball team players. He was a college athlete and got an insight that there's really nothing like this out there.Ben:They didn't enjoy... they enjoyed the flavor and the taste of Starbucks drinks and cafe drinks, but not the way it made them feel, nor the sugar and the calories. And they also liked the idea of energy drinks, but again, not great ingredient profiles and tons of sugar and those things too. So they didn't want to put that in their body and that's really why they started Super Coffee. And, like mentioned, Jordan formulated it in his dorm room for the first time, and then, slowly but surely convinced his brothers to join in on his mission of disrupting the coffee industry. And now, five, if not six years later, here we are and and it's really amazing what they've accomplished.Stephanie:Yeah, it's definitely huge progress. I saw that they were on Shark Tank back in 2017 and then, now recently, they received investment from like big NBA stars and NFL quarterbacks. And then, I think most recently, the company is valued at like 200 million in June or something which blows my mind for something that started in a dorm room. That's amazing.Ben:Yeah, let's not forget J.Lo and A-Rod are our investors and partners in the company and it's no big deal.Stephanie:No big deal, J-Lo. What is up, girl? So, obviously, this company is awesome, which is why you're there, what does your day to day look like as the VP of ecommerce and growth? What do you do?Ben:Yeah, it's varied. So overseeing the sales division of ecommerce so, the actual divisional P&L for Shopify, Amazon, and then, that long tail of third party online retailers. Thrive Market is really awesome standout, actually a new partner of ours, early this year and really great partners so far. So really excited to go deeper on that relationship. Walmart.com is in the mix there as well. So, that's from a sales, divisional responsibility. That's what we're working with. But then, also responsible for the 3PL, whose services all of our ecommerce order fulfillment, the 3PL also services our Amazon business, so is basically, [inaudible] and inbound logistics to Amazon for FBA. And they also do some managed services for us. On top of that, also responsible for overseeing all of our acquisition or retention marketing efforts to really drive both of those two strong horses.Stephanie:Cool. So, what is the breakout between selling on Amazon, selling on your site, selling on other websites, what does that breakout look like? Are you favoring one area right now? Has it changed in the last year?Ben:No, it's the... the really interesting thing about it for us and it's funny now, having done this with a few different brands, it's so brand specific, where your consumers desire to shop from you and for us, we really maintain a very consistent mix so what you might often see is a brand, start strip consumer, then they start moving into Amazon and customers just shift in to Amazon, because everybody has a Prime account these days. It's very easy, very dependable, great return policies, all that so there's a lot of trust there. You're already doing a lot of shopping there. So oftentimes, you'll just find your customer base moving to Amazon in that somewhat uncontrollable way.Ben:There's definitely things that you can do to maintain a more healthy mix. And I would say a lot of those, factors and criteria are in place at Super Coffee and so as a result, we maintain a really healthy mix, let's call it 60%, Shopify, 40%, Amazon, and both both scaling pretty consistently against each other and maintaining that mix and we expect that to continue this year.Stephanie:So what are some neat tricks with selling with Amazon because we've had a lot of smaller brands on here, DTC players who... we've, of course, talked about Amazon creating a white label version of their product and we've also had a couple people be like, there's nothing to worry about as long as your product is strong. How do you guys think about selling on Amazon? And what opportunities are there that maybe people are missing?Ben:Yeah. So, there's many ways to skin a cat there and again, it's very brand dependent on what's right for us. Our context is we really are a retail brand first. So we're now, I think, in over 30,000 outlets across the United States, approaching 60 to 65% ACV so we're getting pretty ubiquitously available. But obviously, nothing compared to a Red Bull that, at the time I left the company over 300,000 outlets, so you can stumble and buy a Red Bull no matter where you are.Ben:Super Coffee is a bit earlier in that lifecycle, but still predominantly retail brand. I think in relative to our category, we really want the consumer to be able to have perfect availability of our products and to be able to purchase our products, when, where, how often, from whom they like. And so from, this is leading into an assortment strategy, from an assortment perspective, maybe another brand might have only select assortment on Amazon and then, to get the full brand experience, you have to go to the website. So, that's a natural path toward toward direct consumer.Ben:There's other ways that we do it. However, we provide the best subscription experience and discount on our website. So, we actually offer subscription on a limited basis. And when we do only the 5% funding amount on Amazon, whereas our website is 15% and so, naturally loyalists, people who are really engaged with the brand will come over to us. And there's other things like special bundles and different content and things like that the website offers that Amazon simply can't.Stephanie:Are you oftentimes finding your customers on Amazon and then, speaking to them in a way that brings them to your website afterwards, top of funnel, they come there and then, you pull them in to create a loyal customer base and retain them?Ben:Yeah, there's a master design for that to occur. It's almost though in practice a bit of pushing a boulder uphill, in that people are demonstrating an intent to purchase somewhere, and there's something there, right? And so, if they are starting to buy on Amazon, that's really an Amazon customer, most likely and then, the factors that would drive somebody from Amazon to our website are a bit more natural and gradual per se. That being said, we do nurture that behavior but it's not a really aggressive, offensive strategy that I would say we've unlocked. Even though I would like to say that we've unlocked that as a massive arbitrage opportunity on the platform, we do find that people tend to stay where they start.Stephanie:Yeah. I mean, what would the ideal state look like to you, if you were to make it into the perfect funnel? How would you have it work, if you could just choose?Ben:Semi-limited assortment on Amazon, full assortment, full experience on the direct consumer website. And then, different mechanics and communication strategies in between that Amazon experience, that trial opportunity into the direct consumer experience. Again, slightly different for us, since we're beverage and consumable, or really on the go and post product, retail product, but a brand that's maybe less oriented in that way, could more aggressively attack that type of opportunity.Stephanie:Yeah. Cool. And how do you guys think about subscriptions? Because that was a thing that I feel like everyone wanted everyone to have subscriptions to their products? And then, I feel like a lot of people realize, okay, that's actually not best for our customers, because they don't need a subscription for whenever we have t-shirts or something so we are going to drop that from their offering. And now, it seems like it's making a comeback, but only with certain products. So how did you guys think about that as part of your customer retention strategy?Ben:Yeah, subscriptions for us are paramount, I would say. So, again, a very consumable product. Ideally, we are 50 to 100% of your coffee consumption, obviously, when you're on the go on the weekends, you're out with friends, things like that, pop into coffee shops, you can't avoid that, of course, but relative to... especially, from being at home and through the pandemic in the last nine months, we really want to be that one source coffee solution for you at home, irrespective of your on the go behaviors. And so, for that, subscription, works perfectly on that repeat purchase behavior.Ben:And it's great because you don't have to recruit or remind that shopper to come back and buy every single time they're running low. It's actually right... it's going to happen anyways. But then, we give them the opportunity to say, Hey, not right now, I'm not quite through my last order or we give them the opportunity to say, Hey, I blazed through that order. Let me get my next one, ASAP. So there's that opportunity to modulate on the consumer side of things, that makes it an ideal situation.Ben:I think the technology is not quite there yet to make that a perfect experience, that 30 day cadence is not always perfect for the amount of units in a case and the amount of units in a case is going to last you longer or less time than it would, me. So it's not perfect, but we are working on communication strategies and software and technology to help improve that subscription experience for our customers.Stephanie:Yeah, I think that flexibility is key, I even think about something like Stitch Fix where they say you can pause the orders, you can start it up again, you can take a vacation from it, whatever you need to do. And, I think that feels very risk free like you mean, I can just try it once and then, pause it for three months, and then, try it again? And it's just so different from how it was, I would even say a year ago, where it felt very, cut and dried, you're in it or not. You can get six months in or you can't have it at all, which shows so much has changed a lot.Ben:You're committed. Yeah, we offer ultimate flexibility. You can add a subscription to cart, checkout and then, go and log into your account and cancel that subscription, five minutes later and while that's not ideal, it's okay. That's okay. And really, it's more modeling less than, in a way, the function of subscription itself, we're modeling a loyalty program, in a sense. And so, if our subscription customers get 15%, every order, don't really care if they're actually on a subscription that auto bills them, or they're managing that bill on their own. So, we find ways to incentivize and give rewards and give backs regardless of the way that they are actually going about that.Stephanie:Yeah. That's cool. So, what are some of the biggest driving forces with the program that work well? Is it just the cost savings that usually attracts people and then, something else, once they're in it or what do those incentives look like?Ben:Yeah, it's the cost savings and then, the stated flexibility, the money back guarantee, things like that get them in and interested. Thereafter, one of the things that we invested in six or nine months ago, was basically text message based subscription management. And so essentially, three days before re-bill, an automated text will go out and say, hey, your order of, fill in the blank, is set to ship in three days, would you like to make any changes? Gives the opportunity to opt out, cancel, gives the opportunity to say, ship it right away. Thank God, you messaged me. I'm ready for it now.Ben:They can add products that are not even subscribable. So, they can add season or one time products to try, things that might not even be subscribable. They can modify quantity. They can do all kinds of stuff. It's just as easy as a text message back and forth. So, that's the experience that we're trying to create both at managing and an automatic and dynamic concierge experience for the customer. To really make that experience carefree, really feel like they have as much control as they want over the experience and to steer away from what you were mentioning, which is the old history of you opt into a subscription, you get a deal. And then, you try to go log in and cancel, you can't even figure out how to cancel the dang thing and that's not-Stephanie:Call our customer service representatives and [inaudible].Ben:My gosh, yeah. Email us or okay, that's crazy. So that's not the business that we're in. We're in it to spread positivity, create a great connection with our consumers because now, they're not just buying from us on our website. They're buying from us in stores and they have family members and friends and that kind of experience goes a long way and, the opposite experience also goes a long way.Stephanie:Yeah, I agree. What did it look like after you implemented the SMS stuff? And then, all of a sudden, the customers can easily just be like, and cancel. What did the results look like? Was there anything surprising there?Ben:Yeah. So you'd think, okay, you're would go through the roof. And because you give somebody such an easy way to cancel, it's almost a fear mindset rather than an opportunity mindset and what it actually did for us is it didn't increase cancels, but it decreased cx inbound. So, it actually decreased our costs on the customer service, customer experience side of things, because customers could then, choose their own adventure, right? And self service.Ben:And, philosophically, we haven't gotten the data yet until a software, right? The customer has a great experience, doesn't have to email support, all of that back and forth, they're probably more likely to come back later because there's less thrash, less risk of a negative experience. So all in all, great from that perspective, and great from the perspective of allowing people to increase quantities, add new products, things like that. So AOB subscription has also increased.Stephanie:That's awesome. Is there anything else that you do in the text message arena where you're like, this is also working well, or another way that you communicate with your customers outside of just your orders coming up from a subscription standpoint?Ben:Yeah, we do. We do marketing blogs so to... the other part of our text message strategy, and I like calling it a text strategy, not an SMS strategy.Ben:It's pretty much what everybody calls it, but I even see it sometimes where companies or brands, call it that to consumers. And I see it printed on packaging or it's like, send us an SMS. I don't know if any consumer knows what an SMS is.Stephanie:Calling on a landline.Ben:Yeah. Exactly. So, relative to that, it's actually two separate softwares that power it, which we would like to synthesize over time. So two separate phone numbers that these communications come from. So, we let people know that this is your subscription phone number and then, this is the Super Coffee personality brand phone number. And on that second one, we really nurture that as a VIP audience and so, when we do a product launch, things like that, we let people know if they want early access to the new products or early access to, let's call it a Black Friday, Cyber Monday sale, or what have you, you're going to get a 24 hours heads up, to everybody else, to get that early access if you're opted into our text message database.Ben:And so, that's largely how we use it, get early access to things like that product launches, seasonal products and then, the occasional motivational marketing push, things like that that are more conversational, less, we're trying to sell you something. And, I think that's the direction that we want to continue to go deeper on, is driving personalization, driving value, as opposed to asking so much. I think that's something that the industry is striving for as well.Stephanie:Yeah. I agree. It definitely is a tricky channel to where you see a lot of people doing it wrong. And I can see brands being hesitant to even try it out because they probably have experienced something not so great themselves. And they're like, I just don't want to get it wrong. Because I mean, I'm sure you get the random text where you're like, I don't need that coupon right now. I'm in bed, watching Bachelor, which, Ben, I know, you're doing the same thing. I just don't need that right now. It's unhelpful.Ben:There's this... I don't know, who invented it is probably decades, if not 100 years old but this concept of, I think Gary Vaynerchuk might have popularized it, but this concept of give twice, or give three times or five times before you ask for anything. So, it's all about that, giving value and that can be modeled through social media, that can be modeled through email marketing, and that certainly, I think, should be modeled in text messaging but it's tough as marketers or as business owners, business operators, as soon as you stop being consumer, sometimes it's hard not to become incentivized as the business owner and want to sell, sell, sell.Ben:I think sometimes as the business owner or the operator, it's easy to forget what it's like being a consumer and slip into that sales mindset. But I think it's important for us to all, empathize as much as possible with being on the other end and really think about what you would like to receive from a brand as opposed to just another sort of promo?Stephanie:Yeah, I definitely agree that as a business owner, seeing all this data, it's easy to slip into that mindset to, you people like that and, especially, if you're being measured by certain KPIs, and you're like, well, if I send out three random poems or jokes and my boss sees that, they're going to wonder what I'm doing and I can explain it versus my marketing message, which is very kosher and by the books, might not perform as well, but less explaining, just-Ben:Yeah, exactly. So, I think depending on where you are in your organization, or who's listening to this, doing this correctly could require a lot of education upward or throughout the organization. And it's tough, because it's a long term thing. And it's building trust with the consumer, but you also have to build trust internally, to give yourself that runway to operate like this. So there's no silver bullet here, but something to strive for, for sure.Stephanie:Yeah, I agree. So what do you see right now, when it comes to the customer acquisition landscape. What has so far 2021 looked like? Is it very different than prior years?Ben:Yeah, it's interesting, I think... two things happened last year and people started spending more time on the Internet and on their devices as a result of the pandemic. So in a way, there's now more reach, more impressions, for sure. And then, there is definitely a surge of people buying more heavily online in certain categories than they ever were before. But I think, we're moving toward the back end of that and reverting to a new mean or a new normal. And, now we've also had nine months for advertisers and brands to catch up to starting to sell and advertise on the internet. And so, there's a crowding from the brand side of things and certainly over the last... [inaudible] always but even now, in starting the year, things are just continuing to escalate and get more expensive on CPM and CPR basis.Ben:So putting increasing pressures on cost per acquisition, and overall customer acquisition costs for a brand new business that might have been previously very reliant on paid digital advertising to find new customers. And so, at least what we're focusing on is diversifying, not only just in channel, so testing obviously, other advertising channels to acquire customers. But diversifying away from paid and more into owned and earned and shared, obviously, longer term investments, things like Content Marketing blog, or let's say, diving deep and building an organic presence on TikTok, which is a buzzword and everyone's very interested in right now.Ben:Pinterest is another area. Pinterest is really the third search engine of the internet, I would say, behind Amazon and Google. So that's something that's been hiding in plain sight for a long time and strategies like that to nurture a healthier upper funnel and then, Paid may be more of converting, retargeting remarketing engine, than a prospecting engine is probably the best way forward. from our perspective currently.Stephanie:Yeah, and I think that's a really good viewpoint, especially when you think about what's happening around the privacy rules and what people have relied on for a long time when it came to Facebook ads and like what IOS is coming out with, it seems like a lot is changing but brands are going to have to rethink how they find new customers just like you're mentioning.Ben:100%.Stephanie:Crazy. So, when you're talking about, right now, there's also a lot of crowding from the brands who popped up, who either came online that weren't or a lot of brand new DTC companies that all started last year, a lot of them did, how do you think about making sure that Super Coffee shows its value in a way when there's a lot of other coffee players popping up and keto brands and butters that you add to your coffee, it feels like the space is getting very saturated. How do you know keep showcasing your value and why you're so different than a lot of other brands?Ben:Yeah. 100%. We tested so many different creative strategies, and this is... we'll talk about paid advertising for a second. Ultimately, we've come down to a few key creative formats or messaging strategies on the paid side that work really well for us. One that we continue to own is is a comparison style ad, which is putting us up against a really sort of delicious looking, we'll call it a Starbucks or a Dunkin Donuts cafe drink with foam and cream and swirl and things like that. And then, putting our product directly next to it, and saying, hey, everything about this... these two things are the same, actually, except for and then we flashed through the nutritional profile, the calories, the sugar, the carbs, that works really well. And, that's not only driving value for us, from an ecommerce perspective, but that's driving global value for us all the way, through the omni channel environment. So we're really happy about that type of communication and that creative strategy, very hard working. That side of things-Stephanie:It's hard too because you're instantly anchoring yourself to a brand that everyone already knows about. So you don't even have to explain, it tastes like this, it's got its own, you don't even have to worry about that when you anchor yourself to a larger brand like that.Ben:Exactly. It's interesting. It's a strategy that has being successfully used by the Magic Spoons of the World, maybe a bit easier, right? Because we've all known for a long time now that cereal is not good for us but we love it, right? I grew up on cereal. I'm from the Midwest and I subsisted off the cereal. So when I learned Magic Spoon came out and Catalina Crunch and different brands like this, it was like, no brainer. I'm ready to try that because I've been dying to eat cereal for a decade and I told myself I couldn't anymore. That's a great comparison.Ben:Ours, we were comparing it against a bottled product in the past. But less household penetration on those types of products, what we really found success in is actually comparing it to the cafe drinks, actually looks like they get an indulgent frappuccino from Starbucks and maybe less people actually, these days are getting frappuccinos than they did so it's moving toward that sterile example, as opposed to bottled or canned coffee drinks, we might still in a way not know that those are super unhealthy for us.Stephanie:What are some other creatives like that that you guys are leaning into?Ben:Yeah, otherwise, we really lean into UGC style creative, raw stuff, really focused on the product this year. So our product, we do have packaging that really distinguishes ourselves from the category, a lot of white in our packaging, we have that Angular slash to our packaging that really stands out. And what we found is really just a standard iPhone style photo, tightly cropped bottle or can is oriented such that the user can actually read it, if they're scanning through the feed. And, with some situational context that could feel like it's a real person, right? It could actually be real UGC, could be manufactured, etc.Ben:Either way, it gives that sense of, okay, I learned that this product in comparison to this other drink is a lot healthier for me. And then, okay, on my second impression from the brand, I'm seeing that this is actually a real thing that exists in the world. I can see myself holding and consuming this product. Let me click through and give it a try. So, that's the funnel, oversimplified, how we think about things currently but both of those creative styles have been very hard working for us historically.Stephanie:That's such an important shift. I've even seen personally like when I'm on Instagram or Tiktok, and I see people using something or they have something in their room, where I'm like, it's like my living room right now. But I don't remember thinking that way, a couple years ago, where I was looking for that more, I really want something to look formal and official. It's already the real deal if you spend a lot of money on it, where now I mean, our best performing ads for Mission are, I'll be walking around with the iPhone, doing the ad and that movement, and organic look does way better than anything that we've actually produced in a formal fashion.Ben:Totally. Yeah. People are turning off the advertising these days. The more polished it looks, the worse it performs, in a way, which is so ironic.Stephanie:Yeah. I agree. So, what channels are you most excited to... I mean, I know you mentioned like TikTok and Pinterest but then, everyone's talking about TikTok, where are you guys zooming in on for this coming year that you're really excited about?Ben:Yeah, we started investing pretty heavily in podcast advertising, as of the start of the year. So we're advertising on shows like Armchair Expert and Pod Save America and Sibling Rivalry and a whole basket of great shows that have partners that represent our brand and are a great fit for our audience. So that's been going quite well. And that's exciting, because it's supportive of the total business, again, maybe moving from a singular ecommerce mindset to more of an omnichannel view on on the world and the market.Ben:So that's been great, we'll continue to invest there and work that into our ongoing marketing mix, a bit more upper funnel. And then, I think, yeah, as I mentioned, really thinking through a Content Marketing Strategy holistically as an upper funnel driver and obviously, there's different distribution channels, but really owning an editorial calendar, owning our perspective, leveraging our partners, and then, distributing that in the channels that are applicable, and really bringing all that to the world of Super Coffee to life, through our partners and through content, I think, is going to be our bleeding edge this year. And really write the ship relative to upper funnel, mid funnel, bottom funnel, and create that healthy balance that all of us are looking for in this industry.Stephanie:One thing I have been thinking about lately is how... in the next coming years, all these brands are turning into essentially, like media companies creating content, and everyone's going to be trying to pull the consumer back to their blogs, to their hubs, and it's like, instead of just going to Instagram feeds and seeing it on there, you're going to be pulling people back to your websites. I mean, how do you think about that landscape because it feels crazy, thinking about hundreds of brands going to be like, come back to my blog to see content that we're creating. And you have to kind of go in a million different places to find it.Ben:Yeah, I think it just puts an increasing pressure on, I will say quality, quality is in the eye of the beholder, right. So, it's, again, like we mentioned quality from designer or creative director of yesteryear is perfect, polished detail dialed whereas quality these days is on a YouTube channel or TikTok account and from a mobile phone and not really produced and published and polished. I think it's quality, it's relatability, it's authenticity and above and beyond all that, it's having something to say, that really speaks to somebody and makes them feel like they're engaging with a personality, engaging something that means something to them, that makes them feel a certain way. And so, it'll just put an increasing pressure on that confusing definition of quality for the consumer, to really create that connection and say, hey, it's worth subscribing to us directly, as opposed to all these other 100 brands that offer X, Y and Z to you. In order to do that, you're going to stay focused and attention on us and not the rest of them.Stephanie:Yeah, I think about the amount of newsletters that popped up last year where obviously, that whole industry is very much democratized. And now, anyone can make a newsletter and charge for it and I subscribed to quite a few of them. But then, now, I'm like, whoa, what'd I do? I mean, now they're coming in, I'm having to send them into different categories and filter them so you don't hit my inbox. And it makes me think that could be an eventual future for brands too, if you don't figure out how to write something, create something that someone is eager to open and actually wants to hear what you have to say and doesn't just drift over to a corporate create marketing message over time.Ben:Yes, exactly. It just all goes back to giving and creating value and it's dependent on the brand and the Tim Ferriss mindset, which is tools, tips, practices, all of that he gives his audience, that's why you go listen to Tim Ferriss. It's contextually different for a brand or for another personality in a podcast or what have you. So, it's all about knowing what you want to say, knowing what you have to give and share to the world and then, give it as much of that as possible.Stephanie:I agree. All right. Let's shift over to the Lightning Round and Lightning Round is brought to you by Salesforce Commerce Cloud. And, this is where I ask a question and you give an answer under 30 seconds.Ben:Wow. Okay. Exciting.Stephanie:What one thing from 2020 do you hope sticks around throughout 2021?Ben:Wow, not much.Stephanie:I know, that's a hard question.Ben:Well, I think, this is going to be a firm answer but a lot of people are of the belief that COVID accelerated transic technology, transic consumer behavior that would have otherwise taken 10 years to happen so, I think, as a digital marketer, as an ecommerce professional, I think thankful and excited for all the change relative to consumer behavior and online commerce that happened in 2020 and I don't think we are going backward on that so excited and thankful for it and excited for what's next.Stephanie:I like that. What's your favorite resource or resources to stay on top of, like the ecommerce industry as a whole?Ben:There's great podcast like yours. I'm not talking to other podcasts because I was on it, DTC podcasts, I think it's Pallet House labs and speaking to these others, they've got really great newsletters as well.Stephanie:Cool. Sounds good.Ben:[inaudible]. Yeah, they're killing it.Stephanie:What one thing do you not understand that you wish you did?Ben:I feel like I wish I understood almost...I don't feel like I understand anything, ever, in a way especially in this industry, everything is always changing and you would speak to somebody, you had such high confidence over something that you feel like you don't know anything about and that's just the constant feeling that you'll have and so, I think, always maintaining an extreme curiosity over things, continuous learning. You'll never know it all so I think that's in the DNA of somebody successful in this industry in ecommerce and digital is, that needs to be a big thing.Stephanie:Yeah. I agree. What's the last purchase you made online that you normally would not have, online prior to 2020?Ben:Well, I'm a new dog dad.Stephanie:Congrats. What's the dog's name and what kind of dog is it?Ben:Her name is Honey because she's so sweet and she's rescue pup, about six months old and we think she's a lab mixed with jindo which is a Korean breed.Stephanie:Okay. I'm like, I know what kind of dog that is.Ben:It's almost like a Siberian Husky that's more slender.Stephanie:Okay. So you bought that offline or you bought something for her online?Ben:I buy everything for her on the internet now. I never bought the pet category before in my life and certainly not online so that's opening me up to just a completely different world of industry and I think, the number one ecommerce category is vitamins and supplements, number two is pet supplies, number three might be pet food and over 50% of pet products are bought online so pet is the most endemic ecommerce category there is besides vitamins and supplements.Stephanie:Yeah. All right, Ben. Well, this whole conversation has been a blast, thanks so much for coming on and sharing your knowledge. Where can people find out more about you and Super Coffee?Ben:Yeah, Super Coffee is easy, drinksupercoffee.com or just type us in the search bar, Super Coffee in Google or Amazon, they'll find your way to us. Myself, really the only place I exist is on LinkedIn. That really means in any social profiles. I don't have a newsletter or a blog myself but feel free to find me on LinkedIn and make a connection and reach out and love to connect.Stephanie:Perfect. Thanks so much, Ben.Ben:No, thanks, Stephanie. It's been great.

“Don’t treat your business accounting like your personal budget!”When it comes to discussing all of the various roles and responsibilities of a real estate entrepreneur, one responsibility that often doesn’t get highlighted is the importance of bookkeeping and accounting. You may be interested to find that many successful real estate entrepreneurs do not have an accounting degree or studied accounting at a higher education level however understanding accounting principles and proper bookkeeping our essential to successfully operating your real estate business.Our guest on today’s episode is Ben Day, Founder of Rex Capital Group and Owner of Lionshare Bookkeeping. Ben and his team specialize in helping real estate entrepreneurs properly manage their business accounting and finances. Understanding the implications of poor bookkeeping and accounting practices has allowed Ben to help many entrepreneurs right their ship and avoid costly mistakes. Accounting is not sexy, but is fundamental as a business owner and entrepreneur.Since 2017, Lionshare Bookkeeping has provided outsourced bookkeeping exclusively to real estate investors. In 2020, Ben launched The Landlord CFO System to help real estate investors and entrepreneurs figure out their own finance department before committing to a bookkeeper. Ben is a certified instructor for Bookkeepers.com, Inc, a Fortune 500 company that helps aspiring entrepreneurs launch and grow their bookkeeping businesses. Ben also invests in various passive & semi-passive ventures through his company, Rex Capital Group.In this episode, we cover:The difference between a bookkeeper and accountantThe common mistakes real estate entrepreneurs make as it relates to bookkeeping and accounting.When is the best time to hire a bookkeeperHow to keep asset managers, bookkeepers, and accountants alignedHow Lionshare integrates its bookkeeping services across your desired management platformsTune in today to hear Ben address each of these important topics and so much more in this information-packed episode! The Final Four:1. What do you do for your continued education to further your investing?Ben: “I have a mastermind group that I meet with each month, I do weekly coaching for bookkeeping businesses, and I spend time with my mentor. On the real estate side, I have 43 clients, so I have 43 people doing different strategies across the country that I can look to for advice and insight. When you ask, people show up for you. Also, so many books.”2. What have been the lasting lessons you've learned along your journey?Ben: “There’s very much a culture in entrepreneurship right now that’s all about working as hard as you can every day, short-term sacrifice for long-term gain. That works, but if you grow 1% each day or work on growth for just 15 minutes a day, 100 days from now you’ll be miles ahead of where you originally were. Go read Atomic Habits.” 3. What advice would you give to the listeners to help them grow their businesses?Ben: “Don’t be afraid of networking and making new friends, everyone expects you to be weird because it’s real estate and we’re all weird. Go full nerd with it. Also, don’t forget to build your business along with your growth. It’s so easy to get excited about something but if you forget about accounting, marketing, building relationships, or hiring high-level talent, it’s going to hurt.” 4. How can they listeners learn more about and connect with you? Ben: “Stalk me on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube.” Resources mentioned:Lionshare Bookkeeping Landlord CFO SystemRex Capital GroupBookkeepers.comQuickBooksXeroCozyStessaTenantCloudTraction by Gino Wickman

This week is a cause for celebration as it’s my podcast show’s 20th episode! In addition that that, this week’s guest is unusual in that I have already appeared as his guest on his live show, Ben There. Ben Voegele was born in the USA and spent a large part of his childhood in Asia. When he returned to the US in his teens he had all the usual reverse culture shock that we TCKs experience. Listen to me chatting to Ben about his life, his choice of career (very TCK!) and how he has found a degree of peace and a place to put down roots in Utah.

Lair of the Clockwork God is a comedic point-and-click adventure game with platforming elements that follows the exploits of Ben and Dan from Ben There, Dan That and Time, Gentlemen Please

In this episode, we are Frankly Speaking with the co-authors of Our Happy Divorce, Nikki and Ben.   Nikki knows how being supported by a strong, loving family can influence the way a person navigates life, love, marriage, and motherhood. Having grown up as a member of the iconic San Francisco 49ers football family, she was thrown into the limelight at a young age. The values her family instilled in her have helped shape who she is today, and she continues to live by them.coparents Ben intimately understands the detriment divorce can cause in the lives of children. The example of his parents’ divorce instilled in him a deep commitment "to do" better by his own kids. Ben is an investor, board member, philanthropist, golfer, and sports enthusiast. But above all, he is a dedicated father and family man who understands the importance of putting his ego aside and his children first. IT  WAS  NOT  PERFECT ... Nikki and Ben define their own personal story with us and discuss what happy looks like today. Inspired by their son, they developed ways to co-parent, step-parent with an emphasis on putting the children first. As they say, “If we can do it, anyone can do it”. As Catherine says, "DIVORCE does not mess your kids up, it is how both parents BEHAVE before, during, and after divorce that can mess your children up." There is a different way to get Divorced. Let’s talk about it… Getting to the “Happy” … We chat about cleaning up the wreckage of the past and forgiveness. How can we stop pointing the finger at our spouse and get honest with ourselves? Do not fool yourself, your children know what is going on. Open discussions about financial settlements and joint custody. Using the Divorce Process to redefine what your life, your finances, and relationship will be like post-divorce. Co-Parenting and Step-parenting survival tips during the pandemic. Want to learn more about Our Happy Divorce? Visit their website at https://ourhappydivorce.com/ Whether you are thinking of divorce/separation, are in the midst of a divorce, or embarking on your new life after divorce, this episode has something to help you. If you have questions for us or a topic you’d like us to cover, contact us at hello@mydivorcesolution.com or visit MyDivorceSolution.com ----more---- Karen Chellew: Welcome to We Chat Divorce. Hello, I'm Karen Chellew, legal liaison, here with Catherine Shanahan, CDFA. We're the co-founders of My Divorce Solution. We're a company whose mission is to change the way people get divorced by providing a different approach, financial clarity, and an online course to help couples develop a transparent plan that will optimize the outcome of their divorce. Karen Chellew: Each podcast we sit down with professionals who provide insight and frank discussion on real people, real situations, and real divorce. Today we welcome Nikki and Ben, co-authors of Our Happy Divorce: How Ending Our Marriage Brought Us Together. That's fantastic. Co-founders Ben Heldfond and Nikki DeBartolo understand that no divorce is ever easy, especially for those involved. Karen Chellew: After nearly a decade together the couple decided to split, and inspired by their son, Asher, to find ways to happily navigate a divorce. Ben and Nikki created Our Happy Divorce, a service empowering and inspiring people to think differently about divorce, co-parenting, stepparenting, and what it means to put kids first. Nikki and Ben describe themselves as ordinary people who have accomplished something extraordinary. They have sidestepped a lot of the booby traps that make most divorces acrimonious. Nikki and Ben say, "If we can do it, you can do it." Thank you. Ben: No truer words have ever been spoken. Karen Chellew: I love that. So first and foremost, I want to say thank you for the beautiful gift you sent of your book, your bookmark. It was awesome. Beautiful gift. And for people who receive that, it's just so inspiring just to open the box and feel the book, so you guys have done a great job. Catherine Shanahan: Aren't you supposed to send that over to me, Karen? Karen Chellew: What, the chocolate? Catherine Shanahan: Yeah. Where'd that go, Karen? Karen Chellew: Everything but the chocolate's on its way. Ben: Everything. Catherine Shanahan: I'll give you my address so I can get one of those. Ben: There you go. That's a deal. We'll get that off to you. Karen Chellew: Oh, that's good. So a service inspiring people to think a different way about divorce. How do you do that? Ben: Well, I think we do it through our story. All this book is is our experience. We're not lawyers, we're not therapists. We just happen to figure out a way to have an acrimonious divorce. We didn't have a roadmap. Collaborative divorce was sort of in the beginning stages, but you know, it was just the two of us. We say if we can do it, anybody can do it because we are two Type A personalities who somehow came to a point of putting the past behind us and not making anybody a villain, and putting our son first. And then everything sort of fell into place. Nikki: Right. It wasn't perfect in the beginning. I think people need to realize that, that we went through some rocky months. Ben: Right. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah, yeah. So that's a really good point, Nikki. Let's talk about that a little bit because if you read anything I write, or if you ever talk to me, or if anyone has gone through our process, they'll hear me say not once, but probably a thousand times because I am a stepmom. I have been divorced and I have raised five children in a blended family, so I am a firm believer that divorce does not mess your kids up. It's how the parents behave before divorce, during divorce, and after divorce that can mess your children up. Catherine Shanahan: However, you call your company or your book The Happy Divorce and I think everybody has to define happy. What is happy, and that can mean something different to everyone, and that's okay. Nikki: Right. Catherine Shanahan: So happy for somebody could be that... as a stepmom I can remember, happy for me sometimes was that my stepchildren went home on Sunday night, and that's okay. Nikki: That's okay. Catherine Shanahan: Because it's exhausting, right? Ben: Yeah, yeah. Nikki: That's totally normal. Ben: Yeah, and Nikki said it took time. I think if you had asked us 13 years ago what happy meant, what our definition of a happy divorce was, it would have been that we could just be in the same room together. Catherine Shanahan: Exactly. Nikki: Or at like an event together or a birthday party together. Ben: And not make everybody feel uncomfortable, but most importantly our son. Catherine Shanahan: Right. Ben: So even today, we know people who have happy divorces, they might not be to the extreme that Nikki and mine are, or they might be better, it's just that you put the kids first. You don't hand the kids the emotional bill to pay for something that they had absolutely no choice in. Catherine Shanahan: Exactly. I think your son said it so cute, and he is... Asher, right? Nikki: Yes. Karen Chellew: Adorable. Catherine Shanahan: Oh, my God. He is so cute. I watched your video clip and he said, "You know, I always wanted siblings. Well, maybe not so much." Ben: After it came, right, yeah. Nikki: And he was like, "Oh, can't they go back?" No. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah, yeah. I thought that was so cute, and it's so true. So his happy was, "I got them." Well, maybe today I don't want them. Ben: Right. Catherine Shanahan: You know, it was so cute, it kind of ties it all up. And so in divorce we say that with our couples when we're negotiating a settlement where we're going through their financial portrait with them, which it's kids and your finances. So what would your happy be? Is your happy keeping the house? Is your happy having the retirement monies? Is your happy having your children three days a week? Every other weekend so you can have your career? Define what your happy is. So I love the title of your book, and it's okay to define that, and to define your co-parenting, because your co-parenting is not the same as my co-parenting. Nikki: No. It's different for everybody. Karen Chellew: And it's okay. Nikki: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: So how did you come to your happy, the two of you? Nikki: Well... I think it took less work on my part than it did on his. Karen Chellew: Oh, why is that? Nikki: I sort of set out thinking, "How am I going to do this?" My parents are still married after 52 years, so I kind of had the mindset of, "Okay, what am I going to do to make my son's life as close to the way I grew up as possible, but being divorced?" So that was always something that was in my head, and it was sort of ingrained to try to figure out a way to make him... have what I had growing up and not feel slighted. Ben: Yeah. Nikki: [crosstalk 00:07:40] not so much. Ben: And I on the other hand grew up in the complete opposite household of a family of parents who didn't have a happy divorce. So part of it was ingrained in me, being a child of the '80s, well, actually I was born in early '70s, but parents were divorced in the '80s. It was the way it was, right? People got divorced, and it wasn't, "How are we going to get along? How are we going to co-parent?" It's like, "We're going to go to war. I'm going to get my lawyer. You're going to get yours and it's going to be battle." Ben: I also was in a completely different place in my life emotionally. I wasn't a very happy person when I left our marriage. For me, that manifest itself at pointing the finger at Nikki. It was all her fault. It was all her... you know, if only she hadn't done this. If only she should have done... you know. And 'shoulding' all over myself. That's S-H-O-U-L-D, not the other one. Ben: But you know, and then what it took was a realization or clarity to find out what my part was in the relationship. So in order to get to happy, I had to, we had to clean up the wreckage of the past, and we had to get honest about what our part is and understand that it takes two to make a relationship, it takes two to ruin a relationship. Ben: And just like our happy divorce it works that way too. Now it takes four to make it, because we're both remarried. In our book, it doesn't go into what happened, who did what, who didn't do what, because at the end of the day, what we realize is all that stuff doesn't matter. What matters is that we both came to a place of forgiveness, but also admitted what we had done wrong. Karen Chellew: How did you come to a place of forgiveness? What started turning the tide from the anger and resentment, or whatever the negative emotions were? What happened on both of your parts to just start to turn that tide a little bit. Ben: Well, yeah, for me, again, Nikki wasn't as scorned I guess you could say, which is weird for her. Nikki: That's really weird for me. Ben: But you know, I left the house- Nikki: You [crosstalk 00:09:54] the one out for blood. Ben: Right, exactly. I left the house in a way that I look back and I almost cringe, a very dramatic way. I took off my ring. I put it on the bathroom counter with a picture of us torn out and I left. Nikki: Very dramatic. Ben: Very dramatic. Nikki: Like something I would have done. Ben: And I went and I did my research, and I looked for the best shark lawyer, the one who had all the biggest cases in Tampa. Definitely did my research. I called him and explained to him what I wanted, and I wanted to destroy Nikki, and I wanted to embarrass her, and I wanted to show our son what a fraud she was, at least how I saw her. Ben: So he took a very hefty retainer from me, and then he wrote up a manual on how we were going to go about doing what I wanted to accomplish. And I didn't read it for a little bit, and it was in my backpack that I carry everywhere, and I was on a plane back from LA to Tampa, and I pulled it out and I decided to read it. I got two pages into it, and this thing was like 30 pages long. Nikki: That's probably the same thing he gives everybody else. Ben: Right, just different boiler plate. Nikki: Names are just changed. Ben: Exactly. And then all of a sudden I had a moment of clarity, and I saw for the first time in a long time that if I went down this path, continuing to read this War and Peace destruction manual what it was going to lead to, because I knew where it was going to lead to, because I had been down that road. I had been part of my parents divorce down the road. Ben: Or I could try to find a different way and a different path. So I called Nikki when I landed and I said, "I need some time. I need some space." Because I knew I couldn't deal with the divorce in the head space I was in. Karen Chellew: Right. Ben: And probably Nikki too. We weren't ready to start talking about the end until we cleared up the past and found our part. So I called the lawyer and said, "I'm going to find a different way, if you could send back the balance of the retainer," and conveniently there wasn't much left. But it was the best money I ever spent. So then I started working with somebody that I knew, and just went through and found out what my in the relationship was, and my part in the ending of the relationship. And realized about halfway through that I wouldn't want to be married to me either at that time. Ben: I was not in a good place. I was not the father I thought I was, but more importantly I wasn't the husband I thought I was. So then I called Nikki to coffee, and she probably had no idea why I was calling her. Nikki: No. Because I kind of knew this was going on with him, so I mean- Ben: She knew. It was that black sedan that was following me everywhere. Nikki: And I knew that this was the mindset he was in. And I just knew I hadn't gotten to that place. I mean, yes, I was angry and I was sad and I was upset, but I wasn't in the place that he was at. Where I sort of was like, "Let's just get this over with. Let's just fix this... fix it to a point where it's just done." To me, I went at this a totally different way. Nikki: I did hire a lawyer, but it was kind of more like, "What do I do? Here's this divorce, what am I going to do with this?" So mine wasn't, "Let's attack him and let's kill him." Ben: Well, your hardest thing also was that you said it too, it was a, "Fix it." Nikki's a fixer. She wants to get in there and fix everything and not call her a control freak, but control freak. Nikki: I am a control freak. 100% Catherine Shanahan: Were you living together at the time or were you separated in different homes? Nikki: We were in different homes, but not really. At that time- Ben: Somewhere in between there... I was staying in a hotel for about six months, and then I'd come home and- Nikki: Did you really stay in a hotel for six months? Ben: Six months. The biggest most exciting time of my life during that time was when they released a new movie on the On Demand thing at the hotel. Catherine Shanahan: Oh yeah. Yeah, yeah. Ben: Because I'd watched them all. And then I eventually got a place. So we weren't officially divorced yet when I had my own place, but it was when we told our son. He forced our hand to tell him because... Why don't you tell the story about us thinking we were getting over on him. Nikki: Oh yeah. So Ben would come over every morning before Asher would go to school. And you know, he would make sure he was there before he woke up. One morning- Catherine Shanahan: How old was he at the time? Ben: Four? Karen Chellew: Yeah? Ben: Four. Yeah. Nikki: So he comes in my room. Ben is already there. And he looks at me and says, "Hey mom, where did Daddy sleep last night?" And I always thought I did a really good job of messing up the bed thinking like, "Oh, okay." Ben: Yeah. Nikki: And I was like, "What do you mean? Right here." And he's like, "Where did Daddy sleep last night?" And I was like, "Oh, boy. This kid is way smarter than we're giving him credit for, so we need to do something, and it's time for us to sit him down as best we can with someone that young and just say, "Hey, this is what's happening. We love you." That's probably the hardest thing I've ever had to do in my life. Ben: Oh yeah. It was hard. But we framed it in a way and were open with him. If anything from our experience, again, not lawyers, not therapists, but through my experience with my parents, my experience with my son and our divorce is the idea that kids are resilient and they'll get over it, or they don't see things... is nonsense. It is absolute nonsense and I can say that from experience on both sides of it, right? "Oh, our kids will get over it. They're resilient. They don't know what's going on." Here a four-year-old who knew- Nikki: Exactly what was going on. Ben: Right. Playing Inspector Clouseau. Knew that I hadn't slept there because my bed wasn't made, my pillows weren't ruffled or whatever he did. So that's another message we try to get across is that, "Don't fool yourself." To me, and staying on my soapbox too much here, but to me, that's justification for behaviors." Karen Chellew: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Nikki: And too, to this day he still claims that he saw boxes, which we never let a box- Ben: At least we thought we didn't. Nikki: But he still says he saw boxes. Catherine Shanahan: You know, I think sometimes even if he didn't see boxes, he probably heard you talk about boxes. Nikki: Right. And in his head, he's like, "Oh yeah." Catherine Shanahan: You can probably remember talking about something in your childhood, but you don't really remember going to Disney World when you were two, but you remember seeing pictures that you went to Disney World when you were two. Nikki: Right. Catherine Shanahan: So you think you remember you were in Disney World when you were two, right? Ben: Yeah. Nikki: It's true. Catherine Shanahan: I'm sure he heard about that or saw that. So he's a smart kid. Like I said, I feel like I know him a little bit from watching the video. Nikki: Yes. Ben: Yeah, he wraps up the book too. He's got a chapter at the end of the book that just puts a bow on it perfectly, because our happy... Your answer, "How does your happy look?" We didn't know it was going to be happy at the time, but you know, I called her to coffee after I'd done this work on myself. The first thing I told her was I was sorry, that I'd done some work myself and I realized that it's no one's fault, it's not her fault, it's not my fault. We equal parts of this and I'm sorry for my part. Ben: I went through some of the things. I wasn't a very good husband. I ignored you, I didn't... blah, blah, blah, blah. I'm not going to apologize again, I already did that. Karen Chellew: Yeah. Ben: You're only getting it once. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah, she's sitting here smiling and she's like [crosstalk 00:17:45]. Ben: She loves it. And so we went through it and then she apologized to me, which was- Nikki: Which was probably the first and only time I've ever apologized. Catherine Shanahan: And you're lucky because we have this recorded [crosstalk 00:17:59]- Ben: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: You can both listen on repeat. Nikki: Yeah. Ben: And then from that moment on it didn't just all of a sudden become happy, but there was room to move, because then we both genuinely accept each other's apologies, and we told each other we loved each other, and that we committed at that meeting to putting our son first with every decision we made. So our happy looked like not what was in Nikki's bank account or Nikki's family's bank account or what I thought I deserved. Our happy was what was best for our son. Nikki: Right. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah. So you know we like to get real with everyone, and a lot of our viewers come from a wide range, and we deal with a lot of affluent people, but we also deal with people who aren't affluent, or they don't know that they're affluent. Ben: Right. Catherine Shanahan: We do a lot of budgeting and we hone in on financials with everyone. And as a CDFA, I sit down and Karen does a lot of the budgeting with our clients, pre-divorce and post-divorce. So we listen to your story and it sounds great. You afforded him the ability to go through the mucky waters of what he needed to figure out for himself, which is a luxury, because he had that time to do that. Catherine Shanahan: And you blamed her in the beginning and you had all that anger, and you went and hired the bulldog, which oh, my God, we hear so many times people go and hire the bulldog, and only 10% of divorce cases need whatever everybody wants to refer to as the bulldog, and Karen loves to jump in and really get the definition of what a bulldog actually means, because you don't really need a bulldog. But anyway, that's a whole other podcast. Catherine Shanahan: But what did you do with your finances, because a lot of people who have money there, they can't access it during that time. How do you stay in a hotel room if you can't get the money? Did you two have your separate bank accounts, because people can't be happy if they can't get their financials, right? So if somebody out there wants to have a happy divorce, they come to us. Catherine Shanahan: So for example, for us we start with your finances. So we can afford them that time to work through the financials so they don't run to attorneys. You don't need two attorneys gathering your financial data. It's the same data you're collecting. You're paying thousands and thousands... We save people hundreds of thousands of dollars because why are you paying them to gather the same information and go through the packet of information you were asked to gather. Ben: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Nikki: Right. Catherine Shanahan: Why would you both have to do that. So we do that so that they can work through their stuff, right? Ben: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: So during that time- Ben: I think what's important at least is yes from my experience, and also from this process of writing this book with Nikki and talking with people, it doesn't matter if there are a thousand dollars in the bank or there's a hundred million dollars in the bank, you know for the most part, because what it comes down to is financial insecurity. Ben: And what I think the problem with divorce and why sometimes it goes sideways is because it deals with two of the biggest trigger buttons, I could use a different word, but trigger buttons of our human condition and that's romance and finance, and both those speak directly to ego, right? Catherine Shanahan: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Ben: And so our financial settlement was the same as our custody agreement is that we try to as much as possible take ego out of it, and to try to put Asher first. So when it came time to discussing finances, it was, "Okay, what's best for Asher?" Nikki or myself had to make sacrifices, or give more or take less or whatever it was, but it was... Look, it wasn't simple, right? It was easier though when we looked at it through a pair of glasses of what's best for Asher, and you take the ego out of it as much as possible. Nikki: Right. I mean, I think too for him it was about his life. Ben: Right. Nikki: And the way we wanted him to be raised. We wanted him to be raised at both houses as basically as much the same- Ben: As possible. Nikki: Even with rules. With four parents, there's a lot of rules too. Ben: Right. Well, there's a lot of communication. Nikki: Right. Ben: The other thing we did, which... We both had lawyers, so I don't want to say that we did this willy nilly. But we did what's called collaborative and it wasn't- Nikki: We did through. Ben: We did. Nikki: We sort of brought it to our lawyers and said, "Hey, this is what we think we want to do." Ben: Right. So what we've tried, and agreed to try is, "Let's figure out what we can do on our own, and let's go through it with this pair of glasses that we now have of what's best for Asher, try to take ego out of it and see where we go." Nikki: And I think for us too, I mean, I guess couples... One of his biggest things with me was, "Do you have a problem with joint custody of our son?" And obviously if he was not a good guy or had some sort of issues that would be a different story, but I mean obviously I had no problem with that. So that was one of the first things that kind of softened him a little bit. Ben: That was the first question I asked was, "Do you have any problem with doing 50/50 everything with our son from the left shoe to the right shoe?" Nikki: Right. Ben: And she said, "Of course not. You're his dad." So I said with the other stuff we can work it out. And so then we started with that foundation, and then we were on the same page with that. Then we went to some other things like the businesses that we had together. Nikki had a jewelry company that she had started that I owned half of. I had a record label that I had started with her sister, which is kind of weird, but you know, so it wasn't necessarily about how much each one was worth at the time or the balance sheet of the jewelry company versus the record label. Nikki: It was things that he could have been like, "Oh, I'm going to get her because I want my half of that." Ben: Yeah, and I had no desire to be in the jewelry business. But if I was looking at it- Nikki: Why should you be? Ben: Yeah, right. Right, but if I'd been looking at it from a scorned ego standpoint, I was like, "I'm going to take the jewelry business because I know how much it means to her." Nikki: Right. Catherine Shanahan: Well I think it's really great that because you work through... Well, let me back up first. It's because I always say two people, you come together and you get married, it takes two people to get married, and it takes two people to get divorced, you know? Ben: Yup. Catherine Shanahan: And none of it has to do with your children. So you took the time to heal first, and then you made the important decision, so Karen, you know and you can pick up from this, the process that we developed because we're both divorced before we started... We saw how people got divorced, and when I went through my divorce eight years ago I just thought, "Hell, people have to get divorced different. This is just ridiculous." Ben: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: The way we work is you do your financials first, and then you take your agreement, and we do a lot of negotiated agreements, and when we get to them take this to your attorney, pretty much what you're saying and have them draw up this agreement. You don't need them to talk to each other to tell you what you should do for yourselves, right? Nikki: Yup. Ben: Right. Karen Chellew: You just need to know what you want, and they don't necessarily spend a lot of time helping you figure that out. Catherine Shanahan: And you don't need a judge how to set up visitation for your lifestyle and your child. Ben: Control your own destiny. Nikki: I do all our calendar, well, because I'm that person. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah. Ben: Literally, she prints out... We used to- Nikki: I still use paper. Ben: In the beginning we used to meet at the same coffee shop, the same table, with Nikki's calendars, which are legendary, you know, not an iPhone calendar, not a computer, like the actual calendar printed out and we'd go through the month and you know, "What days are you traveling?" And I'd tell her- Catherine Shanahan: I love that. Ben: And we would do the schedule. And then over time this is sort of how the evolution of our divorce happened. Then now, she just does it. I entrust in her, not that I didn't entrust in her before, well maybe not. Catherine Shanahan: But it works. Ben: But it works. But now she does it, and it's in our shared calendar with Asher. Nikki: He knows where he is. He knows where to go. Ben: And it's 15 days, and if- Nikki: Sports is on there. Anything. Everything's on that calendar. Dinners, everybody can see it. Ben: But the thing that we went to too is again, we tried to see where we agreed or what we could do by ourselves and ended up doing the whole thing, and hashing out the whole settlement over many coffee meetings. It didn't just happen at that one coffee, but same table, same coffee shop, and then we handed it to the lawyers. Catherine Shanahan: I love that. Ben: We said, "Add your 'whereas' and run on sentences and you can get it as [crosstalk 00:27:06] as possible, so you can get paid $450 an hour for somebody to then reread it to try to find a way out of that run-on." Anyways... no offense. Karen Chellew: So I'm going to observe here that during all of those coffee shop meetings and all of those different interactions that the end result that you redefined your relationship as parents of Asher, and as your future. So I think that is fantastic, and I think that's what we try to help our client understand that use the divorce the process, and use that time to redefine what you're going to be like post-divorce, because your kids need to be able to depend on that and rely on that. Karen Chellew: And it's a very important time, and the time you spend fighting and arguing with each other, the less time you spend on creating that new relationship. So I think that's key what you did. Ben: Nobody's ever been happy or survived feeding their kids poison hoping the other one dies. Karen Chellew: Right. Ben: I think that happens a lot in divorces is that... And again, one beautiful thing about this process is when I left that house I was angry, I was going to go to war, I was going to go down the same path as my parents had gone done. But now I realize my parents didn't sit around the table when they got divorced and premeditate how they were going to not get along and how they were going to get us in the middle of that and all that awkwardness, it was just they were so blinded by the things we talked about earlier, the romance, the finance, and egos were hurt so they were blind to it. Ben: I was blind to it. When I left that house and I hired the lawyer and I wasn't talking to Nikki, I wasn't purposely sitting there going, "Hm, how am I going to screw up my kid?" But it's hard. It's hard on them. It was hard on me growing up. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah, well you know, nobody gets married thinking they're going to get divorced. Nikki: No. Ben: No. Catherine Shanahan: And you know, truth be told, myself included, there are times that you sit back and you say you wish your kid didn't have to go between one home and the other. Ben: And he does too. Catherine Shanahan: Nobody wants their child to do that or spend half their Christmas. Then you have more children and you don't want them to have to leave their siblings and all of that. It's not an easy process, and you can't be normal and wonder, "Is my child okay?" Even though they're happy and healthy. We know they are. I mean, my children are thriving, and I'm happy for them. They're doing so well. Catherine Shanahan: I'm remarried. I got married in June. I feel like I have the love of my life and I'm so blessed, and my children love him, so all of that, but we do wonder sometimes. But I think that's okay, and I think that's part of just being healthy human beings. But sometimes, you know, we deal with so many people's emotions they can't see past that. Catherine Shanahan: I think what your son has learned most importantly is the respect, and the reason why you let Nikki take over this whole calendar issue is because you respect her, and she respects you and that's why she does it. For your son to learn how a couple can respect each other is probably the best gift, because that's the best love you can give a partner. Ben: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: Because you can't fully love someone if you don't respect them. Ben: And you brought up just a good point about co-parents too. And our spouses currently are... Just the other thing, I'm sure you see clients and people who are divorced miserable, but remarried and happy, and yet they still have this hatred towards the other one, and it's just like if you could just take a step back and realize that if you hadn't gotten divorced, and you hadn't gone down that, you wouldn't have met the other person. Ben: And our spouses, Chad and Nadia, there's no question who we were meant to be with. Nikki and Chad, I still... I'm like, "She never looked at me that way. She never grabbed my hand like that." It's like I never think, "What if." And then on the flip side, Nadia- Nikki: It's the same way though. I tell her too. I look at her sometimes and I'm like, "I couldn't be married to him," but she just smiles and loves him. Ben: She loves me, the unconditional love, which means you love the good and the bad just as much. And then Asher gets to see this, and he gets to see healthy relationships, and he gets to see that even though his parents are divorced, and this is the most sobering part about it. A couple years ago we were on a fishing trip and out of nowhere he said, "This divorce is hard on me." And this is like three years ago. Ben: I felt like saying, "You little SOB. You have no idea what a bad divorce is or how hard divorce is." And then it hit me. Even as good as Nikki and I have it, and I don't think... Maybe it could get better if we lived together, but besides that- Nikki: No, it would definitely not get better if we lived together. Karen Chellew: He doesn't know that. He doesn't know that. Ben: So but just the idea of being displaced every couple days, and even though we live seven houses down, I've seen him go, "Oh, I forgot my math book at Mom's. I've got to go down and get it." Nikki: But he even says too, sometimes he'll look at me and go, "You and Dad get along so well. Sometimes I don't understand why you're not married anymore." And I'm like, "We get along really well right now. We were meant to be best friends. We weren't meant to be husband and wife." I go, "You were meant to be here, so that's why we..." 100%. Karen Chellew: That's beautiful. Ben: Yeah, so a lot of kids read Dr. Seuss books as a kid, he was always an animal junkie, so we would read him animal encyclopedias, and he knew every single animal, where they came from, where they lived. And we always knew that we wanted to take him to Africa on a safari. But with the shots and everything... So if anything was going to send our divorce south, and it was if one of the other ones had taken Asher to Africa without the other one. Ben: So this past summer, Nikki and Asher and I went to Africa, just the three of us together on a safari. Nikki: I didn't feed him to any animals. Ben: And I didn't die. There were no lion accidents. Nikki: No accidents. Ben: But it was a great opportunity for our son. Nikki: Yes. Ben: Our spouses, when we told them- Nikki: I mean, we asked them if they wanted. Ben: Right. Nikki: It was this open invitation trip. Ben: But her husband just has this small responsibility of being a sheriff of Hillsborough County, and my wife was raising our two sons and starting a practice of her own, so it just wasn't possible. Nikki: Raising your what? Ben: What? Nikki: Your two sons. Ben: Oh, no, two kids. Well, two sons and daughter. But she has two young kids at home, it just wasn't possible for them to go, but the response, and this is where it really just comes full circle, wasn't, "Are you crazy that you think it's okay for you to go to Africa in the middle of the bush with your ex-wife? Are you nuts?" It was, "Asher will love that. What a great opportunity he has to go to Africa with his parents, and have that experience." Nikki: And day two of our trip he looked at me and he said, "Thank you so much. This is the best trip I could have ever gone on." Karen Chellew: That's awesome. That's awesome. Catherine Shanahan: That's really rare. There's not very many... I don't know anyone... That's really rare and really special. Ben: Yeah, and again- Nikki: And I mean, there are people that still think we're crazy. Ben: Right. And it didn't happen overnight. Nikki: Our families thought we were crazy in the beginning. Ben: I still think they might. Nikki: I think they might too. Ben: But the important thing is, I think we started this conversation with this, and that it didn't happen overnight. Nikki: Right. Ben: And a small example of that is when Nikki married Chad, Nikki called me and said, "I don't think that I feel comfortable with inviting you to the wedding. It's because I don't want people to worry about how Ben's feeling, take away from 'this is my day.'" And I was, "Completely understandable." It wasn't ready. It wasn't the right time. It wasn't about me. It was about Nikki and her day and her second day, her and Chad. Ben: And she's right, all the guests saying, "Oh, the ex-husband's here? This is weird." But again, fast forward about three or four years later, I get married and Nikki and Chad and her whole family are at my wedding, and not like, "Gotcha," like, "Hey, you didn't invite me to yours, I'm going to show everybody I'm a bigger person." Sorry- Nikki: There's something in my ear. Ben: My phone is... So that she came to my wedding. So it's been progress, not perfection. Nikki: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Ben: But it's been progress and it's getting there, and it didn't happen overnight. We've been doing this for 13 years. Catherine Shanahan: That's awesome. Karen Chellew: Yeah. Ben: It's just become more natural. Catherine Shanahan: Yeah, that's really good. Karen Chellew: That is great. So let's pivot to the topic of the day because I think a lot of people will benefit from your perspective on the pandemic and COVID and parenting children through... or co-parenting children who are traveling back and forth, and a lot of what we're hearing is, "I don't know if my son or my daughter or my children are safe at the other parent's house because they're not sheltering in place and they're not making sure everything's taken care of." So we're hearing a lot of that. Karen Chellew: And everybody's just cooped up together, so what can you offer the parents and the kids going through this right now to offer some kind of support? Nikki: I think for us, I mean, obviously we have it a little differently than most divorced couples, but I think in the beginning we sort of sat down and had a conversation, an open conversation. We weren't going to keep anything from Asher. We wanted him to know what was going on in the world, but we were on the same page about what Asher was... You know, in the beginning it was kind of a little bit slower process, "Oh, they can do this. They can do this. They can't do this." Then all of a sudden it was like, "No, you can't do anything." Nikki: So I think it took both of us to try to explain to him too in the beginning like, "Listen, you really can't leave the house. You're not going anywhere. You can get in your car and you can go for a drive, but you can't stop anywhere. You can't talk to your friends. You can't see your friends. You can't do anything." And I think the same went for the two of us. We kind of said, "Listen, what's going on at your house? Where are you going to go? Where am I going?" We kind of got on the same page where we were like, "You have to shut it down." Nikki: I mean, other than the fact that my husband has to go to work, he even tries to shut it down where he goes into work, goes in his office, he sees all of about two people when he goes into work, and that's it, because he doesn't have a choice. Ben: Right. Nikki: But we just decided in the beginning, "Let's shut this down." And so Asher's obviously homeschooled now, or whatever that's called, virtual school, whatever. Ben: It's the new homeschool, yeah. Nikki: That kind of even made a decision too that the days Asher is at Ben and Nadia's house, he comes over to our house by 9:30 in the morning to start school, unless he's got a Zoom class that starts before that, and he does all of his schoolwork at our house until he's done, because- Ben: Otherwise it'd be mayhem with the two young... his brothers and sisters going into- Nikki: Them trying to do their school, and then him trying, you know, conflicts. All they want to do, when he's there they just want to be with him. Ben: Right. Catherine Shanahan: What's the age different? Ben: Four and seven, so- Nikki: And Asher's 16. Ben: Yeah, so [crosstalk 00:39:14]. The other thing is that I think that the way we handle this pandemic and sort of a microcosm of how we handle life in our divorce. We had a conversation. We both agreed upon the rules at both houses that we were going to social distance, we were going to be responsible, we were going to shelter in place. We were going to do all the same things at both houses. And once we did that, all of a sudden, now our sphere of quarantine has widened. Ben: That's why Nikki and I are sitting next to each other right now and not because- Nikki: Because we quarantined together. I see the kids almost every day. Ben: Right. We can go down to her house because Asher's been going back and forth, being the outbreak monkey, so if it was going to be in one house, it was going to be in the other house anyway. Nikki: We're all getting it. If it's in one house, we're all getting it. Catherine Shanahan: What do you do, Ben, if Nadia doesn't agree with Nikki? Ben: About... Catherine Shanahan: Parenting, rules, or where you go? Ben: I think one of the greatest things about Nadia and Chad is we all co-parent together. Nadia's a therapist specializing in kids, so she brings a different perspective. She doesn't try to step on Nikki's shoes. She disagrees with some things we do with Asher, but she says it, and I'm sure Chad does too. She says it, and they say it, but at the end of the day, we're his parents. At the end of the day, we're going to make the ultimate decision, but for the most part, since it's evolved, the four of us usually sit down on the big ticket items. Ben: Nikki and I have different parenting styles. Nadia and I have different parenting styles. Nikki: Chad and I have different parenting styles. Ben: Right, and Nikki and I would have different parenting styles whether we were married or divorced. So it's just about finding the- Nikki: Some sort of common ground with all of us. Ben: Picking your battles. I learned to pick my battles with her. It's not worth the... Catherine Shanahan: Yeah. Ben: So the COVID thing, we ran out of paper towels for just a small example, but you know, I called Nikki, I knew that she probably had 25 cases, and even if she didn't I knew that she would give us one. Nikki: I did give you some. Ben: That's just the way- Catherine Shanahan: Are you hoarding? Ben: She's always been. There is no difference. She's- Nikki: I do not hoard toilet paper. I don't understand the toilet paper thing. I barely have enough toilet paper in the house. Ben: She's been preparing for this thing for what, 45 years? Karen Chellew: So you didn't say, "Asher, when you're at mom's house, just grab toilet paper, throw it in your bag and just run out"? Ben: No, and I go over there and I got caught robbing her pantry. Nikki: Yes, for snacks. And then if you notice my hair is pink. It is not normally pink. This has been a quarantine thing. And his daughter is convinced that her hair is going to be pink too, so I tried once, her hair's darker than mine, so didn't work. So now I've just instead of asking for permission, I'm like, "Okay, well I'm dyeing your daughter's hair pink." Ben: Yeah, I found out after I got home from work yesterday. This is, again, what our life is like today. It truly is. You talk about the byline on the book, but it's also the other one we talk about is finding a different kind of love. That's what we've done over the past 14 years, or however long it's been. I love this woman. I've always loved this woman. I think we kind of got confused with being in love and love. But luckily enough we never lost... We might have lost it for a little bit there, but we got back to it. Ben: Then it's evolved into this thing, you know, that is beyond us, beyond our wildest imagination. Again, if we can do it, and this might sound like French or Latin to some of your listeners right now, it's real, but it was a process. Karen Chellew: That's awesome. Ben: You know, if you're starting out, I don't know what you tell your clients, but take small steps, and that's what we had to do in the beginning is get the small wins, get the softball game where there wasn't an awkward feeling or event at your kid's school where you didn't walk away feeling awkward. That's a win. Nikki: Yup. Ben: That's a small win, and then the wins start piling up. Before you know it you're in Africa and no one's dying. Catherine Shanahan: I love that. We tell our clients you know, "You do not have to tell your children that their mom's an alcoholic, or their dad's an idiot. If they're an idiot or an alcoholic they'll see it for themselves." Ben: Right. Nikki: They will. Catherine Shanahan: Just be the dad or the mom that you want to be because that's what they're going [crosstalk 00:44:09]. Ben: Love that. Catherine Shanahan: Like I said it brings tears to my eyes. Literally I had chills when I watched your video because, you know, I do what I do and Karen can speak for herself, but I know that she does it also, but we do what we do because we're advocates for the children of the parents that we helped, and we've helped over 400 couples already. One day I'm hoping that the children of the parents will stand up and say, "Those women helped my parents divorce a better way," you know? Catherine Shanahan: We don't need attorneys fighting for parents to set a parenting schedule or to help divide assets. That's what you have professionals to do. So we're doing what we're doing to help people divorce a better way. We just need the attorneys to tie it up and put the 'as is' or 'as set forth' or whatever those words are. We don't really care. We just want them to have financial clarity and to help them to set up a co-parenting plan that works for their family. Catherine Shanahan: I'm like Nikki, I like to write paper agendas and put stickers on everything and all that stuff. Nikki: Me too. I love it. Catherine Shanahan: That's how I like it too. Nikki: I just won't get rid of it. Catherine Shanahan: I love hearing your story because I think that's how it should be. Ben: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: I hope you can come to our Mrs2Me Summit and maybe speak and talk to our attendees. Ben: Oh, we'd love to because that's why we wrote the book. It's not... This is truly an altruism. Nobody wants to spill their... And in the book we talk about our shortcomings. We talk about our failures. We're imperfect, but what we have is real and just for it to be inspirational. We're so happy to do this thing, and then run into people like you guys and others who... Ben: We kind of kept our head down. As silly as it sounds, when we got divorced there was no Facebook or Instagram. There's Myspace, but not a lot of divorced, co-parenting- Catherine Shanahan: Myspace, is that even around? Karen Chellew: I don't remember that. Ben: Right, so we didn't have support groups online to go to. Then even writing the book, it took us four years to write this book because we'd get in a fight, this was my idea and I was- Nikki: [crosstalk 00:46:16] say, "No, I'm not doing your book." Ben: I'm not doing your effing book, blah, blah, blah. Nikki: Yeah. Ben: So then all of a sudden we get the book out and we're starting to do some research, and we see this huge community online. It's not like, "Oh, no, we just launched a book and there's so many other..." It was like, "This is great." Nikki: Like, "This is awesome." Catherine Shanahan: Yeah. Ben: Because these people have the same goal as us and it's to let people know- Nikki: There's a different way. Ben: There's a different way going into it. Not even after they're divorced and it's yucky and all that, but I think I went into it thinking if I get divorced, it's War of the Roses. It's on. This is the only way to go. Nikki: That's the only kind of divorce I ever knew though. Catherine Shanahan: I tell people, "No." They come to us sometimes when they've been the process and we're like, "Oh, my gosh, I wish you would have came here first because you just wait..." I mean, they spent 20, 40,000, and they come with bags of papers. They don't even know what they have. I look at Karen, because the legal process to me is such a crock sometimes. It's not logical thinking, and as a financial I'm like, "What?" So she's like, "It's the process. This is the process." Look at her, she's laughing because I get so annoyed that people spend money for that. Catherine Shanahan: So we're digital. We work nationally, so I just crack up at the process. So I just wish people come here first because it would save them so much angst. It starts couples fighting when they don't even have to fight. Ben: Right. Catherine Shanahan: I said, "Oh, my God," because they get served this nasty language and they say, "Oh, my God, he's going after this," or, "She's going after this." And the couple will say, "I didn't mean that. I didn't mean to do that." So now a war began where the person didn't even mean it. Catherine Shanahan: So when you said you got to work out your stuff first, I was like, "Thank God he came to his senses," because he didn't really want to attack you, but that's how it would have started because like you said, Nikki said, "Yeah, he probably sends that to everybody." That's exactly what that attorney does. And unfortunately they have to send it like that because that's the process. I'm glad you [crosstalk 00:48:28]. Ben: For us, at least for me it was really thin ice. I think that that's the thing is one misstep... I don't know if you guys saw The Marriage Story, but that is a perfect example of one... If she just maybe read that letter in that first meeting, it might have turned out the way it seemed like the movie had ended. And for me, if I hadn't just had that moment of clarity right then or pull it out at the particular time, whatever it was and whenever it happened, who knows, but it's in the beginning, it's just so... It's a powder keg. Ben: To go to people who are aligned with a better outcome will help you, guide you down that path of the right way. We didn't have that, but luckily we got there. Karen Chellew: Kudos. Ben: Someone tell that woman, Scarlet Johansson, "Read the letter." Nikki: Yeah. Catherine Shanahan: Yes, yes. Karen Chellew: Well you guys are great, and I think one of my takeaways from today is first and foremost have the conversation. Try to have as many conversations as you can as rugged as they are, but also what I've noticed from hearing you today is whenever something happens today or yesterday that kind of is a trigger, I see that you assign it to that person, not to your relationship that broke apart years ago. And I think a lot of couples haven't developed the ability to do that whenever the other person does something that's irritating or that creates that trigger, "That's why I divorced him. I hate him. He's a terrible person blah, blah, blah." Karen Chellew: But I see you just saying, "That's Ben." or, "That's Nikki." And we're different and you move on. I think that's key in the ongoing relationship. Nikki: Give it a day [crosstalk 00:50:23] we'll come back to that. Ben: Yeah, I mean, I think Nikki [crosstalk 00:50:26] the same thing is that some of the same buttons that I pushed when we married, I still pushes. She still pushes the same. Like you said about parenting, our parenting skills would be different, our styles would be different if we were divorced or married, same as the personality. Nikki: Right. Ben: But it's a lot easier to accept Nikki today being her best friend than it is being her husband. But it's still, I'll also give it a day when she tells me she's not doing the effing book. I'll let her Italian hot head cool off a little bit. Nikki: Cool off for a minute. Ben: Then I'll come back. Catherine Shanahan: I'll take your roll of paper towels and I'll go home and talk to her tomorrow. Ben: Exactly. Karen Chellew: I love that. Well, thank you both for being with us today and to our listeners, the book is Our Happy Divorce. And your website is ourhappydivorce.com. You're on Instagram. You're on Facebook I believe as well. Ben: Facebook, Twitter, everything @ourhappydivorce. Yeah. Karen Chellew: All right. We're happy to meet you. Nikki: Nice to meet you. Karen Chellew: And we hope to see you soon at Mrs2Me. We'll talk with you a little bit more about that. Nikki: Thank you. Karen Chellew: Thank you again. Have a nice and safe and healthy day. Ben: Yeah, thank you. And thank you for everything you guys do. Thank you. Karen Chellew: Thank you. Have a great day. Bye. Ben: All right, thank you guys so much, and let us know about that whatever... the summit or whatever- Karen Chellew: Yeah, we will. We'll reach out to you. Ben: However you want to use us to help spread the message because it sounds like we're very much aligned. Karen Chellew: Great. Yeah, we'll stay in touch. Ben: Okay. Thank you guys. Karen Chellew: Bye. Catherine Shanahan: Be well. Bye.  

Before the big game release storm rolls in, The Besties wanted to cover some of the latest smaller titles you might have missed. Including action platformer Bloodroots, mobile game Crossy Road Castle, the third installment in the Ben There, Dan That! series Lair of the Clockwork God and the manga artist Junji Ito influenced WORLD OF HORROR. Plus, they examine the upcoming PS5 versus Xbox Series X and the promise of HDMI 2.1, https://www.polygon.com/2020/3/4/21151509/xbox-series-x-ps5-specs-4k-8k-tv-hdmi

Ben Brown has a coaching business that helps highly driven men improve their energy and body composition and help them create a balance between work and home life. Ben is also the owner of Complete Essentials, an essential amino acid product which was born out of his own health issues. Ben talks to your host Blake Bowman about the connection between nutrition, lifestyle, and symptoms.   Episode Highlights: How Ben discovered what could heal his gastrointestinal inflammation naturally. The primary area of Ben’s business is nutrition coaching. H. Pilori is the bacteria that causes stomach ulcers and a high percentage of people have it. The lining of the gut can be deteriorated through stress, food quality, and more. The process Ben goes through to help people define their optimal diet. The most impactful thing coaches can do is to help people be more in tune with their body. Why eating ancestrally makes a lot of sense and is a good jumping off point. Eating seasonally and locally is another great way to start. Why certain diets give your gut time to regenerate and repair. There’s no one right way to eat, we have to understand biochemical individuality. If you’re serious about taking control of your health then you’ll have to consider big life changes. How to use things like hydrochloric acid effectively without becoming dependant on them. If you’re just starting out, you need digestive support. The natural things people can do to improve their digestive enzymes: Slow down and chew your food. Drink a lot of water, but not while you’re eating. There’s a reason our stomach is such an acidic environment and it should be that way. Ben’s thoughts on digestive bitters and bitter herbs. The role of ox bile in your health after having your gall bladder removed. About Ben’s product Complete Essentials and why it’s an all-in-one workout product. The body can function without carbohydrates but it cannot function for any period of time without essential amino acids. The best course of action is to be getting enough protein in throughout the day through real food. Many supplements are in pill form, but that’s not very conducive to workouts. When you take the Complete Essentials powder it’s instantly absorbed into the bloodstream. With essential amino acids, even people who have compromised digestion can benefit. Why it’s easier to gain fat as you get older. Essential amino acids provide mineral support without any caffeine or artificial sweeteners.   3 Key Points: Gut health and optimal digestion should be the primary focus when there is poor health. Eating ancestrally, seasonally, and locally can be the best way to start figuring out what diet works best with your body. Alkaline water is harmful to your production of hydrochloric acid, if you’re drinking it you need to stop.   Tweetable Quotes: “You aren’t what you eat, you are what you digest and assimilate.” -Blake “Most of the general population has compromised gut integrity.” -Ben “You have to go through trial and error to figure out what works best for you.” -Ben “Everything we do on a daily basis lends itself to screwing up our digestion.” -Ben “There’s a reason our stomach is such an acidic environment and it should be that way.” -Ben “The body can function without carbohydrates but it cannot function for any period of time without essential amino acids.” -Ben   Resources Mentioned: GuerrillaZen.com Get Complete Essentials at BSLNutritionshop.com

My guest this week is Brian Nosek, co-Founder and the Executive Director of the Center for Open Science. Brian is also a professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Virginia doing research on the gap between values and practices, such as when behavior is influenced by factors other than one's intentions and goals. The topic of this conversation is how incentives in academia lead to problems with how we do science, how we can fix those problems, the center for open science, and how to bring about systemic change in general. Show Notes Brian’s Website Brian on Twitter (@BrianNosek) Center for Open Science The Replication Crisis Preregistration Article in Nature about preregistration results The Scientific Method If you want more, check out Brian on Econtalk Transcript Intro   [00:00:00] This podcast I talked to Brian nosek about innovating on the very beginning of the Innovation by one research. I met Brian at the Dartmouth 60th anniversary conference and loved his enthusiasm for changing the way we do science. Here's his official biography. Brian nozik is a co-founder and the executive director for the center for open science cos is a nonprofit dedicated to enabling open and reproducible research practices worldwide. Brian is also a professor in the department of psychology at the University of Virginia. He's received his PhD from Yale University in 2002 in 2015. He was on Nature's 10 list and the chronicle for higher education influence. Some quick context about Brian's work and the center for open science. There's a general consensus in academic circles that there are glaring problems in how we do research today. The way research works is generally like this researchers usually based at a university do experiments then when they have a [00:01:00] result they write it up in a paper that paper goes through the peer-review process and then a journal publishes. The number of Journal papers you've published and their popularity make or break your career. They're the primary consideration for getting a position receiving tenure getting grants and procedure in general that system evolved in the 19th century. When many fewer people did research and grants didn't even exist we get into how things have changed in the podcast. You may also have heard of what's known as the replication crisis. This is the Fairly alarming name for a recent phenomena in which people have tried and failed to replicate many well-known studies. For example, you may have heard that power posing will make you act Boulder where that self-control is a limited resource. Both of the studies that originated those ideas failed to replicate. Since replicating findings a core part of the scientific method unreplicated results becoming part of Cannon is a big deal. Brian has been heavily involved in the [00:02:00] crisis and several of the center for open science is initiatives Target replication. So with that I invite you to join my conversation with Brian idzik.   How does open science accelerate innovation and what got you excited about it?   Ben: So the  theme that  I'm really interested in is  how do we accelerate Innovations? And so just to start off with I love to ask you sort of a really broad question of  in your mind. How does having a more open science framework help us accelerate Innovations? And I guess parallel to that. Why what got you excited about it first place. Brian: Yeah, yeah, so that this is really a core of why we started the center for open science is to figure out how can we maximize the progress of science given that we see a number of different barriers to or number of different friction points to the PACE and progress of [00:03:00] Science. And so there are a few things. I think that how. Openness accelerates Innovation, and I guess you can think of it as sort of multiple stages at the opening stage openness in terms of planning pre-registering what your study is about why you're doing this study that the study exists in the first place has a mechanism of helping to improve Innovation by increasing The credibility of the outputs. Particularly in making a clear distinction between the things that we planned in advance that we're testing hypotheses of ideas that we have and we're acquiring data in order to test those ideas from the exploratory results the things that we learn once we've observed the data and we get insights but there are necessarily more uncertain and having a clear distinction between those two practices is a mechanism for. Knowing the credibility of the results [00:04:00] and then more confidently applying results. That one observes in the literature after the fact for doing next steps. And the reason that's really important I think is that we have so many incentives in the research pipeline to dress up exploratory findings that are exciting and sexy and interesting but are uncertain as if they were hypothesis-driven, right? We apply P values to them. We apply a story upfront to them we present them as. These are results that are highly credible from a confirmatory framework. Yeah, and that has been really hard for Innovation to happen. So I'll pause there because there's lots more but yeah, so listen, let's touch on that.   What has changed to make the problem worse?   Ben: There's there's a lot that right there. So you mentioned the incentives to basically make. Things that aren't really following the scientific method follow the clicker [00:05:00] following the scientific method and one of the things I'm always really interested in what has changed in the incentives because I think that there's definitely this. Notion that this problem has gotten worse over time. And so that means that that something has has changed and so in your mind like what what changed to make to sort of pull science away from that like, you know sort of ice training ideal of you have your hypothesis and then you test that hypothesis and then you create a new hypothesis to this. System that you're pushing back against. Brian: You know, it's a good question. So let me start with making the case for why we can say that nothing has changed and then what might lead to thinking something has changed in unpacking this please the potential reason to think that nothing has [00:06:00] changed is that the kinds of results that are the most rewarded results have always been the kinds of results that are more the most rewarded results, right? If I find a novel Finding rather than repeating something someone else has done. I'm like. To be rewarded more with publication without latex cetera. If I find a positive result. I'm more likely to gain recognition for that. Then a negative result. Nothing's there versus this treatment is effective, which one's more interesting. Well, we know which ones for interesting. Yeah. Yeah, and then clean and tidy story write it all fits together and it works and now I have this new explanation for this new phenomenon that everyone can can take seriously so novel positive clean and tidy story is the. They'll come in science and that's because it breaks new ground and offers a new idea and offers a new way of thinking about the world. And so that's great. We want those. We've always wanted those things. So the reason to think well, this is a challenge always is [00:07:00] because. Who doesn't want that and and who hasn't wanted that right? It turns out my whole career is a bunch of nulls where I don't do anything and not only fits together. It's just a big mess right on screen is not a way to pitch a successful career. So that challenge is there and what pre-registration or committing an advanced does is helps us have the constraints. To be honest about what parts of that are actual results of credible confrontations of pre-existing hypotheses versus stuff that is exploring and unpacking what it is we can find. Okay, so that in this in the incentive landscape, I don't think has changed. Mmm what thanks have changed. Well, there are a couple of things that we can point to as potential reasons to think that the problem has gotten worse one is that data acquisition many fields is a lot easier than it ever was [00:08:00] and so with access more data and more ways to analyze it more efficient analysis, right? We have computers that do this instead of slide rules. We can do a lot more adventuring in data. And so we have more opportunity to explore and exploit the malays and transform it into things signal. The second is that the competitive landscape is. Stronger, right there are fewer than the ratio of people that want jobs to jobs available is getting larger and larger and larger and that fact and then competitiveness for Grants and same way that competition than can. Very easily amplify these challenges people who are more willing to exploit more researcher degrees of freedom are going to be able to get the kinds of results more easily that are rewarded in the system. And so that would have amplify the presence of those in people that managed to [00:09:00] survive that competitive firm got it. So I think it's a reasonable hypothesis that people that it's gotten worse. I don't think there's definitive evidence but those would be the theoretical points. At least I would point to for that. That makes a lot of sense. So you had a just sort of jumping back. You had a couple a couple points and we had we have just touched on the first one.   Point Number Two about Accelerating Innovation   Ben: So I want to give you that chance to oh, yeah go back and to keep going through that. Brian:  Right. Yeah. So accelerating Innovation is the idea, right? So that's a point of participation is accelerating Innovation by by clarifying The credibility of claims as they are produced. Yes, we do that better than I think will be much more efficient that will have a better understanding of the evidence base as it comes out. Yeah second phase is the ability is the openness of the data and materials for the purposes of verify. Those [00:10:00] initial claims right? I do a study. I pre-registered. It's all great and I share it with you and you read it. And you say well that sounds great. But did you actually get that and what would have happened if you made different decisions here here and there right because I don't quite agree with the decisions that you made in your analysis Pipeline and I see some gaps there so you're being able to access the materials that I produced in the data that came from. Makes it so that you can one just simply verify that you can reproduce the findings that I reported. Right? I didn't just screw up the analysis script or something and that as a minimum standard is useful, but even more than that, you can test the robustness in ways that I didn't and I came to that question with some approach that you might look at it and say well I would do it differently and the ability to reassess the data for the same question is a very useful thing for. The robustness particularly in areas that are that have [00:11:00] complex analytic pipelines where there's are many choices to make so that's the second part then the third part is the ReUse. So not only should we be able to verify and test the robustness of claims as they happen, but data can be used for lots of different purposes. Sometimes there are things that are not at all anticipated by the data originator. And so we can accelerate Innovation by making it a lot easier to aggregate evidence of claims across multiple Studies by having the data being more accessible, but then also making that data more accessible and usable for. Studying things that no one no one ever anticipated trying to investigate. Yeah, and so the efficiency gain on making better use of the data that already exists rather than the Redundant just really do Revenue question didn't dance it your question you did as it is a massive efficiency. Opportunity because there is a lot of [00:12:00] data there is a lot of work that goes in why not make the most use of it began?   What is enabled by open science?   Ben: Yeah that makes a lot of sense. Do you have any like really good sort of like Keystone examples of these things in action like places where because people could replicate the. The the study they could actually go back to the pipeline or reuse the data that something was enabled. That wasn't that wouldn't have been possible. Otherwise, Brian: yeah. Well, let's see. I'll give a couple of local mean personal examples just to just to illustrate some of the points, please so we have the super fun project that we did just to illustrate this second part of the pipeline right this robustness phase of. People may make different choices and those choices may have implications for the reliability results. So what we did in this project was that we get we acquired a dataset [00:13:00] of a very rich data set of lots of players and referees and outcomes in soccer and we took that data set and then we recruit a different teams. 29 in the end different teams with lots of varied expertise and statistics and analyzing data and have them all investigate the same research. Which is our players with darker skin tone more likely to get a red card then players with lighter skin tone. And so that's you know, that's a question. We'll of Interest people have studied and then we had provided this data set. Here's a data set that you can use to analyze that and. The teams worked on their own and developed an analysis strategies for how they're going to test that hypothesis. They came up with their houses strategy. They submitted their analysis and their results to us. We remove the results and [00:14:00] then took their analysis strategies and then share them among the teams for peer review right different people looking at it. They have made different choices. They appear each other and then went back. They took those peer reviews. They didn't know what each other found but they took. Because reviews and they wanted to update their analysis they could and so they did all that and then submitted their final analyses and what we observed was that a huge variation in analysis choices and variation in the results. So as a simple Criterion for Illustrated the variation results two-thirds of the teams found a significant. Write P less than 0.05 standard for deciding whether you see something there in the data, right and Atherton teams found a null. So the and then of course they debated amongst each other which was analysis strategy was the right strategy but in the end it was very clear among the teams that there are lots of reasonable choices that could be made. And [00:15:00] those reasonable choices had implications for the results that were observed from the same data. Yeah, and it's Standard Process. We do not see the how it's not easy to observe how the analytics choices influence the results, right? We see a paper. It has an outcome we say those are what the those fats those the outcomes of the data room. Right, but what actually the case is that those are the outcomes the data revealed contingent on all those choices that the researcher made and so that I think just as an illustrative illustrative. So it helps to figure out the robustness of that particular finding given the many different reasonable choices. That one would make where if we had just seen one would have had a totally different interpretation, right either. Yeah, it's there or it's not there.   How do you encode context for experiments esp. with People?   Ben:  Yeah, and in terms of sort of that the data and. [00:16:00] Really sort of exposing the the study more something that that I've seen especially in. These is that it seems like the context really matters and people very often are like, well there's there's a lot of context going on in addition to just the procedure that's reported. Do you have any thoughts on like better ways of sort of encoding and recording that context especially for experiments that involve? Brian: Yeah. Yeah. This is a big challenge is because we presume particularly in the social and life sciences that there are many interactions between the different variables. Right but climate the temperature the time of day the circadian rhythms the personalities whatever it is that is the different elements of the subjects of the study whether they be the plants or people or otherwise, yeah. [00:17:00] And so the. There are a couple of different challenges here to unpack one is that in our papers? We State claims at the maximal level of generality. We can possibly do it and that that's just a normal pattern of human communication and reasoning right? I do my study in my lab at the University of Virginia on University of Virginia undergraduates. I don't conclude in the. University of university University of Virginia undergraduates in this particular date this particular time period this particular class. This is what people do with the recognition that that might be wrong right with recognition. There might be boundary conditions but not often with articulating where we think theoretically those boundary conditions could be so in one step of. Is actually putting what some colleagues in psychology of this great paper about about constraints on [00:18:00] generality. They suggest what we need in all discussion sections of all papers is a sexually say when won't this hold yeah, just give them what you know, where where is this not going to hold and just giving people an occasion to think about that for a second say oh. - okay. Yeah, actually we do think this is limited to people that live in Virginia for these reasons right then or no, maybe we don't really think this applies to everybody but now we have to say so you can get the call it up. So that alone I think would make a huge difference just because it would provide that occasion to sort of put the constraints ourselves as The Originators of findings a second factor, of course is just sharing as much of the materials as possible. But often that doesn't provide a lot of the context particularly for more complex experimental studies or if there are particular procedural factors right in a lot of the biomedical Sciences there. There's a lot of nuance [00:19:00] into how it is that this particular reagent needs to be dealt with how they intervention needs to be administered Etc. And so I like the. Moves towards video of procedures right? So there is a journal Journal of visualized events jove visualized experiments that that that tries to that gives people opportunities to show the actual experimental protocol as it is administered. To try to improve it a lot of people using the OSF put videos up of the experiment as they administered it. So to maximize your ability to sort of see how it is that it was done through. So those steps I think can really help to maximize the transparency of those things that are hard to put in words or aren't digitally encoded oil. Yeah, and those are real gaps   What is the ultimate version of open science?   Ben: got it. And so. In your mind what is sort of like the endgame of all this? What is it? Like what [00:20:00] would be the ideal sort of like best-case scenario of science? Like how would that be conducted? So I say you get to control the world and you get to tell everybody practicing science exactly what to do. What would that look like? Brian: Well, if it if I really had control we would just all work on Wikipedia and we would just revising one big paper with the new applicants. Ask you got it continuously and we get all of our credit by. You know logging how many words that I changed our words that survived after people have made their revisions and whether those words changed are on pages that were more important for the overall scientific record versus the less important spandrels. And so we would output one paper that is the summary of knowledge, which is what Wikipedia summarizes. All right, so maybe that's that's maybe going a little bit further than what like [00:21:00] that we can consider. The realm of conceptually possible. So if we imagine a little bit nearer term, what I would love to see is the ability to trace the history of any research project and that seems more achievable in the sense that. If a every in fact, my laboratory is getting close to this, right every study that we do is registered on the OSF. And once we finish the studies, we post the materials and the data or as we're doing it if we're managing the materials and data and then we attach a paper if we write a paper at the end preprint or the final report so that people can Discover it and all of those things are linked together. Be really cool if I had. Those data in a standardized framework of how it is that they are [00:22:00] coded so that they could be automatically and easily integrated with other similar kinds of data so that someone going onto the system would be able to say show me all the studies that ever investigated this variable associated with this variable and tell me what the aggregate result is Right real-time meta-analysis of the entire database of all data that I've ever been collected that. Enough flexibility would help to really very rapidly. I think not just spur Innovations and new things but to but help to point out where there are gaps right there a particular kinds of relationships between things particular effects of predict interventions where we know a ton and then we have this big assumption in our theoretical framework about how we get from X to y. And then as we look for variables that help us to identify whether X gets us to why we feel there just isn't stuff. The literature has not filled that Gap. So I think there are huge benefits for that [00:23:00] kind of aggregate ability. But mostly what I want to be able to do is instead of saying you have to do research in any particular way. The only requirement is you have to show us how you did your research and your particular way so that the marketplace of ideas. Can operate as efficiently as possible and that really is the key thing? It's not preventing bad ideas from getting into the system. It's not about making sure that the different kinds of best things are the ones that immediately are through with not that about Gatekeepers. It's about efficiency in how it is. We call that literature of figuring out which things are credible which things are not because it's really useful to. The ideas into the system as long as they can be. Self-corrected efficiently as well. And that's where I think we are not doing well in the current system. We're doing great on generation. [00:24:00] We're General kinds of innovative ideas. Yeah, but we're not is parsing through those ideas as efficiently as it could decide which ones are worth actually investing more resources in jumping. A couple levels in advance that   Talmud for Science   Ben:  that makes a lot of sense and actually like I've definitely come across many papers just on the internet like you go and Google Scholar and you search and you find this paper and in fact, it has been refuted by another paper and there's no way to know that yeah, and so. I does your does the open science framework address that in any way? Brian:  No, it doesn't yet. And this is a critical issue is the connectivity between findings and the updating of knowledge because the way that like I said doesn't an indirect way but it doesn't in the systematic way that actually would solve this problem. The [00:25:00] main challenge is that we treat. Papers as static entities. When what their summarizing is happening very dynamically. Right. It may be that a year later. After that paper comes out one realizes. We should have analyze that data totally different. We actually analyzed it wrong is indefensible the way that we analyzed it. Right right. There are very few mechanisms for efficiently updating that paper in a way that would actually update the knowledge and that's something where we all agree. That's analyze the wrong way, right? What are my options? I could. Retract the paper. So it's no longer in existence at all. Supposedly, although even retracted papers still get cited we guess nuts. So that's a base problem. Right or I could write a correction, which is another paper that comments on that original paper that may not itself even be discoverable with the original paper that corrects the analysis. Yeah, and that takes months and years. [00:26:00] All right. So the really what I think is. Fundamental for actually addressing this challenge is integrating Version Control with scholarly publishing. So that papers are seen as Dynamic objects not static objects. And so if you know what I would love to see so here's another Milestone of this if we if I could control everything another Milestone would be if a researcher could have a very productive career with. Only working on a single paper for his or her whole life, right? So they have a really interesting idea. And they just continue to investigate and build the evidence and challenge it and figure, you know, just continue to unpack it and they just revise that paper over time. This is what we understand. Now, this is where it is. Now. This is what we've learned over here are some other exceptions but they just keep fine-tuning it and then you get to see the versions of that paper over its [00:27:00] 50-year history as that phenomenon got unpacked that. Plus the integration with other literature would make this much more efficient for exactly the problem that you raised which is we with papers. We don't know what the current knowledge base is. We have no real good way except for these. These attempts to summarize the existing literature with yet a new paper and that doesn't then supersede those old papers. It's just another paper is very inefficient system.   Can Social Sciences 'advance' in the same way as the physical sciences?   Ben: Ya know that that totally makes sense. Actually. I just I have sort of a meta question that I've argued with several people about which is do you feel like. We can make advances in our understanding of sort of like [00:28:00] human-centered science in the same way that we can in like chemistry or physics. Like people we very clearly have like building blocks of physics and the Builds on itself. And there's I've had debates with people about whether you can do this in. In the humanities and the social sciences. What are your thoughts on that? Brian:  Yeah. It is an interesting question and the. What seems to be the biggest barrier is not anything about methodology in particular but about complexity? Yeah, right, if the problem being many different inputs can have similar impact cause similar kinds of outcomes and singular inputs can have multivariate outcomes that it influences and all of those different inputs in terms of causal elements may have interactive effects on the [00:29:00] outs, so. How can we possibly develop Rich enough theories to predict the actions effectively and then ultimately explain the actions effectively of humans in a complex environments. It doesn't seem that we will get to the beautiful equations that underlie a lot of physics and chemistry and count for a substantial amount of evidence. So the thing that I don't feel like I under have any good hand along with that is if it's a theoretical or practical limit right is it just not possible because it's so complex and there isn't this predicted. Or it's just that's really damn hard. But if we had big enough computers if you had enough data, if we were able to understand complex enough models, we would be able to predict it. Right so is as a mom cycle historians, right? They figure it out right the head. [00:30:00] Oxidizing web series righty they could account for 99.9 percent of the variance of what people do next and but of course, even there it went wrong and that was sort of the basis of the whole ceilings. But yeah, I just don't know I don't have a way to. I don't yet have a framework for thinking about how is it that I could answer that question whether it's a practical or theoretical limit. Yeah. What do you think? Ben:  What do I think I think that it's great. Yeah, so I usually actually come down on the I think it's a practical limit now how much it would take to get there might make it effectively a theoretical limit right now. But that there's there's nothing actually preventing us from like if you if you could theoretically like measure everything why not? I [00:31:00] think that is just with again. It's like the it's really a measurement problem and we do get better at measuring things. So that's the that's that's where I come down on but I.   How do you shift incentives in science?   Yep, that's just purely like I have no good argument. going going back to the incentives. It seems to me like a lot of what like I'm completely convinced that these changes would. Definitely accelerate the number of innovations that we have and so and it seems like a lot of these changes require shifting scientists incentives. And so and that's like a notoriously hard thing so we both like how are you going about shifting those incentives right now and how might they be shifted in the future. [00:32:00] Brian: Yeah, that's a great question. That's what we spend. A lot of our time worrying about in the sense of there is very little at least in my experience is very distal disagreement on the problems and the opportunities for improving the pace of Discovery and Innovation based on the solutions. It really is about the implementation. How is it that you change that those cultural incentives so that we can align. The values that we have for science with the practices that researchers do on a daily basis and that's a social problem. Yeah, there are technical supports. But ultimately it's a social problem. And so the the near term approach that we have is to recognize the systems of rewards as they are. And see how could we refine those to align with some of these improved practices? So we're not pitching. Let's all work on [00:33:00] Wikipedia because that's that is so far distant from. What they systems have reward for scientist actually surviving and thriving in science that we wouldn't be able to get actually pragmatic traction. Right? So I'll give one example of can give a few but here's the starting with one of an example that integrates with current incentives but changes them in a fundamental way and that is the publishing model of registered reports. Sophie in the standard process right? I do my research. I write up my studies and then I submit them for peer review at the highest possible prestigious Journal that I can hoping that they will not see all the flaws and if they'll accept it. I'll get all the do that process me and I understand it anyway - journal and the P plus Terminal C and eventually somewhere and get accepted. The register report model makes one change to the process and that is to move. The critical point of peer review [00:34:00] from after the results are known and I've written up the report and I'm all done with the research to after I've figured out what the question that I want to investigate is and what the methodology that I'm going to use so I don't have an observed the outcomes yet. All I've done is frame question. An articulated why it's important and a methodology that I'm going to just to test that question and that's what the peer reviewers evaluate right? And so the key part is that it fits into the existing system perfectly, right? The the currency of advancement is publication. I need to get as many Publications as I can in the most prestigious Outlets. I can to advance my career. We don't try to change that. Instead we just try to change. What is the basis for making a decision about publication and by moving the primary stage of peer reviewed before the results are known does a fundamental change in what I'm being rewarded for as the author [00:35:00] right? Yeah, but I'm being rewarded for as the author in the current system is sexy results, right get the best most interesting most Innovative results. I can write and the irony of that. Is that the results of the one thing that I'm not supposed to be able to control in your study? Right? Right. What I'm supposed to be able to control is asking interesting questions and developing good methodologies to test those questions. Of course that's oversimplifying a bit. There are in there. The presumption of emphasizing results is that my brilliant insights at the outset of the project are the reason that I was able to get those great results, right, but that depends on the credibility of that entire Pipeline and put that aside but the moving it to at the design stage means that my incentive as an author is to ask the most important questions that I can. And develop the most compelling and effective and valid methodologies that I can to test them. [00:36:00] Yeah, and so that changes to what it is presumably we are supposed to be being rewarded for in science. The other thing that it changes in the there's a couple of other elements of incentive changes that it has an impact on that are important for the whole process right for reviewers instant. It's. When I am asked to review a paper in my area of research when I when all the results are there, I have skin in the game as a reviewer. I'm an expert in that area. I may have made claims about things in that particular area. Yeah, if the paper challenges my cleanse make sure to find all kinds of problems with the methodology. I can't believe they did this is this is a ridiculous thing, right? We write my paper. That's the biggest starting point problem challenge my results all well forget out of you. But the amount of course if it's aligned with [00:37:00] my findings and excites me gratuitously, then I will find lots of reasons to like the paper. So I have these Twisted incentives to reinforce findings and behave ideologically as a reviewer in the existing system by moving peer review to the design stage. It fundamentally changes my incentives to right so say I'm in a very contentious area of research and there's only ten opponents on a particular claim when we are dealing with results You can predict the outcome right it people behave ideologically even when they're not trying to when you don't know the results. Both people have the same interests, right? If I truly believe in the phenomenon that I'm studying and the opponents of my point of view also believe in their perspective, right then both want to review that study and that design and that methodology to maximize its quality to reveal the truth, which I think I [00:38:00] have and so that alignment actually makes adversaries. To some extent allies and in review and makes the reviewer and the author more collaborative, right the feedback that I give on that paper can actually help the methodology get better. Whereas in the standard process when I say here's all the things you did wrong. All the author has this to say well geez, you're a jerk. Like I can't do anything about that. I've already done the research and so I can't fix it. Yeah. So the that shifts earlier is much more collaborative and helps with that then the other question is the incentives for the journal right? So in the. Journal editors have strong incentives of their own they want leadership. They want to have impact they don't want the one that destroyed their journal and so [00:39:00] the incentives and the in the existing model or to publish sexy results because more people were read those results. They might cite those results. They might get more attention for their Journal, right? And shifting that to on quality designs then shift their priorities to publishing the most rigorous research the most rust robust research and to be valued based on that now. Yeah, so I'll pause there there's lots of other things to say, but those I think are some critical changes to the incentive landscape that still fits. Into the existing way that research is done in communicated.   Don't people want to read sexy results?   Ben: Yeah. I have a bunch of questions just to poke at that last point a little bit wouldn't people still read the journals that are publishing the most sexy results sort of regardless of whether they were web what stage they're doing that peer review. Brian:  Yeah. This is a key concern of editors and thinking about adopting registered reports. [00:40:00] So we have about a hundred twenty-five journals that are offering this now, but we continue to pitch it to other groups and other other ones, but one of the big concerns that Hunters have is if I do this then I'm going to end up publishing a bunch of no results and no one will read my journal known will cite it and I will be the one that ruined my damn door. All right. So it is a reasonable concern because of the way the system works now, so there's a couple answers to that but the one is empirical which is is it actually the case that these are less red or less cited than regular articles that are published in those. So we have a grant from the McDonald Foundation to actually study registered reports. And the first study that we finished is a comparison of articles that were done as register reports with this in the same published in the same Journal. [00:41:00] Articles that were done the regularly to see if they are different altmetrics attention, right citation and attention and Oppa in media and news and social media and also citation impact at least early stage citation impact because the this model is new enough that it isn't it's only been working for since 2014. In terms of first Publications and what we found in that is that at least in this initial data set. There's no difference in citation rates, and if anything the register report. Articles have gotten more altmetric impact social media news media. That's great. So at least the initial data suggests that who knows if that will sustain generalize, but the argument that I would make in terms of a conceptual argument is that if Studies have been vetted. In terms of without knowing the results. These are important results to know [00:42:00] right? So that's what the actors and the reviewers have to decide is do we need to know the outcome of this study? Yeah, if the answer is yes that this is an important enough result that we need to know what happened that any result is. Yeah, right. That's the whole idea is that we're doing the study harder find out what the world says about that particular hypothesis that particular question. Yeah, so it become citable. Whereas when were only evaluating based on the results. Well, yeah things that Purity people is that that's crazy, but it happened. Okay, that's exciting. But if you have a paper where it's that's crazy and nothing happened. Then people say well that was a crazy paper. Yeah, and that paper would be less likely to get through the register report kind of model that makes a lot of sense. You could even see a world where because they're being pre-registered especially for more like the Press people can know to pay attention to it. [00:43:00] So you can actually almost like generate a little bit more height. In terms of like oh we're not going to do this thing. Isn't that exciting? Yeah, exactly. So we have a reproducibility project in cancer biology that we're wrapping up now where we do we sample a set of studies and then try to replicate findings from those papers to see where where can we reproduce findings in the where are their barriers to be able to reproduce existing? And all of these went through the journal elife has registered reports so that we got peer review from experts in advance to maximize the quality of the designs and they published instead of just registering them on OSF, which they are they also published the register reports as an article of its own and those did generate lots of Interest rule that's going to happen with this and that I think is a very effective way to sort of engage the community on. The process of actual Discovery we don't know the answer to these [00:44:00] things. Can we build in a community-based process? That isn't just about let me tell you about the great thing that I just found and more about. Let me bring you into our process. How does were actually investigating this problem right and getting more that Community engagement feedback understanding Insight all along the life cycle of the research rather than just as the end point, which I think is much more inefficient than it could be.   Open Science in Competitive Fields and Scooping   Ben: Yeah and. On the note of pre-registering. Have you seen how it plays out in like extremely competitive Fields? So one of the world's that I'm closest to is like deep learning machine learning research and I have friends who keep what they're doing. Very very secret because they're always worried about getting scooped and they're worried about someone basically like doing the thing first and I could see people being hesitant to write down to [00:45:00] publicize what they're going to do because then someone else could do it. So, how do you see that playing out if at all? Brian: Yeah scoping is a real concern in the sense that people have it and I think that is also a highly inflated concern based on the reality of what happens in practice but nevertheless because people have the concern systems have to be built to address it. Yeah, so one simple answer on the addressing the concern and then reasons to be skeptical at the. The addressing the concern with the OSF you can pre-register an embargo your pre-registrations from to four years. And what that does is it still gets all the benefits of registering committing putting that into an external repository. So you have independent verification of time and date and what you said you were going to do but then gives you as the researcher the flexibility to [00:46:00] say I need this to remain private for some period of time because of whatever reason. As I need it to be private, right? I don't want the recent participants that I am engaged in this project to discover what the design is or I don't want it competitors to discover what the design is. So that is a pragmatic solution is sort of dress. Okay, you got that concern. Let's meet that concern with technology to help to manage the current landscape. There are a couple reasons to be skeptical that the concern is actually much of a real concerning practice Tristan. And one example comes from preprints. So a lot of people when they pre princess sharing the paper you have of some area of research prior to going through peer review and being published in a journal write and in some domains like physics. It is standard practice the archive which is housed at Cornell is the standard for [00:47:00] anybody in America physics to share their research through archive prior to publication in other fields. It's very new or unknown but emerging. But the exact same concern about scooping comes up regularly where they say there's so many people in our field if I share a preprint someone else with the lab that is productive lab is going to see my paper. They're going to run the studies really fast. They're going to submit it to a journal that will publish and quickly and then I'll lose my publication because it'll come out in this other one, right and that's a commonly articulated concern. I think there are very good reasons to be skeptical of it in practice and the experience of archive is a good example. It's been operating since 1991 physicists early in its life articulated similar kinds of concerns and none of them have that concern now, why is it that they don't have that concern now? Well the Norms have shifted from the way you establish priority [00:48:00] is not. When it's published in the journal, it's when you get it onto archive. Right? Right. So a new practice becomes standard. It's when is it that the community knows about what it is you did that's the way you get that first finder Accolade and that still carries through to things like publication a second reason is that. We all have a very inflated sense of self importance that our great our kids right? There's an old saw in in venture capital of take your best idea and try to give it to your competitor and most of the time you can write. We think of our own ideas really amazing and everyone else doesn't yeah people sleeping other people. Is Right Southern the idea that there are people looking their chops on waiting for your paper your registration to show up so they can steal your [00:49:00] idea and then use it and claim it as their own is is great. It's shows High self-esteem. And that's great. I am all for high self. I don't know and then the last part is that. It is a norm violation to do that to such a strong degree to do the stealing of and not crediting someone else for their work, but it's actually very addressable in the daily practice of how science operates which is if you can show that you put that registration or that paper up on a independent service and then it was it appeared prior to the other person doing it. And then that other group did try to steal it and claim it as their own. Well, that's misconduct. And if they did if they don't credit you as the originator then that's something that is a norm violation and how science operates and I'm actually pretty confident in the process of dealing with Norm [00:50:00] violations in the scientific Community. I've had my own experience with the I think this very rarely happens, but I have had an experience with it. I've posted papers on my website before there were pretty print services in the behavioral sciences since I. Been a faculty member and I've got a Google Scholar one day and was reading. Yeah, the papers that I have these alerts set up for things that are related to my work and I paper showed up and I was like, oh that sounds related to some things. I've been working on. So I've clicked on the link to the paper and I went to the website. So I'm reading the paper. I from these authors I didn't recognize and then I realized wait that's that's my paper. I need a second and I'm an author and I didn't submit it to that journal. And it was my paper. They had taken a paper off of my website. They had changed the abstract. They run it through Google translate. It looks like it's all Gobbledy gook, but it was an abstract. But the rest of it was [00:51:00] essentially a carbon copy of our paper and they published. Well, you know, so what did I do? I like contacted the editor and we actually is on retraction watch this story about someone stealing my paper and retraction watch the laughing about it and it got retracted. And as far as we heard the person that had gone it lost their job, and I don't know if that's true. I never followed. But there are systems place is the basic point to deal with the Regis forms of this. And so I have I am sanguine about those not be real issues. But I also recognize they are real concerns. And so we have to have our Technology Solutions be able to address the concerns as they exist today. And I think the those concerns will just disappear as people gain experience.   Top down v Bottom up for driving change   Ben: Got it. I like that distinction between issues and concerns that they may not be the same thing. To I've been paying attention to   sort of the tactics that you're [00:52:00] taking to drive this adoption. And there's  some bottom up things in terms of changing the culture and getting  one Journal at a time to change just by convincing them and there's also been some some top-down approaches that you've been using and I was wondering if you could just sort of go through those and what you feel like. Is is the most effective or what combinations of things are are the most effective for really driving this change? Brian: Yeah. No, it's a good question because this is a culture change is hard especially with the decentralized system like science where there is no boss and the different incentive drivers are highly distributed. Right, right. He has a richer have a unique set of societies. Are relevant to establishing my Norms you could have funders that fund my work a unique set of journals that I publish in and my own institution. And so every researcher [00:53:00] has that unique combination of those that all play a role in shaping the incentives for his or her behavior and so fundamental change if we're talking about just at the level of incentives not even at the level of values and goals requires. Massive shift across all of those different sectors not massive in terms of the amount of things they need to shift but in the number of groups that need to make decisions tissue. Yeah, and so the we need both top-down and bottom-up efforts to try to address that and the top down ones are. That we work on at least are largely focused on the major stakeholders. So funders institutions and societies particularly ones that are publishing right so journals whether through Publishers societies, can we get them like with the top guidelines, which is this framework that that has been established to promote? What are the transparency standards? What could we [00:54:00] require of authors or grantees or employees of our organizations? Those as a common framework provide a mechanism to sort of try to convince these different stakeholders to adopt new standards new policies to that that then everybody that associated with that have to follow or incentivised to follow simultaneously those kinds of interventions don't necessarily get hearts and minds and a lot of the real work in culture change. Is getting people to internalize what it is that mean is good science is rigorous work and that requires a very bottom up community-based approach to how Norms get established Within. What are effectively very siloed very small world scientific communities that are part of the larger research community. And so with that we do a lot [00:55:00] of Outreach to groups search starting with the idealists right people who already want to do these practices are already practicing rigorous research. How can we give them resources and support to work on shifting those Norms in their small world communities and so. Out of like the preprint services that we host or other services that allow groups to form. They can organize around a technology. There's a preprint service that our Unity runs and then drive the change from the basis of that particular technology solution in a bottom-up way and the great part is that to the extent that both of these are effective they become self reinforcing. So a lot of the stakeholder leaders and editor of a journal will say that they are reluctant. They agree with all the things that we trying to pitch to them as ways to improve rigor and [00:56:00] research practices, but they don't they don't have the support of their Community yet, right. They need to have people on board with this right well in we can the bottom. It provides that that backing for that leader to make a change and likewise leaders that are more assertive are willing to sort of take some chances can help to drive attention and awareness in a way that facilitates the bottom-up communities that are fledgling to gain better standing and we're impact so we really think that the combination of the two is essential to get at. True culture change rather than bureaucratic adoption of a process that now someone told me I have to do yeah, which could be totally counterproductive to Scientific efficiency and Innovation as you described. Ben: Yeah, that seems like a really great place to to end. I know you have to get running. So I'm really grateful. [00:57:00] This is this has been amazing and thank you so much. Yeah, my pleasure.  

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students.   Last time on the show... Beginnings - 600 BCE   The origin of humans and early human societies: Beginnings -  Gabe - Prehistory is the history before it was written. Finding bones and doing tests like potassium argon dating or other methods to find the age was one of the ways we could see find prehistory. The tools they used and how the newer ones were perfected is another. Ben- Anthropology is the study of ancient humans and their cultures. Everyone always talks about how old certain things are, but how is the information found? Radiocarbon dating is when you get a certain element called carbon 14 and and see how much of it has decayed back into nitrogen 14. So if half the carbon 14 has decayed, that means the item is 5730 years old. The radiocarbon method is a good indicator of how old something is. Audrey - Written records are a main tool in learning the history of the people before us. These are, in some ways, more detailed than other forms of records, including archaeological and biological remains. That being said, written records can’t be the only thing taken into consideration; they could be biased or could be stories passed down generation after generation, slowly being changed to fit the current worldviews. Emma - Many Paleolithic societies were communal. The members of a community, which were most often small, nomadic groups, worked together to perform various tasks. The women typically raised the children, gathered food, and cooked, whereas the men did the hunting, often in groups. However, in some communities, the work is thought to have been divided evenly between both women and men. Ella - Early paleolithic societies did not have agricultural systems like we do today. They relied on tools they made to hunt animals. These societies would use tools made out of rocks such as handaxes. They used these for both hunting and digging. The other half of their diet consisted of natural fruits and vegetables they found in their environment. Skylar - According to historians the first generations of “human” like people are called Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens were apart of a group called Hominids. Archaeologist and anthropologist believe that they were alive between 2.5 and 4 million years ago and lived in eastern and southern Africa. Ethan - The anatomic structure of the people of today has existed for about 200,000 years. Egyptian hieroglyphs have been around for close to 5,000 years but America couldn’t even comprehend the hieroglyphs until 1799 when America found the Rosetta Stone. Even then when America had the Rosetta Stone it took quite a while to decipher it. And even after we began to comprehend hieroglyphs, we still had to hope no one would “change the story” to make it more interesting. And people still had altering views so deciding which was true caused more investigation. Thus, the Scientific Process. Hunter- the study of human existence has been going on for multiple centries. The process has just evolved to even being able to find the year of when the creature and or early human existed and died.   600 BCE The Neolithic Revolution and the birth of agriculture: Beginnings - Emma - The word Neolithic is derived from neo, meaning new, and the Greek word lithos, which translates to stone. It is the latter part of the stone age in which tools began to have a more smooth and refined appearance. Unlike before, these tools had complex shapes and purposes, and began to resemble the instruments used in more advanced societies. Audrey - Since the birth of agriculture, Earth’s population has increased immensely. In the Paleolithic period, humans were primarily hunter-gatherers, and the population was roughly 10 million. Then 10 - 15 thousand years ago (13000 - 8000 B.C.) the Neolithic period came, and along with that, agriculture. Since plants and animals were now being domesticated, and more people could be fed, the population grew. By the time of the Roman Empire there were around 250 million people on Earth, and since then the population has grown to approximately 7 billion.  Gabe -  There was different types of agriculture there was pastoralism which was the branch of agriculture that bred animals goat, sheep, cattle, and in this branch they collected food from there goats and cattle and probably wool from the sheep and milk from the cows and probably the goats too     Ella - Most  early civilizations came together through religion, or beliefs and practices that associate with the meaning of the world. with  This was how people who were not familiar with one another created trustworthy and respectful relationships. Religion was commonly associated with politics. Religious leaders commonly worked as political leaders as well.   Ethan - Agriculture was created so that the survivability of the human race would increase. The end of the most recent glacial period was about the same time that agriculture emerged. The reasoning behind this is that the soil had thawed so food could be grown in abundance. Ben - There were a few different things being grown around the world. Stuff like barley, but also something less known called sorghum. Sorghum today is mostly used for animal food, but can also be used to create a kind of sweet syrup. Sorghum was being grown about the area sudan is at today and was probably being used as a normal grain in 9000-7000 BCE. There was also okra, black eyed peas, and yam around the west coast of africa. (Can talk about more different foods and where they’re from if needed) Skylar -City-States couldn’t have been became created without agriculture. Most people would not be alive if it wasn’t for agriculture. Since agriculture has been created the plants (veggies) and animals (meat and milk). Thanks to irrigation vegetation can now be grown almost anywhere. The availability of human consumable calories per square kilometer has increased rapidly. People started farming in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey and went on to East Asia, mexico, and many more places. Hunter- Neolithic Age is also known as the New Stone Age. However, it is closely connected to civilization, animal domestication, inventions, and agriculture. Stability in life opened new doors for man, as he ventured into domesticating animals rather than merely hunting them as per his need. He also invented pottery in this era, making it a symbol of the Neolithic era. 600 BCEAncient Mesopotamia: Beginnings -  Gabe - I'm going to start by saying Mesopotamia means country between to rivers so most the cities were born on the rivers tigris euphrates (which is what Mesopotamia is in between) the yangtze or the nile. They were born on these cities because the rivers would fertilize their crops bring water and transportation later on      Ella - The Sumerians were a group of people that started in Southern Mesopotamia around 4000 BCE. They wrote some of the first written scripts that were made of clay tablets. These ideas spread to surrounding civilizations which resulted in more languages being written. These languages are what today's alphabet was developed from. Audrey - Mesopotamia was one of the first significant civilizations, and was located in what is now Iraq. The Sumerians are believed to be the first civilization to emerge in Mesopotamia (4000 B.C.). They are well known for the first development of the wheel (3500 B.C.), and for their architectural structures, like the ziggurats which were found in the center of many Sumerian and Mesopotamian cities. Emma - Around 3000 BC the Sumerians came in contact with the Akkadians, named after the city-state of Akkad. About 700 years later, Sargon of Akkad came into power and is thought to have started the first dynastic empire. Both the Akkadian and Sumerian speakers were ruled by the Akkadian Empire until it’s fall in 2154 BC. Ben - After the akkadian empire, a new empire began, and it was called the Babylonian empire. The Babylonians used to just be a small place in Akkadia (2300 BC), but grew into an empire. The leader of the Babylonian empire was Hammurabi. The Babylonians influenced the area in that they had a sort of law system that was based on religion. They spoke Akkadian. (1800-600 BC) from 1770- 1670 and from 612-320 BC babylon was estimated to be the largest city in population size in the world. Skylar - The Pharaoh King Menes was able to unify upper and lower Egypt with the Eqyptian civilization. Hammurabi was famous for making the code of Hammurabi. He codified a series of laws. Ethan - After the Sumerian and Akkadian empires formed, the Assyrian Empire formed about 1000 years later in northern Mesopotamia. Ashur was the capital of Assyria. Assyria was originally ruled by Sargon and his bloodline during the Akkadian Empire. After the end of the Akkadian empire Assyria became the major empire then. 8. Hunter- Mesopotamia was known in antiquity as a seat of learning, and it is believed that Thales of Miletus  (c. 585 BCE, known as the first philosopher) studied there. As the Babylonians believed that water was the ‘first principle’ from which all else followed, and as Thales is famous for that very claim, it seems probable that he studied there.   600 BCEAncient Egypt: Beginnings - 600 BCE  Gabe - Egypt started next to the nile which is because it helps with many things as we  talked about earlier there was the old egypt which was when the pyramids were built and this is the time we kind of think about when we think egypt but the pharaohs you think about were very far from the building of the pyramids and cleopatra actually lived 2500 years from the makings of the pyramids and 2037 from the making of the first iphone so she lived closer to the iphone   Ella - During the old kingdom period, Egypt was a single state. The country eventually became more complex and expanded their military. The kings of the time built formations such as Great Pyramid and the Sphinx of Giza. These structures were used as tombs or monuments for the kings that built them. Emma - The Egyptian political system was based on the idea of divine kingship. They believed that the political ruler, or pharaoh, either held the favor of a god (or gods) or was in fact a living incarnation of the god themself. An example of this was Narmer who was thought to be Horus. This reinforced the authority of the current political figure in power. Audrey - The Egyptian civilization was originally divided into upper and lower Egypt. The official beginning of the civilization was somewhere around 3100-3150 B.C. when the two parts of Egypt were united under one king. Ben - As with most early civilizations, egypt was based around a river. When civilizations start around rivers it gives the people fresh water and a good source of water for agricultural purposes too. Even egypt’s seasons were based around the nile and how it affected crops and weather. The first season would be Akhet, which would now be around june-september and was based around the nile river flooding to provide water to crops. The second season was Peret, (Oct. - Feb.) where crops would be planted. The final season was called Shemu, (March - May) when everything would be harvested.                                                                                          Skylar - The Nile River starts in mid-eastern Africa and goes all the way down to the Mediterranean Sea. The Nile is one of the great rivers. It makes the soil around it rich. Like ben said for growing plants. Most of the population in Egypt is around or close by the multipurpose river. They have a season of harvest and it’s when the soil is most fertile for growing crops. The annual rain is very important because it adds another layer of extremely nutrient-rich soil that’s needed for the Shemu season. Ethan - Wars had what seemed to be a major impact on the civil structure of Egypt. The costs include drought, famine, and disruption of Egyptian civilians. This kind of split Egypt into many different city-states. This allowed any city-state with the military power to take cities, as Kush conquered Lower and Upper Egypt. But soon the Kushites were kicked out of Egypt. Hunter- nothing left to write T^T this is sad all info was sucked dry so please dont blame me   Ancient art and artifacts: Beginnings -  Gabe - One of the artifacts that was found was the standard of ur and no one knows for sure what it actually was but it has 2 sides to it and on one side you have basically peace and prosperity where it shows animals being taken to trade or sacrifice or eat were not really sure and it shows the king and some other important people drinking in enjoyment there many things like that.(didnt want to take to much info someone want to connect to mine and explain what was on the other side) Ella - There were many materials used to make the standard of ur such as lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, Red stones from India, and shells from the gulf to the South of Iraq. These things are all reminders that the cities thrived because of the success in agriculture. There was a river valley between Tigris and Euphrates where they grew large amounts of food. Ben - One of the most important historical items in Egyptian history was the Rosetta Stone, the Rosetta Stone was an ancient stone tablet discovered in 1799, it had the same thing written in three different languages. First, hieroglyphs, then egyptian, then greek. This allowed historians to translate all the hieroglyphs that were seen in temples and pyramids. Emma - On the other side of the Standard of Ur, there are three scenes depicting a war. The lowest section shows chariots coming into battle and trampling their enemies. The second row has a clearly organized army marching into battle, fighting, and taking prisoners. The top again has the king, this time being presented with prisoners of war. Audrey - The Rosetta Stone is a very popular artifact found in the British Museum. It was brought there when Napoleon’s army was in Egypt. One of the many people who came with Napoleon came across the stone being used in the foundation of a fort. Originally it would have been in or near an Egyptian temple and was the bottom part of a much taller tablet. Napoleon took the stone back with him, but when the British defeated Napoleon they took it. Two years later, in 1801 or 1802, the Rosetta Stone was taken to the British Museum and it has been there ever since. Ethan - I guess I’ll explain the Rosetta Stone. It had 2 forms of Egyptian on it. Hieroglyphic and Demotic. Hieroglyphic, as many people know, uses symbols. Demotic is kind of like the print writing of English, but Egyptian. It also had Greek on the stone so it, even after many years, was decipherable. Skylar - The Rosetta Stone was carved in 196 B.C. We were not able to read the Rosetta Stone until mid 19th century. The Rosetta stone is called the Rosetta stone because of where it was found, Rosetta. It was written in three different scripts The first was hieroglyphic which was the script used for important or religious documents. The second was demotic which was the common script of Egypt. The third was Greek which was the language of the rulers of Egypt at that time. Hunter- The Rosetta stone and the Standard of Ur are both important discoveries I can’t say anything more because like last season nothing left to say it’s all taken (and yes i went and looked at more than just the first page or google but I mean this is what I get for being busy all week i guess)   600 BCEAncient India: Beginnings -  Gabe - the harappan civilization or the indus valley civilization because it was near the indus river spread from northwest india to afghanistan and pakistan at the peak of the harappan civilization they may have had a population of 5 million people indus cities are noted for there urban planning which is where you build your cities in with the land to make your life easier basically they also made baked brick houses huge drainage systems water supply systems and basically metropolitan areas.    Ella - Around 2600 BCE, Harappan communities had become large urban areas. Overall about 1000 settlements were founded in the Indus river area. The Mohenjo-daro was one of the biggest cities in the area. It was also one of the more sophisticated cities with its advanced uses for engineering and urban planning. Ben - The Indus river civilization was one of the most advanced and one of the most mysterious ancient places. They were very good at building and their brick areas are impressive even to today’s standards because of how they survived hundreds of years of weather and damage. And jewelry from around that area has been seen in different countries, so trading was probably happening too. Emma - The people of the Indus River Valley Civilization region are known for their advancements in the technology of their time. Their accurate systems for measuring length and mass made their advanced sanitation system possible. This system was the first of its kind ever in history. Audrey - Sanskrit has many similarities to other languages like English and Latin. Words like matr, in English mother, and in Latin mater, show the resemblance. The Vedas mention a “god” named Dyaus Pitr which means “sky father”. In Greek there is Zeus Pater, and in Latin Jupiter, both of which, also meaning sky father. - Ethan - Some of the people in the Indus Valley are called Harappans. The reason that the Harappans succeeded in early technology was they had the most accurate ways to measure length and mass. They also invented bricks, one of the staples in building today. Skylar - The Harappa civilization was more than just Harappa. The largest cite they had was Mohenjo-Daro, it was n the Sihn region of Pakistan. They believe 40,000 lived in just Mohenjo-Daro. Some think that the Harappa civilization was happening around 7000 BCE, they believe they were just living in small villages, but they don’t have very much evidence. Nobody really knows how or why the Indus Valley civilization came to an end. Hunter- Important innovations of this civilization include standardized weights and measures, seal carving, and metallurgy with copper, bronze, tin, and lead. 600 BCEShang China: Beginnings -  Gabe - the earliest period in chinese history is the mythical period which supposedly was ruled by the xia empire and was overthrown by the Shang in 1766 bce but we are not sure if the Xia overthrow was true because we don’t have archaeological evidence of the Xia empire but we do have evidence of the Shang empire and they ruled from 1766 bce to 1046 bce Ella - The earliest form of Chinese writing was found as inscriptions carved into bones and shells.These animal remains were known as oracle bones. The writing on the bones was very complex, suggesting that the language had been around for a while. Scientists didn't have trouble reading it because it was very similar to modern chinese writing. Ben - The chinese craftsmen mastered the alloy bronze, which gave most of their soldiers an advantage. The Shang were excellent builders and engineers, they worked on many things including irrigation systems similar to how the indus river civilization did.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Emma - In the Shang Dynasty Civilization, the king was not a political figure. His main role was as a religious leader, the use of oracle bones making up a large part of their responsibilities. The government itself was run by chosen advisors and other officials. Audrey - Chinese writings from the Shang Dynasty can be found on oracle bones. An oracle bone is an ox’s scapula (shoulder blade) that people would write questions on; they would heat the bone over a flame until it cracked, and then they would interpret the cracks to get an answer to their question. Skylar - The Shang Dynasty was the first dynasty that we have a lot of proof of. It lasted around 500 years. They had great irrigation systems for their day, and had also developed social classes. Both banks of the Yellow River had greats amounts of loess.with is a very nutrient-rich soil that is amazing for growing almost anything. The Shang dynasty was in and near the modern day city of Anyang. It’s known for their writing, a lot like modern day Chinese. Near the end of this dynasty they had chariots and people believe they were in contact with people out in the west. - Ethan - The Shang had some, to say the least, strange practices.  The Shang made offerings to dead relatives in attempt to communicate with them. These “Oracle Bones” people will have talked about by now, are made out of turtle shells, and they were used to predict the future. Hunter- the Shang dynasty craftspeople mastered bronze, an alloy of copper and tin; bronze weapons gave the foot soldiers a tactical advantage.   600 BCEAncient Americas: Beginnings - Gabe - Some of the first people in north america were the olmec who were some of the first mexicans they lived around the gulf of mexico around were veracruz and tabasco (like the sauce i guess) is a nahuatl word from the aztec language which means rubber people because they were the first we know to discover how to convert latex off trees into rubber we call them this because we do not know exactly what they called themselves Ella - None of the Olmecs beliefs or customs were recorded, but there were some artifacts found in the area that indicated long trade routes that spread throughout many regions. Some of the artifacts such as jade and obsidian were evidence that the Olmec people traded with civilizations outside the Gulf Coast of Mexico. Ben - There were a few different early north and south american tribes and cultures such as the mayans. The Mayans were the only ones in early america who had a fully developed writing system. They used hieroglyphs and lived in southeast mexico, they kind of owned southeast mexico. Emma - From 3500 to 1700 BC the Caral civilization existed in was is now northern Peru. It was a complex society in which specialized and interconnected roles existed, though people disagree on whether or not it can be classified as a civilization due to the lack of evidence concerning political, economical, and religious systems. Audrey - The first humans to come to the Americas came 15-16,000 years ago.They are believed to have come from north-eastern Asia across the Bering Strait during the last glaciation period when the sea level was low enough for the Bering Land Bridge. Skylar - the first people that came to north and south america somewhere between 15,000 and 16,000 years ago. They believe the first people were in Florida 14,500 years ago. The Mississippian culture was a north american culture. The mississippi river is named after them. Their famous city was Cahokia and it is around modern day St. Louis. - Ethan - There was a race of people called the Chavin and their culture was centered around a big temple in Chavin de Huantar. Their government system was most likely based off of a hierarchy, while sticking to religion. The Chavin was founded in the northern Andean highlands in Peru. Their civilization was founded in between 900 and 250 BC, which was about to the time period of 1000 years after the collapse of the Caral. The Chavin were located in the Mosna River Valley, in which the Mosna and Huachesa rivers meet. Hunter- cant find nothin!!!!!!! 600 BCE Human innovation and the environment  Gabe - We were nomadic people so we started to farm and start agriculture and build small villages probably making us have more food for more population and basically we started staying in one spot and we started to have tribes and the others started doing this. Ella - One thing that separates humans from animals is our ability to learn and teach efficiently and effectively. We are able to pass down the information and skills we learned to the next generation a lot better than other species can. This is because of our specific and strong communication techniques we've developed like language and writing. Skylar - Before the Neolithic era people had to hunt for food. They would walk short or long distances to find food if there was nothing oblivious to kill for food. Most people were what are called hunter gatherers. They did not consume as much calories as pastoral people. This was called Paleolithic era and the beginning of the mesolithic era. The main thing that happened in the Neolithic era was agriculture. Agriculture was a huge deal, most would say one of the best things that happened in human history. It changed people’s lifestyle and diet. They could now raise crops and/or animals. Move most anywhere they wanted. They then had time to figure out a way to write out the things they were learning. Ben - Over all this time and seeing these things it’s interesting to realize that these people were skilled and could create art and sculptures, writing and speech. One of the most helpful human skills is collective learning, where most information can be passed on to more people in such a way to make the potential knowledge of collective humanity nearly infinite. Emma - The development of written language had a huge impact on the development of human civilizations. Learning from the past, beyond what current generations could recall, began to change societies. For example, it allowed agriculture to develop because newer generations could learn what did and didn’t work in the past. Political records also influenced and changed developing political systems. Audrey - The Aboriginal Australians, Aboriginal meaning from the beginning, would have controlled fires that would clear the forests to make the area more suitable for grassland. The grassland would provide an area for animals they could easily hunt and live off of. - Ethan - Innovation mainly began with stone tools that allowed humans to do simple tasks even easier. These tools that helped early humans hunt consisted mainly of spears and knives but very primitive. Like very poorly sharpened edges, but enough to get the job done. Farming tools would mainly consist of what today would be related to a hoe. Hunter- A type of farming used by the Aboriginal Australians was firestick farming, when they would conduct said farming they would start what are called ‘controlled burns’ they were not new to this and knew which seasons to do this in. Like in Spring or Autumn when there was a certain amount of moisture in the air to control the fires and this did more than just give the natives a better landscape but to also help prevent large scale fires and allow kangaroo to graze there for them to eat.   That’s all the time we have for today. THank for joining us out of the box that is learning

Welcome back to The Emancipation Podcast Station - the place to hear about history researched and retold through the eyes of Middle school and HS students.   Last time on the show... Beginnings - 600 BCE   The origin of humans and early human societies: Beginnings -  Gabe - Prehistory is the history before it was written. Finding bones and doing tests like potassium argon dating or other methods to find the age was one of the ways we could see find prehistory. The tools they used and how the newer ones were perfected is another. Ben- Anthropology is the study of ancient humans and their cultures. Everyone always talks about how old certain things are, but how is the information found? Radiocarbon dating is when you get a certain element called carbon 14 and and see how much of it has decayed back into nitrogen 14. So if half the carbon 14 has decayed, that means the item is 5730 years old. The radiocarbon method is a good indicator of how old something is. Audrey - Written records are a main tool in learning the history of the people before us. These are, in some ways, more detailed than other forms of records, including archaeological and biological remains. That being said, written records can’t be the only thing taken into consideration; they could be biased or could be stories passed down generation after generation, slowly being changed to fit the current worldviews. Emma - Many Paleolithic societies were communal. The members of a community, which were most often small, nomadic groups, worked together to perform various tasks. The women typically raised the children, gathered food, and cooked, whereas the men did the hunting, often in groups. However, in some communities, the work is thought to have been divided evenly between both women and men. Ella - Early paleolithic societies did not have agricultural systems like we do today. They relied on tools they made to hunt animals. These societies would use tools made out of rocks such as handaxes. They used these for both hunting and digging. The other half of their diet consisted of natural fruits and vegetables they found in their environment. Skylar - According to historians the first generations of “human” like people are called Homo Sapiens. Homo Sapiens were apart of a group called Hominids. Archaeologist and anthropologist believe that they were alive between 2.5 and 4 million years ago and lived in eastern and southern Africa. Ethan - The anatomic structure of the people of today has existed for about 200,000 years. Egyptian hieroglyphs have been around for close to 5,000 years but America couldn’t even comprehend the hieroglyphs until 1799 when America found the Rosetta Stone. Even then when America had the Rosetta Stone it took quite a while to decipher it. And even after we began to comprehend hieroglyphs, we still had to hope no one would “change the story” to make it more interesting. And people still had altering views so deciding which was true caused more investigation. Thus, the Scientific Process. Hunter- the study of human existence has been going on for multiple centries. The process has just evolved to even being able to find the year of when the creature and or early human existed and died.   600 BCE The Neolithic Revolution and the birth of agriculture: Beginnings - Emma - The word Neolithic is derived from neo, meaning new, and the Greek word lithos, which translates to stone. It is the latter part of the stone age in which tools began to have a more smooth and refined appearance. Unlike before, these tools had complex shapes and purposes, and began to resemble the instruments used in more advanced societies. Audrey - Since the birth of agriculture, Earth’s population has increased immensely. In the Paleolithic period, humans were primarily hunter-gatherers, and the population was roughly 10 million. Then 10 - 15 thousand years ago (13000 - 8000 B.C.) the Neolithic period came, and along with that, agriculture. Since plants and animals were now being domesticated, and more people could be fed, the population grew. By the time of the Roman Empire there were around 250 million people on Earth, and since then the population has grown to approximately 7 billion.  Gabe -  There was different types of agriculture there was pastoralism which was the branch of agriculture that bred animals goat, sheep, cattle, and in this branch they collected food from there goats and cattle and probably wool from the sheep and milk from the cows and probably the goats too     Ella - Most  early civilizations came together through religion, or beliefs and practices that associate with the meaning of the world. with  This was how people who were not familiar with one another created trustworthy and respectful relationships. Religion was commonly associated with politics. Religious leaders commonly worked as political leaders as well.   Ethan - Agriculture was created so that the survivability of the human race would increase. The end of the most recent glacial period was about the same time that agriculture emerged. The reasoning behind this is that the soil had thawed so food could be grown in abundance. Ben - There were a few different things being grown around the world. Stuff like barley, but also something less known called sorghum. Sorghum today is mostly used for animal food, but can also be used to create a kind of sweet syrup. Sorghum was being grown about the area sudan is at today and was probably being used as a normal grain in 9000-7000 BCE. There was also okra, black eyed peas, and yam around the west coast of africa. (Can talk about more different foods and where they’re from if needed) Skylar -City-States couldn’t have been became created without agriculture. Most people would not be alive if it wasn’t for agriculture. Since agriculture has been created the plants (veggies) and animals (meat and milk). Thanks to irrigation vegetation can now be grown almost anywhere. The availability of human consumable calories per square kilometer has increased rapidly. People started farming in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey and went on to East Asia, mexico, and many more places. Hunter- Neolithic Age is also known as the New Stone Age. However, it is closely connected to civilization, animal domestication, inventions, and agriculture. Stability in life opened new doors for man, as he ventured into domesticating animals rather than merely hunting them as per his need. He also invented pottery in this era, making it a symbol of the Neolithic era. 600 BCEAncient Mesopotamia: Beginnings -  Gabe - I'm going to start by saying Mesopotamia means country between to rivers so most the cities were born on the rivers tigris euphrates (which is what Mesopotamia is in between) the yangtze or the nile. They were born on these cities because the rivers would fertilize their crops bring water and transportation later on      Ella - The Sumerians were a group of people that started in Southern Mesopotamia around 4000 BCE. They wrote some of the first written scripts that were made of clay tablets. These ideas spread to surrounding civilizations which resulted in more languages being written. These languages are what today's alphabet was developed from. Audrey - Mesopotamia was one of the first significant civilizations, and was located in what is now Iraq. The Sumerians are believed to be the first civilization to emerge in Mesopotamia (4000 B.C.). They are well known for the first development of the wheel (3500 B.C.), and for their architectural structures, like the ziggurats which were found in the center of many Sumerian and Mesopotamian cities. Emma - Around 3000 BC the Sumerians came in contact with the Akkadians, named after the city-state of Akkad. About 700 years later, Sargon of Akkad came into power and is thought to have started the first dynastic empire. Both the Akkadian and Sumerian speakers were ruled by the Akkadian Empire until it’s fall in 2154 BC. Ben - After the akkadian empire, a new empire began, and it was called the Babylonian empire. The Babylonians used to just be a small place in Akkadia (2300 BC), but grew into an empire. The leader of the Babylonian empire was Hammurabi. The Babylonians influenced the area in that they had a sort of law system that was based on religion. They spoke Akkadian. (1800-600 BC) from 1770- 1670 and from 612-320 BC babylon was estimated to be the largest city in population size in the world. Skylar - The Pharaoh King Menes was able to unify upper and lower Egypt with the Eqyptian civilization. Hammurabi was famous for making the code of Hammurabi. He codified a series of laws. Ethan - After the Sumerian and Akkadian empires formed, the Assyrian Empire formed about 1000 years later in northern Mesopotamia. Ashur was the capital of Assyria. Assyria was originally ruled by Sargon and his bloodline during the Akkadian Empire. After the end of the Akkadian empire Assyria became the major empire then. 8. Hunter- Mesopotamia was known in antiquity as a seat of learning, and it is believed that Thales of Miletus  (c. 585 BCE, known as the first philosopher) studied there. As the Babylonians believed that water was the ‘first principle’ from which all else followed, and as Thales is famous for that very claim, it seems probable that he studied there.   600 BCEAncient Egypt: Beginnings - 600 BCE  Gabe - Egypt started next to the nile which is because it helps with many things as we  talked about earlier there was the old egypt which was when the pyramids were built and this is the time we kind of think about when we think egypt but the pharaohs you think about were very far from the building of the pyramids and cleopatra actually lived 2500 years from the makings of the pyramids and 2037 from the making of the first iphone so she lived closer to the iphone   Ella - During the old kingdom period, Egypt was a single state. The country eventually became more complex and expanded their military. The kings of the time built formations such as Great Pyramid and the Sphinx of Giza. These structures were used as tombs or monuments for the kings that built them. Emma - The Egyptian political system was based on the idea of divine kingship. They believed that the political ruler, or pharaoh, either held the favor of a god (or gods) or was in fact a living incarnation of the god themself. An example of this was Narmer who was thought to be Horus. This reinforced the authority of the current political figure in power. Audrey - The Egyptian civilization was originally divided into upper and lower Egypt. The official beginning of the civilization was somewhere around 3100-3150 B.C. when the two parts of Egypt were united under one king. Ben - As with most early civilizations, egypt was based around a river. When civilizations start around rivers it gives the people fresh water and a good source of water for agricultural purposes too. Even egypt’s seasons were based around the nile and how it affected crops and weather. The first season would be Akhet, which would now be around june-september and was based around the nile river flooding to provide water to crops. The second season was Peret, (Oct. - Feb.) where crops would be planted. The final season was called Shemu, (March - May) when everything would be harvested.                                                                                          Skylar - The Nile River starts in mid-eastern Africa and goes all the way down to the Mediterranean Sea. The Nile is one of the great rivers. It makes the soil around it rich. Like ben said for growing plants. Most of the population in Egypt is around or close by the multipurpose river. They have a season of harvest and it’s when the soil is most fertile for growing crops. The annual rain is very important because it adds another layer of extremely nutrient-rich soil that’s needed for the Shemu season. Ethan - Wars had what seemed to be a major impact on the civil structure of Egypt. The costs include drought, famine, and disruption of Egyptian civilians. This kind of split Egypt into many different city-states. This allowed any city-state with the military power to take cities, as Kush conquered Lower and Upper Egypt. But soon the Kushites were kicked out of Egypt. Hunter- nothing left to write T^T this is sad all info was sucked dry so please dont blame me   Ancient art and artifacts: Beginnings -  Gabe - One of the artifacts that was found was the standard of ur and no one knows for sure what it actually was but it has 2 sides to it and on one side you have basically peace and prosperity where it shows animals being taken to trade or sacrifice or eat were not really sure and it shows the king and some other important people drinking in enjoyment there many things like that.(didnt want to take to much info someone want to connect to mine and explain what was on the other side) Ella - There were many materials used to make the standard of ur such as lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, Red stones from India, and shells from the gulf to the South of Iraq. These things are all reminders that the cities thrived because of the success in agriculture. There was a river valley between Tigris and Euphrates where they grew large amounts of food. Ben - One of the most important historical items in Egyptian history was the Rosetta Stone, the Rosetta Stone was an ancient stone tablet discovered in 1799, it had the same thing written in three different languages. First, hieroglyphs, then egyptian, then greek. This allowed historians to translate all the hieroglyphs that were seen in temples and pyramids. Emma - On the other side of the Standard of Ur, there are three scenes depicting a war. The lowest section shows chariots coming into battle and trampling their enemies. The second row has a clearly organized army marching into battle, fighting, and taking prisoners. The top again has the king, this time being presented with prisoners of war. Audrey - The Rosetta Stone is a very popular artifact found in the British Museum. It was brought there when Napoleon’s army was in Egypt. One of the many people who came with Napoleon came across the stone being used in the foundation of a fort. Originally it would have been in or near an Egyptian temple and was the bottom part of a much taller tablet. Napoleon took the stone back with him, but when the British defeated Napoleon they took it. Two years later, in 1801 or 1802, the Rosetta Stone was taken to the British Museum and it has been there ever since. Ethan - I guess I’ll explain the Rosetta Stone. It had 2 forms of Egyptian on it. Hieroglyphic and Demotic. Hieroglyphic, as many people know, uses symbols. Demotic is kind of like the print writing of English, but Egyptian. It also had Greek on the stone so it, even after many years, was decipherable. Skylar - The Rosetta Stone was carved in 196 B.C. We were not able to read the Rosetta Stone until mid 19th century. The Rosetta stone is called the Rosetta stone because of where it was found, Rosetta. It was written in three different scripts The first was hieroglyphic which was the script used for important or religious documents. The second was demotic which was the common script of Egypt. The third was Greek which was the language of the rulers of Egypt at that time. Hunter- The Rosetta stone and the Standard of Ur are both important discoveries I can’t say anything more because like last season nothing left to say it’s all taken (and yes i went and looked at more than just the first page or google but I mean this is what I get for being busy all week i guess)   600 BCEAncient India: Beginnings -  Gabe - the harappan civilization or the indus valley civilization because it was near the indus river spread from northwest india to afghanistan and pakistan at the peak of the harappan civilization they may have had a population of 5 million people indus cities are noted for there urban planning which is where you build your cities in with the land to make your life easier basically they also made baked brick houses huge drainage systems water supply systems and basically metropolitan areas.    Ella - Around 2600 BCE, Harappan communities had become large urban areas. Overall about 1000 settlements were founded in the Indus river area. The Mohenjo-daro was one of the biggest cities in the area. It was also one of the more sophisticated cities with its advanced uses for engineering and urban planning. Ben - The Indus river civilization was one of the most advanced and one of the most mysterious ancient places. They were very good at building and their brick areas are impressive even to today’s standards because of how they survived hundreds of years of weather and damage. And jewelry from around that area has been seen in different countries, so trading was probably happening too. Emma - The people of the Indus River Valley Civilization region are known for their advancements in the technology of their time. Their accurate systems for measuring length and mass made their advanced sanitation system possible. This system was the first of its kind ever in history. Audrey - Sanskrit has many similarities to other languages like English and Latin. Words like matr, in English mother, and in Latin mater, show the resemblance. The Vedas mention a “god” named Dyaus Pitr which means “sky father”. In Greek there is Zeus Pater, and in Latin Jupiter, both of which, also meaning sky father. - Ethan - Some of the people in the Indus Valley are called Harappans. The reason that the Harappans succeeded in early technology was they had the most accurate ways to measure length and mass. They also invented bricks, one of the staples in building today. Skylar - The Harappa civilization was more than just Harappa. The largest cite they had was Mohenjo-Daro, it was n the Sihn region of Pakistan. They believe 40,000 lived in just Mohenjo-Daro. Some think that the Harappa civilization was happening around 7000 BCE, they believe they were just living in small villages, but they don’t have very much evidence. Nobody really knows how or why the Indus Valley civilization came to an end. Hunter- Important innovations of this civilization include standardized weights and measures, seal carving, and metallurgy with copper, bronze, tin, and lead. 600 BCEShang China: Beginnings -  Gabe - the earliest period in chinese history is the mythical period which supposedly was ruled by the xia empire and was overthrown by the Shang in 1766 bce but we are not sure if the Xia overthrow was true because we don’t have archaeological evidence of the Xia empire but we do have evidence of the Shang empire and they ruled from 1766 bce to 1046 bce Ella - The earliest form of Chinese writing was found as inscriptions carved into bones and shells.These animal remains were known as oracle bones. The writing on the bones was very complex, suggesting that the language had been around for a while. Scientists didn't have trouble reading it because it was very similar to modern chinese writing. Ben - The chinese craftsmen mastered the alloy bronze, which gave most of their soldiers an advantage. The Shang were excellent builders and engineers, they worked on many things including irrigation systems similar to how the indus river civilization did.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Emma - In the Shang Dynasty Civilization, the king was not a political figure. His main role was as a religious leader, the use of oracle bones making up a large part of their responsibilities. The government itself was run by chosen advisors and other officials. Audrey - Chinese writings from the Shang Dynasty can be found on oracle bones. An oracle bone is an ox’s scapula (shoulder blade) that people would write questions on; they would heat the bone over a flame until it cracked, and then they would interpret the cracks to get an answer to their question. Skylar - The Shang Dynasty was the first dynasty that we have a lot of proof of. It lasted around 500 years. They had great irrigation systems for their day, and had also developed social classes. Both banks of the Yellow River had greats amounts of loess.with is a very nutrient-rich soil that is amazing for growing almost anything. The Shang dynasty was in and near the modern day city of Anyang. It’s known for their writing, a lot like modern day Chinese. Near the end of this dynasty they had chariots and people believe they were in contact with people out in the west. - Ethan - The Shang had some, to say the least, strange practices.  The Shang made offerings to dead relatives in attempt to communicate with them. These “Oracle Bones” people will have talked about by now, are made out of turtle shells, and they were used to predict the future. Hunter- the Shang dynasty craftspeople mastered bronze, an alloy of copper and tin; bronze weapons gave the foot soldiers a tactical advantage.   600 BCEAncient Americas: Beginnings - Gabe - Some of the first people in north america were the olmec who were some of the first mexicans they lived around the gulf of mexico around were veracruz and tabasco (like the sauce i guess) is a nahuatl word from the aztec language which means rubber people because they were the first we know to discover how to convert latex off trees into rubber we call them this because we do not know exactly what they called themselves Ella - None of the Olmecs beliefs or customs were recorded, but there were some artifacts found in the area that indicated long trade routes that spread throughout many regions. Some of the artifacts such as jade and obsidian were evidence that the Olmec people traded with civilizations outside the Gulf Coast of Mexico. Ben - There were a few different early north and south american tribes and cultures such as the mayans. The Mayans were the only ones in early america who had a fully developed writing system. They used hieroglyphs and lived in southeast mexico, they kind of owned southeast mexico. Emma - From 3500 to 1700 BC the Caral civilization existed in was is now northern Peru. It was a complex society in which specialized and interconnected roles existed, though people disagree on whether or not it can be classified as a civilization due to the lack of evidence concerning political, economical, and religious systems. Audrey - The first humans to come to the Americas came 15-16,000 years ago.They are believed to have come from north-eastern Asia across the Bering Strait during the last glaciation period when the sea level was low enough for the Bering Land Bridge. Skylar - the first people that came to north and south america somewhere between 15,000 and 16,000 years ago. They believe the first people were in Florida 14,500 years ago. The Mississippian culture was a north american culture. The mississippi river is named after them. Their famous city was Cahokia and it is around modern day St. Louis. - Ethan - There was a race of people called the Chavin and their culture was centered around a big temple in Chavin de Huantar. Their government system was most likely based off of a hierarchy, while sticking to religion. The Chavin was founded in the northern Andean highlands in Peru. Their civilization was founded in between 900 and 250 BC, which was about to the time period of 1000 years after the collapse of the Caral. The Chavin were located in the Mosna River Valley, in which the Mosna and Huachesa rivers meet. Hunter- cant find nothin!!!!!!! 600 BCE Human innovation and the environment  Gabe - We were nomadic people so we started to farm and start agriculture and build small villages probably making us have more food for more population and basically we started staying in one spot and we started to have tribes and the others started doing this. Ella - One thing that separates humans from animals is our ability to learn and teach efficiently and effectively. We are able to pass down the information and skills we learned to the next generation a lot better than other species can. This is because of our specific and strong communication techniques we've developed like language and writing. Skylar - Before the Neolithic era people had to hunt for food. They would walk short or long distances to find food if there was nothing oblivious to kill for food. Most people were what are called hunter gatherers. They did not consume as much calories as pastoral people. This was called Paleolithic era and the beginning of the mesolithic era. The main thing that happened in the Neolithic era was agriculture. Agriculture was a huge deal, most would say one of the best things that happened in human history. It changed people’s lifestyle and diet. They could now raise crops and/or animals. Move most anywhere they wanted. They then had time to figure out a way to write out the things they were learning. Ben - Over all this time and seeing these things it’s interesting to realize that these people were skilled and could create art and sculptures, writing and speech. One of the most helpful human skills is collective learning, where most information can be passed on to more people in such a way to make the potential knowledge of collective humanity nearly infinite. Emma - The development of written language had a huge impact on the development of human civilizations. Learning from the past, beyond what current generations could recall, began to change societies. For example, it allowed agriculture to develop because newer generations could learn what did and didn’t work in the past. Political records also influenced and changed developing political systems. Audrey - The Aboriginal Australians, Aboriginal meaning from the beginning, would have controlled fires that would clear the forests to make the area more suitable for grassland. The grassland would provide an area for animals they could easily hunt and live off of. - Ethan - Innovation mainly began with stone tools that allowed humans to do simple tasks even easier. These tools that helped early humans hunt consisted mainly of spears and knives but very primitive. Like very poorly sharpened edges, but enough to get the job done. Farming tools would mainly consist of what today would be related to a hoe. Hunter- A type of farming used by the Aboriginal Australians was firestick farming, when they would conduct said farming they would start what are called ‘controlled burns’ they were not new to this and knew which seasons to do this in. Like in Spring or Autumn when there was a certain amount of moisture in the air to control the fires and this did more than just give the natives a better landscape but to also help prevent large scale fires and allow kangaroo to graze there for them to eat.   That’s all the time we have for today. THank for joining us out of the box that is learning

We’ve done it! 40% of this show in the rearview mirror! Friend of the show Argyle Funk joins us once again as we discuss S02E24, “Ben There, Done That”. A bad one. Just a real bad ending to a real bad season. In fact, it was so bad, we accidentally said some Singin’ in the […]

We’ve done it! 40% of this show in the rearview mirror! Friend of the show Argyle Funk joins us once again as we discuss S02E24, “Ben There, Done That”. A bad one. Just a real bad ending to a real bad season. In fact, it was so bad, we accidentally said some Singin’ in the Rain trivia that turned out to be false. Oops! This week, we’re making some very inappropriate peer-to-teen choice behaviors. Goodbye forever, Jimmy!Sam | Jordan | ArgylePatreon

Tracy Lee: @ladyleet | ladyleet.com Ben Lesh: @benlesh | medium.com/@benlesh Show Notes: 00:50 - What is This Dot? 03:26 - The RxJS 5.5.4 Release and Characterizing RxJS 05:14 - Observable 07:06 - Operators 09:52 - Learning RxJS 11:10 - Making RxJS Functional Programming Friendly 12:52 - Lettable Operators 15:14 - Pipeline Operators 21:33 - The Concept of Mappable 23:58 - Struggles While Learning RxJS 33:09 - Documentation 36:52 - Surprising Uses of Observables 40:27 - Weird Uses of RxJS 45:25 - Announcements: WHATWG to Include Observables and RxJS 6 Resources: this.media RxJS RX Workshop Ben Lesh: Hot vs Cold Observables learnrxjs.io RxMarbles Jewelbots Transcript: CHARLES: Hello everybody and welcome to The Frontside Podcast, Episode 91. My name is Charles Lowell, a developer here at The Frontside and your podcast host-in-training. Joining me today on the podcast is Elrick Ryan. Hello, Elrick. ELRICK: Hey, what's up? CHARLES: Not much. How are you doing? ELRICK: I'm great. Very excited to have these two folks on the podcast today. I feel like I know them… CHARLES: [Laughs] ELRICK: Very well, from Twitter. CHARLES: I feel like I know them well from Twitter, too. ELRICK: [Laughs] CHARLES: But I also feel like this is a fantastic company that is doing a lot of great stuff. ELRICK: Yup. CHARLES: Also not in Twitter. It should be pointed out. We have with us Tracy Lee and Ben Lesh from This Dot company. TRACY: Hey. CHARLES: So first of all, why don't we start, for those who don't know, what exactly is This Dot? What is it that you all do and what are you hoping to accomplish? TRACY: This Dot was created about a year ago. And it was founded by myself and Taras who work on it full-time. And we have amazing people like Ben, who's also one of our co-founders, and really amazing mentors. A lot of our friends, when they refer to what we actually do, they like to call it celebrity consulting. [Laughter] TRACY: Which I think is hilarious. But it's basically core contributors of different frameworks and libraries who work with us and lend their time to mentor and consult with different companies. So, I think the beautiful part about what we're trying to do is bring together the web. And we sort of do that as well not only through consulting and trying to help people succeed, but also through This Dot Media where it's basically a big playground of JavaScripting all the things. Ben and I do Modern Web podcast together. We do RX Workshop which is RxJS training together. And Ben also has a full-time job at Google. CHARLES: What do they got you doing over there at Google? BEN: Well, I work on a project called Alkali which is an internal platform as a service built on top of Angular. That's my day job. CHARLES: So, you've been actually involved in all the major front-end frameworks, right, at some point? BEN: Yeah, yes. I got my start with Angular 1 or AngularJS now, when I was working as a web developer in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania at a company called Aesynt which was formerly McKesson Automation. And then I was noticed by Netflix who was starting to do some Angular 1 work and they hired me to come help them. And then they decided to do Ember which is fine. And I worked on a large Ember app there. Then I worked on a couple of large React apps at Netflix. And now I'm at Google building Angular apps. CHARLES: Alright. BEN: Which is Angular 5 now, I believe. CHARLES: So, you've come the full circle. BEN: Yeah. Yeah, definitely. CHARLES: [Chuckles] I have to imagine Angular's changed a lot since you were working on it the first time. BEN: Yeah. It was completely rewritten. TRACY: I feel like Angular's the new Ember. CHARLES: Angular is the new Ember? TRACY: [Laughs] BEN: You think? TRACY: Angular is the new Ember and Vue is the new AngularJS, is basically. [Laughs] CHARLES: Okay. [Laughter] CHARLES: What's the new React then? BEN: Preact would be the React. CHARLES: Preact? Okay, or is Glimmer… BEN: [Laughs] I'm just… CHARLES: Is Glimmer the new React? BEN: Oh, sure. [Laughs] CHARLES: It's important to keep these things straight in your head. BEN: Yeah, yeah. CHARLES: Saves on confusion. TRACY: Which came first? [Chuckles] BEN: Too late. I'm already confused. CHARLES: So now, before the show you were saying that you had just, literally just released RxJS, was it 5.5.4? BEN: That's right. That's right. The patch release, yeah. CHARLES: Okay. Am I also correct in understanding that RxJS has kind of come to very front and center position in Angular? Like they've built large portions of framework around it? BEN: Yeah, it's the only dependency for Angular. It is being used in a lot of official space for Angular. For example, Angular Material's Data Table uses observables which are coming from RxJS. They've got reactive forms. The router makes use of Observable. So, the integration started kind of small which HTTPClient being written around Observable. And it's grown from there as people seem to be grabbing on and enjoying more the React programming side of things. So, it's definitely the one framework that's really embraced reactive programming outside of say, Cycle.js or something like that. CHARLES: Mmhmm. So, just to give a general background, how would you characterize RxJS? BEN: It's a library built around Observable. And Observable is a push-based primitive that gives you sets of events, really. CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: So, that's like Lodash for events would be a good way to put it. You can take anything that you can get pushed at you, which is pretty much value type you can imagine, and wrap it in an observable and have it pushed out of the observable. And from there, you have a set of things that you can combine. And you can concatenate them, you can filter them, you can transform them, you can combine them with other sets, and so on. So, you've got this ability to query and manipulate in a declarative way, events. CHARLES: Now, Observable is also… So, when Jay was on the podcast we were talking about Redux observable. But there was outside of the context of RxJS, it was just observables were this standalone entity. But I understand that they actually came from the RxJS project. That was the progenitor of observables even though there's talk of maybe making them part of the JavaScript spec. BEN: Yeah, that's right. That's right. So, RxJS as it stands is a reference implementation for what could land in JavaScript or what could even land in the DOM as far as an observable type. Observable itself is very primitive but RxJS has a lot of operators and optimizations and things written around Observable. That's the entire purpose of the library. CHARLES: Mmhmm. So, what kind of value-adds does it provide on top of Observable? If Observable was the primitive, what are the combinators, so to speak? BEN: Oh, right. So, similar to what Lodash would add on top of say, an iterable or arrays, you would have the same sorts of things and more inside of RxJS. So, you've got zip which you would maybe have seen in Lodash or different means of combines. Of course, map and ‘merge map' which is like a flattening sort of operation. You can concatenate them together. But you also have these time-based things. You can do debouncing or throttling of events as they're coming over in observable and you create a new observable of that. So, the value-add is the ability to compose these primitive actions. You can take on an observable and make a new observable. We call it operators. And you can use those operators to build pretty much anything you can imagine as far as an app would go. CHARLES: So, do you find that most of the time all of the operators are contained right there inside RxJS? Or if you're going to be doing reactive programming, one of your tasks is going to be defining your own operators? BEN: No, pretty much everything you'd need will be defined within RxJS. There's 60 operators or so. CHARLES: Whoa, that's a lot. BEN: It's unlikely that someone's going to come up with one. And in fact, I would say the majority of those, probably 75% of those, you can create from the other 25%. So, some of the much more primitive operators could be used… TRACY: Which is sort of what Ben did in this last release, RxJS 5…. I don't know remember when you introduced the lettable operators but you… BEN: Yeah, 5.5. TRACY: Implemented [inaudible] operators. BEN: Yeah, so a good portion of them I started implementing in terms of other operators. CHARLES: Right. So, what was that? I didn't quite catch that, Tracy. You said that, what was the operator that was introduced? TRACY: So, in one of the latest releases of RxJS, one of the more significant releases where pipeable operators were introduced, what Ben did was he went ahead and implemented a lot of operators that were currently in the library in terms of other operators, which was able to give way to reduce the size of the library from, I think it was what, 30KB bundled, gzipped, and minified, to about 30KB, which was about 60 to 70% of the operators. Right, Ben? BEN: Yeah. So, the size reduction was in part that there's a lot of factors that went into the size reduction. It would be kind of hard to pin it down to a specific operator. But I know that some of the operators like the individual operators themselves, by reimplementing reduce which is the same as doing as scan and then take last, implementing it in terms of that is going to reduce the size of it probably 90% of that one particular file. So, there's a variety of things like that that have already started and that we're going to continue to do. We didn't do it with every operator that we could have. Some operators are very, very common and consequently we want them to be as optimized as possible. For example, map. You can implement map in terms of ‘merge map' but it would be very slow to do so. It might be smaller but it would be slower. We don't want that. So, there are certain areas we're always going to try to keep fairly a hot path to optimize them as much as possible. But in other spots like reduce which is less common and isn't usually considered to be a performance bottleneck, we can cut some corners. Or ‘to array' or other things like that. CHARLES: Mmhmm. TRACY: And I think another really interesting thing is a lot of people when learning RxJS, they… it's funny because we just gave an RX Workshop course this past weekend and the people that were there just were like, “Oh, we've heard of RxJS. We think it's a cool new thing. We have no plans to implement it in real life but let's just play around with it and let me learn it.” I think as people are starting to learn RxJS, one of the things that gets them really overwhelmed is this whole idea that they're having to learn a completely new language on top of JavaScript or what operators to use. And one of our friends, Brian Troncone who is on the Learning Team, the RxJS Learning Team, he pulled up the top 15 operators that were most commonly searched on his site. And some of them were ‘switch map', ‘merge map', ‘fork join', merge, et cetera. So, you can sort of tell that even though the library has quite a few… it's funny because Ben, I think the last RX Workshop you were using pairs and you had never used it before. BEN: Yeah. TRACY: So, it's always amusing for me how many people can be on the core team but have never implemented RxJS… CHARLES: [Laughs] TRACY: A certain way. BEN: Right. Right, right, right. CHARLES: You had said one of the recent releases was about making it more friendly for functional programming. Is that a subject that we can explore? Because using observables is already pretty FP-like. BEN: What it was before is we had dot chaining. So, you would do ‘dot map' and then call a method and then you get an observable back. And then you'd say ‘dot merge' and then you'd call a method on that, and so on and so forth. Now what you have is kind of a Ramda JS style pipe function that just takes a comma-separated list of other functions that are going to act upon the observable. So, it reads pretty much the same with a little more ceremony around it I guess. But the upside is that you can develop your operators as just higher-order functions. CHARLES: Right. And you don't have to do any monkey-patching of prototypes. BEN: Exactly, exactly. CHARLES: Because actually, okay, I see. This is actually pretty exciting, I think. Because we actually ran into this problem when we were using Redux Observable where we wanted to use some operators that were used by some library but we had to basically make a pull request upstream, or fork the upstream library to include the operators so that we could use them in our application. It was really weird. BEN: Yeah. CHARLES: The reason was because it was extending the observable prototype. BEN: Yeah. And there's so many… and that's one way to add that, is you extend the observable prototype and then you override lift so you return the same type of observable everywhere. And there are so many things that lettable operators solved for us. For example… CHARLES: So, lettable operators. So, that's the word that Tracy used and you just used it. What are lettable operators? BEN: Well, I've been trying to say pipeable and get that going instead of lettable. But basically there's an operator on RxJS that's been there forever called let. And let is an operator and what you do is you give it a function. And the function gives you the source observable and you're expected to return a new observable. And the idea is that you can then write a function elsewhere that you can then compose in as though it were an operator, anywhere you want, along with your other dot-chained operators. And the realization I had a few months ago was, “Well, why don't we just make all operators like this?” And then we can use functional programming to compose them with like a reduce or whatever. And that's exactly what the lettable operators are. And that's why I started calling them lettable operators. And I kind of regret it now, because so many people are saying it and it confuses new people. Because what in the world does lettable even mean? CHARLES: Right. [Laughs] BEN: So, they are pipeable operators or functional operators. But the point is that you have a higher-order function that returns a function of a specific shape. And that function shape is, it's a function that receives an observable and returns an observable, and that's it. So, basically it's a function that transforms an observable into a new observable. That's all an operator. That's all an operator's ever been. It's just this is in a different flavor. CHARLES: Now, I'm curious. Why does it do an observable into an observable and not a stream item into an observable? Because when you're actually chaining these things together, like with a map or with a ‘flat map' or all these things, you're actually getting an individual item and then returning an observable. Well, I guess in this case of a map you're getting an item and returning an item. But like… BEN: Right, but that's not what the entire operation is. So, you've got an operation you're performing whenever you say, if you're to just even dot-chain it, you'd say ‘observable dot map'. And when you say ‘dot map', it returns a new observable. And then you say ‘dot filter' and it returns another new observable. CHARLES: Oh, gotcha, gotcha, gotcha. Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. BEN: So, this function just embodies that step. CHARLES: I see, I see. And isn't there some special… I feel like there's some proposal for some special JavaScript syntax to make this type of chaining? BEN: Yeah, yeah, the pipeline operator. CHARLES: Okay. BEN: I don't know. I think that's still at stage one. I don't know that it's got a lot of headway. My sources and friends that are in the TC39 seem to think that it doesn't have a lot of headway. But I really think it's important. Because if you look at… the problem is we're using a language where the most common use case is you have to build it, get the size as small as possible because you need to send it over the wire to the browser. And understandably, browsers don't want to implement every possible method they could on say, Array, right? CHARLES: Mmhmm, right. BEN: There's a proposal in for ‘flat map'. They could add zip to Array. They could add all sorts of interesting things to Array just by itself. And that's why Lodash exists, right? CHARLES: Right. BEN: Is because not everything is on Array. And then so, the onus is then put on the community to come up with these solutions and the community has to build libraries that have these constraints in size. And what stinks about that is then you have say, an older version of Lodash where you'd be like, “Okay, well it has 36 different functions in it and I'm only using 3 of them. And I have to ship them all to the browser.” CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: And that's not what you want. So, then we have these other solutions around tree-shaking and this and that. And the real thing is what you want is you want to be able to compose things left to right and you want to be able to have these functions that you can use on a particular type in an ad hoc way. And there's been two proposals to try to address this. One was the ‘function bind' operator, CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: Which is colon colon. And what that did is it said, “You can use this function as a method, as though it were a method on an object. And we'll make sure that the ‘this' inside that function comes from the instance that's on the left-hand side of colon colon.” CHARLES: Right. BEN: That had a bunch of other problems. Like there's some real debate I guess on how they would tie that down to a specific type. So, that kind of fell dead in the water even though it had made some traction. And then the pipeline operator is different. And then what it says is, “Okay, whatever is on the…” And what it looks like is a pipe and a greater than right next to each other. And whatever's on the left-hand side of that operand gets passed as the first argument to the function on the right-hand side of that operand. CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: And so, what that means is for the pipeable operators, instead of having to use a pipe method on observable, you can just say, “instance of observable, pipeline operator and an operator, and then pipeline operator, and then the Rx operator, and then pipeline operator and the Rx operator, and so on.” And it would just be built-in. And the reason I think that JavaScript really needs it is that means that libraries like Lodash can be written in terms of simple functions and shipped piece-meal to the browser exactly as you need them. And people would just use the pipeline operator to use them, instead of having to wrap something in a big object so you can dot-chain things together or come up with your own functional pipe thing like RxJS had to. CHARLES: Right. Because it seems it happens again and again, right? Lodash, RxJS, jQuery. You just see this pattern of chaining, which is, you know… BEN: Yeah, yeah. People want chaining. People want left to right composition. CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: And it's problematic in a world where you want to shake off as much unused garbage as possible. And the only way to get dot chaining is by augmenting a prototype. There's all sorts of weird problems that can come with that. And so, the functional programming approach is one method. But then people look at it and they say, “Ooh, yuck. I've got to wrap things in a function named pipe. Wouldn't it be nicer if there was just some syntax to do this?” And yeah, it would be nicer. But I have less control over that. CHARLES: Right. But the other alternative is to have right to left function composition. BEN: Right, yeah. CHARLES: But there's not any special syntax for that, either. BEN: Not very readable. CHARLES: Yeah. BEN: So, you just wrap everything. And the innermost call is the first one and then you wrap it in another function and you wrap that in another function, and so on. Yeah, that's not [inaudible]. But I will say that the pipe function itself is pretty simple. It's basically a function that takes a rest of arguments that are all functions. CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: And so, you have this array of functions and you just reduce over it and call them. Well, you return a function. So, it's a higher function. You return a function that takes an argument then you reduce over the functions that came in as arguments and you call each one of them with whatever result was from the previous. CHARLES: Right. Like Tracy mentioned in the pre-show, I'm an aspiring student of functional programming. So, would this be kind of like a monoid here where you're mashing all these functions together? Is your empty value? I'm just going to throw it out there. I don't know if it's true or not, but that's my conjecture. BEN: Yes. Technically, it's a monoid because it wouldn't work unless it was a monoid. Because monoids, I believe the category theory I think for monoid is that monoids can be concatenated because they definitely have an end. CHARLES: Right. BEN: So, you would not be able to reduce over all those functions and build something with that, like that, unless it was a monoid. So yeah, the fact that there's reduction involved is a cue that it's a monoid. CHARLES: Woohoo! Alright. [Laughter] CHARLES: Have you found yourself wanting to apply some of these more “rigorous” formalisms that you find out there in the development of RxJS or is that just really a secondary concern? BEN: It's a secondary concern. It's not something that I like. It's something I think about from time to time, when really, debating any kind of heavy issue, sometimes it's helpful. But when it comes to teaching anybody anything, honestly the Haskell-isms and category theory names, all they do is just confuse people. And if you tell somebody something is a functor, they're like, “What?” And if you just say it's mappable, they're like, “Oh, okay. I can map that.” CHARLES: [Laughs] Right, right. BEN: And then the purists would be like, “But they're not the same thing.” And I would be like, “But the world doesn't care. I'm sorry.” CHARLES: Yeah, yeah. I'm kind of experiencing this debate myself. I'm not quite sure which side I fall on, because on the one hand it is arbitrary. Functor is a weird name. But I wish the concept of mappable existed. It does, but I feel like it would be handy if people… because there's literally five things that are super handy, right? Like mappable, if we could have a name for monoid. But it's like, really, you just need to think in terms of these five constructs for 99% of the stuff that you do. And so, I always wonder, where does that line lie? And how… mappable, is that really more accessible than functor? Or is that only because I was exposed to the concept of mapping for 10 years before I ever heard the F word. BEN: Yes, and yes. I mean, that's… CHARLES: [Laughs] BEN: Things that are more accessible are usually more accessible because of some pre-given knowledge, right? What works in JavaScript probably isn't going to work in Haskell or Scala or something, right? CHARLES: Mmhmm. BEN: If someone's a Java developer, certain idioms might not make sense to them that come from the JavaScript world. CHARLES: Right. But if I was learning like a student, I would think mappable, I'd be thinking like, I would literally be thinking like Google Maps or something like that. I don't know. BEN: Right, right. I mean, look at C#. C#, a mapping function is always going to be called select, right, because that's C#. That's their idiom for the same thing. CHARLES: Select? BEN: Yeah. CHARLES: Really? BEN: Yeah, select. So, they'll… CHARLES: Which in Ruby is like find. BEN: Yeah. there's select and then, what's the other one, ‘select many' or something like that. [Chuckles] BEN: So, that's C#. CHARLES: Oh, like it's select from SQL. Okay. BEN: Yeah, I think that's kind of where it came from because people had link and then they had link to SQL and then they're like, well I want to do this with regular code, with just using some more… less nuanced expressions. So, I want to be able to do method calls and chain those together. And so, you end up with select functions. And I think that that exists even in Rx.NET, although I haven't used Rx.NET. CHARLES: Hmm, okay. ELRICK: So, I know you do a lot of training with Rx. What are some of the concepts that people struggle with initially? TRACY: I think when we're teaching RX Workshop, a lot of the people sort of… I'll even see senior level people struggle with explaining it, is the difference between observables and observers and then wrapping their head around the idea that, “Hey, observables are just functions in JavaScript.” So, they're always thinking observables are going to do something for you. Actually, it's not just in Angular but also in React, but whenever someone's having issues with their Rx applications, it's usually something that they're like nesting observables or they're not subscribing to something or they've sort of hot-messed themselves into a tangle. And I'm sure you've debugged a bunch of this stuff before. The first thing I always ask people is, “Have you subscribed?” Or maybe they're using an Angular… they're using pipes async but they're also calling ‘dot subscribe' on their observable. BEN: Yeah. So, like in Angular they'll do both. Yeah. There's that. I think that, yeah, that relates to the problem of people not understanding that observables are really just functions. I keep saying that over and over again and people really don't seem to take it to heart for whatever reason. [Chuckles] BEN: But you get an observable and when you're chaining all those operators together, you're making another observable or whatever, observables don't do anything until you subscribe to them. They do nothing. CHARLES: Shouldn't they be called like subscribable? BEN: Yes. [Chuckles] BEN: They probably should. But we do hand them an observer. So, you are observing something. But the point being is that they don't do anything at all until you subscribe to them. And in that regard, they're like functions, where functions don't do anything unless you call them. So, what ends up happening with an observable is you subscribe to it. You give it an observer, three callbacks which are then coerced into an observer. And it takes that observer and it hands it to the body of this observable definition and literally has an observer inside of there. And then you basically execute that function synchronously and do things, whatever those things are, to set up some sort of observation. Maybe you spin up a WebSocket and tie into some events on it and call next on the observer to get values out of your observable. The point being that if you subscribe to an observable twice, it's the same thing as calling a function twice. And for some reason, people have a hard time with that. They think, if I subscribe to the observable twice, I've only called the function once. CHARLES: I experienced this confusion. And I remember the first time that that… like, I was playing with observables and the first time I actually discovered that, that it was actually calling my… now what do you call the function that you pass to the constructor that actually does, that calls next or that gets passed the observer? TRACY: [Inaudible] BEN: I like to call it an initialization function or something. But the official name from the TC39 proposal is subscriber function. CHARLES: Subscriber function. So, like… BEN: Yeah. CHARLES: I definitely remember it was one of those [makes explosion sound] mind-blowing moments when I realized when I call my subscribe method, the entire observable got run from the very beginning. But my intuition was that this is an object. It's got some shared state, like it's this quasar that I'm now observing and I'm seeing the flashes of light coming off of it. But it's still the same object. You think of it as having yeah, not as a function. Okay. No one ever described it to me as just a function. But I think I can see it now. ELRICK: Yeah, me neither. CHARLES: But yeah, you think of it in the same way that most people think of objects, as like, “I have this object. I have a reference to it.” Let observable equal new observable. It's a single thing. It's a single identity. And so, that's the thing that I'm observing. It's not that I'm invoking this observable to observe things. And I think that's, yeah, that's a subtle nuance there. I wish I had taken y'all's course, I guess is what I'm saying. ELRICK: Yeah. BEN: Yeah. Well, I've done a few talks on it. CHARLES: [Laughs] BEN: I always try to tell people, “It's just a function. It's just a function.” I think what happens to a lot of people too is there's the fact that it's an object. But I think what it is, is people's familiarity with promises does this. Because promises are always multicast. They are always “hot”. And the reason for this is because they're eager. So, by the time you have a promise, whatever is producing value to the promise has already started. And that means that they're inherently a multicast. CHARLES: Right. BEN: So, people are used to that behavior of, I can ‘then' off of this promise and it always means one thing. And it's like, yeah, because the one thing has nothing to do with the promise. It wasn't [Chuckles] CHARLES: Right. BEN: This promise is just an interface for you to view something that happened in the past, where an observable is more low-level than that and more simple than that. It just states, “I'm a function that you call. I'm going to be able to do anything a function can do. And by the way, you're giving me an observer and I'm going to do some stuff with that too and notify you via this observer that you handed me.” Because of that you could take an observable and close over something that had already started. Say you had a WebSocket that was already running. You could create a new observable and just like any function, close over that, externally create a WebSocket. And then everyone that subscribes to that observable is tying an observer to that same WebSocket. Then you're multicast. Then you're “hot”. ELRICK: [Inaudible] CHARLES: Right. So, I was going to say that's the distinction that Jay was talking about. He was talking about we're going to just talk about… he said at the very beginning, “We're just going to talk about hot observable.” ELRICK: Yup. CHARLES: But even a hot observable is still theoretically evaluating every single time you subscribe. You're getting a new observable. You're evaluating that observable afresh each time. It just so happens that in the lexical scope of that observable subscriber function, there is this WebSocket? BEN: Yeah. So, it's the same thing. Imagine you wrote a function that when you called it created a new WebSocket and then… say, you wrote a new function that you gave an observer object to, right? An observer object has next, error, and complete. And in that function, when you called it, it created a new WebSocket and then it tied the ‘on message' and ‘on close' and whatever to your observer's next method and your observer's error message and so on. When you call that function, you would expect a new WebSocket to be created every single time. Now, let's just say alternately you create a WebSocket and then you write a new function that that function closes over that WebSocket. So, you reference the WebSocket that you externally created inside of your function. When you call that function, it's not going to create a new WebSocket every time. It's just closing over it, right? So, even though they both are basically doing the same thing, now the latter one of those two things is basically a hot observable and the former is a cold observable. Because one is multicast which is, “I'm sharing this one WebSocket with everybody,” and the other one is unicast which is, “I am going to create a new WebSocket for each person that calls me.” And that's the [inaudible] people have a hard time with. CHARLES: Right. But really, it's just a matter of scope. BEN: Yeah. The thing people have a hard time with, with observables, is not realizing that they're actually just functions. CHARLES: Yeah. I just think that maybe… see, when I hear things like multicast and unicast, that makes me think of shared state, whereas when you say it's just a matter of scope, well then I'm thinking more in terms of it being just a function. It just happens that this WebSocket was already [scoped]. BEN: Well, shared state is a matter of scope, right? CHARLES: Yes, it is. It is. Oh, sorry. Shared state associated with some object identity, right? BEN: Right. CHARLES: But again, again, it's just preconceptions, really. It's just me thinking that I've had to manage lists of listeners and have multicast observers and single-cast observers and having to manage those lists and call notify on all of them. And that's really not what's happening at all. BEN: Yeah. Well, I guess the real point is observables can have shared state or they could not have shared state. I think the most common version and the most composable version of them, they do not have any shared state. It's just one of those things where just like a function can have shared state or it could be pure, right? There's nothing wrong with either one of those two uses of a function. And there's nothing wrong with either one of those two uses of Observable. So, honest to god, that is the biggest stumbling block I think that I see people have. That and if I had to characterize it I would say fear and loathing over the number of operators. People are like… CHARLES: [Chuckles] BEN: And they really think because everyone's used to dealing with these frameworks where there's an idiomatic way to do everything, they think there's going to be an RxJS idiomatic way to do things. And that's just patently false. That's like saying there's an idiomatic way to use functions. There's not. Use it however it works. The end. It's not… CHARLES: Mmhmm, mmhmm. BEN: You don't have to use every operator in a specific way. You can use it however works for you and it's fine. ELRICK: I see that you guys are doing some fantastic work with your documentation. Was that part of RxJS 2.0 docs? TRACY: I was trying to inspire people to take on the docs initiative because I think when I was starting to learn RxJS I would get really frustrated with the docs. BEN: Yeah. TRACY: I think the docs are greatly documented but at the same time if you're not a senior developer who understands Rx already, then it's not really helpful. Because it provides more of a reference point that the guys can go back and look at, or girls. So anyways, after many attempts of trying to get somebody to lead the project I just decided to lead the project myself. [Laughter] TRACY: And try to get… the community is interesting because I think because the docs can be sometimes confusing… Brian Troncone created LearnRxJS.io. There's these other visualization projects like RxMarbles, RxViz, et cetera. And we just needed to stick everybody together. So, it's been a project that I think has been going on for the past two months or so. We have… it's just an Angular app so it's probably one of the most easiest projects to contribute to. I remember the first time I tried to contribute to the Ember docs. It literally took me an hour to sit there with a learning team, Ember Learning Team member and… actually, maybe it was two hours, just to figure out how the heck… like all the things I had to download to get my environment set up so that I could actually even contribute to the darn documentation. But with the Rx, the current RxJS docs right now is just an Angular app. You can pull it down. It's really easy. We even have people who are just working on accessibility, which is super cool, right? So, it's a very friendly place for beginners. BEN: I'm super pleased with all the people that have been working on that. Brian and everybody, especially on the accessibility front. Jen Luker [inaudible] came in and voluntarily… she's like the stopgap for all accessibility to make sure everything is accessible before we release. So, that's pretty exciting. TRACY: Yeah. ELRICK: Mmhmm. TRACY: So funny because when me and Jen started talking, she was talking about something and then I was like, “Oh my god, I'm so excited about the docs.” She's like, “I'm so excited, too! But I don't really know why I'm excited. But you're excited, so I'm excited. Why are you excited?” [Laughter] TRACY: I was like, “I don't know. But I'm excited, too!” [Chuckles] TRACY: And then all of a sudden we have accessibility. [Laughs] ELRICK: Mmhmm. Yeah, I saw some amazing screenshots. Has the new docs, have they been pushed up to the URL yet? TRACY: Nah, they are about to. We were… we want to do one more accessibility run-through before we publish it. And then we're going to document. We want to document the top 15 most viewed operators. But we should probably see that in the next two weeks or so, that the new docs will be… I mean, it'll say “Beta, beta, beta” all over everything. But actually also, some of our friends, [Dmitri] from [Valas] Software, he is working on the translation portion to make it really easy for people to translate the docs. CHARLES: Ah. TRACY: So, a lot of that came from the inspiration from the Vue.js docs. we're taking the versioning examples that Ember has done with their docs as inspiration to make sure that our versioning is really great. So, it's great that we can lend upon all the other amazing ideas in the industry. ELRICK: Oh, yeah. CHARLES: Yeah, it's fantastic. I can't wait to see them. ELRICK: Yeah, me neither. The screenshots look amazing. I was like, “Wow. These are some fabulous documentation that's going to be coming out.” I can't wait. TRACY: Yeah. Thank you. CHARLES: Setting the bar. ELRICK: Really high. [Laughter] CHARLES: Actually, I'm curious. Because observables are so low-level, is there some use of them that… what's the use of them that you found most surprising? Or, “Whoa, this was a crazy hack.” BEN: The weirdest use of observables, there's been quite a few odd ones. One of the ones that I did one time that is maybe in RxJS's wheelhouse, it was just that RxJS already existed. So, I didn't want to pull in another transducer library, was using RxJS as a transducer. Basically… in Netflix we had a situation where we had these huge, huge arrays of very large objects. And if you try to take something like that and then map it and then filter it and then map it and then filter it, we're using Array map and filter, what ends up happening is you create all sorts of intermediary arrays in-memory. And then garbage collection has to come through and clean that up. And that locks your thread. And over time, we were experiencing slowness with this app. And it would just build up until eventually it ground to a halt. And I used RxJS because it was an available tool there to wrap these arrays in an observable and then perform operations on them step-by-step, the same map, filter, and so on. But when you do that, it doesn't create intermediary arrays because it passes each value along step to step instead of producing an entire array and then doing another step and producing an entire array, and so on. So… CHARLES: So, will you just… BEN: It saved garbage collection and it increased the performance of the app. But that's just in an extreme case. I would never do that with just regular arrays. If anything, it was because it was huge, huge arrays of very large objects. CHARLES: So, you would create an observable our of the array and then just feed each element into the observable one at a time? BEN: Well, no. If you say ‘observable from' and you give it an array, that's basically what it does. CHARLES: Okay. BEN: It loops over the array and nexts those values out of the array synchronously. CHARLES: I see, I see. BEN: So, it's like having a for loop and then inside of that for loop saying, “Apply the map. Apply the filter,” whatever, to each value as they're going through. But when you look at it, if you had array map, filter, reduce, it's literally just taking the first step and saying ‘observable from' and wrapping that array and then the rest of it's still the same. CHARLES: Right. Yeah. No, that's really cool. BEN: That was a weirder use of it. I've heard tell of other things where people used observables to do audio synchronization, which is pretty interesting. Because you have to be very precise with audio synchronization. So, hooking into some of the Web Audio APIs and that sort of thing. That's pretty interesting. The WebSocket multiplexing is something I did at Netflix that's a little bit avant-garde for observable use because you essentially have an observable that is your WebSocket. And then you create another observable that closes over that observable and sends messages over the WebSocket for what you're subscribed to and not subscribed to. And it enables you to very easily retry connections and these sorts of things. I did a whole talk on that. That one's pretty weird. CHARLES: Yeah. Man, I [inaudible] to see that. BEN: But in the general use case, you click a button, you make an AJAX request, and then you get that back and maybe you make another AJAX request. Or like drag and drop and these sorts of things where you're coordinating multiple events together, is the general use case. The non-weird use case for RxJS. Tracy does weird stuff with RxJS though. [Laughter] CHARLES: Yeah, what's some weird uses of RxJS? TRACY: I think my favorite thing to do right now is to figure out how many different IoT-related things I can make work with RxJS. So, how many random things can I connect to an application using that? BEN: Tracy's projects are the best. They're so good. [Laughter] TRACY: Well, Ben and I created an application where you can take pictures of things using the Google Image API and it'll spit back a set of puns for you. So, you take a picture of a banana, it'll give you banana puns. Or you can talk to it using the speech recognition API. My latest thing is I really want to figure out how to… I haven't figured out if Bluetooth Low Energy is actually enabled on Google Home Minis. But I want to get my Google Home Mini to say ‘booty'. [Inaudible] [Laughter] CHARLES: RxJS to the rescue. [Laughter] BEN: Oh, there was, you remember Ng-Cruise. We did Ng-Cruise and on there, Alex Castillo brought… TRACY: Oh, that was so cool. BEN: All sorts of interesting… you could read your brain waves. Or there was another one that was, what is it, the Microsoft, that band put around your wrist that would sense what direction your arm was in and whether or not your hand was flexed. And people… TRACY: Yeah, so you could flip through things. BEN: Yeah. And people were using reactive programming with that to do things like grab a ball on the screen. Or you could concentrate on an image and see if it went blurry or not. ELRICK: Well, for like, Minority Report. BEN: Oh, yeah, yeah. Literally, watching a machine read your mind with observables. That was pretty cool. That's got to be the weirdest. TRACY: Yeah, or we had somebody play the piano while they were wearing one of the brainwave… it's called the OpenBCI project is what it is. And what you can do is you can actually get the instructions to 3D print out your own headset and then buy the technology that allows you to read brain waves. And so with that, it's like… I mean, it was really awesome to watch her play the piano and just see how her brain waves were going super crazy. But there's also these really cool… I don't know if you guys have heard of Jewelbots, but they're these programmable friendship bracelets that are just little Arduino devices that light up. I have two of them. I haven't even opened them. CHARLES: [Laughs] TRACY: I've been waiting to play with them with you. I don't know what we're going to do, but I just want to send you lights. Flashing lights. [Laughter] TRACY: Morse code ask you questions about RxJS while you're working. [Laughter] CHARLES: Yeah. Critical bug. Toot-toot-toot-too-too-too-too-toot-toot. [Laughter] CHARLES: RxJS Justice League. TRACY: That would actually be really fun. [Laughter] TRACY: That would be really fun. I actually really want to do that. But… CHARLES: I'm sure the next time we talk, you will have. TRACY: [Laughs] Yes. Yes, yes, yes, I know. I know. we'll do it soon. We just need to find some time while we're not going crazy with conferences and stuff like that. CHARLES: So, before we head out, is there any upcoming events, talks, releases, anything that we ought to be, we or the listeners, ought to be aware of? TRACY: Yeah, so one of the things is that Ben and I this weekend actually just recorded the latest version of RX Workshop. So, if you want to learn all about the latest, latest, newest new, you can go ahead and take that course. We go through a lot of different things like multiplex WebSockets, building an application. Everywhere from the fundamentals to the more real world implementations of RxJS. BEN: Yeah. Even in the fundamentals area, we've had friends of ours that are definitely seasoned Rx veterans come to the workshop. And most of them ask the most questions while talking about the fundamentals. Because I tend to dig into, either deep into the internals or into the why's and how's thing. Why and how things work. Even when it comes to how to subscribe to an observable. Deep detailed information about what happens if you don't provide an error handler and certain cases and how that's going to change in upcoming versions, and why that's changing in upcoming versions, and what the TC39's thoughts are on that, and so on and so forth. So, I try to get into some deeper stuff and we have a lot of fun. And we tend to be a little goofier at the workshops from time to time than we were in this podcast. Tracy and I get silly when we're together. TRACY: It's very true. [Laughter] TRACY: But I think also, soon I think there are people that are going to be championing an Observable proposal on what [inaudible]. So, aside from the TC39 Observable proposal that's currently still at stage one, I don't know Ben if you want to talk a little bit about that. BEN: Oh, yeah. So, I've been involved in conversations with folks from Netflix and Google as well, Chrome team and TC39 members, about getting the WHATWG, the ‘what wig', they're a standards body similar to W3C, to include observables as part of the DOM. The post has not been made yet. But the post is going to be made soon as long as everybody's okay with it. And what it boils down to is the idea of using observables as part of event targets. An event target is the API we're all familiar with for ‘add event listener', ‘remove event listener'. So, pretty much anywhere you'd see those methods, there might also someday be an on method that would return an observable of events. So, it's really, really interesting thing because it would bring at least the primitives of reactive programming to the browser. And at the very least it would provide maybe a nicer API for people to subscribe to events coming from different DOM elements. Because ‘add event listener' and ‘remove event listener' are a little unergonomic at times, right? CHARLES: Yeah. They're the worst. BEN: Yeah. CHARLES: That's a very polite way of putting it. BEN: [Chuckles] So, that's one thing that's coming down the pipe. Other things, RxJS 6 is in the works. We recently tied off 5.5 in a stable branch. And master is now our alpha that we're working on. So, there's going to be a lot of refactoring and changes there, trying to make the library smaller and smaller. And trying to eliminate some of the footprints that maybe people had in previous versions. So, moving things around so people aren't importing stuff that were meant to be implementation details, reducing the size of the library, trying to eliminate some bloat, that sort of thing. I'm pretty excited about that. But that's going to be in alpha ongoing for a while. And then hopefully we'll be able to move into beta mid first quarter next year. And then when that'll be out of beta, who knows? It all depends on how well people like the beta and the alpha, right? CHARLES: Alright. Well, so if folks do want to follow up with y'all either in regards to the course or to upcoming releases or any of the other great stuff that's coming along, how would they get in touch with y'all? TRACY: You can find me on Twitter @ladyleet. But Ben is @BenLesh. RX Workshop is RXWorkshop.com. I think in January we're going to be doing state of JavaScript under This Dot Media again. So, that's where all the core contributors of different frameworks and libraries come together. So, we'll definitely be giving a state of RxJS at that time. And next year also Contributor Days will be happening. So, if you go to ContributorDays.com you can see the previous RxJS Contributor Days and figure out how to get involved. So, we're always open and happy and willing to teach everybody. And again, if you want to get involved it doesn't matter whether you have little experience or lots of experience. We are always willing to show you how you can play. BEN: Yeah. You can always find us on Twitter. And don't forget that if you don't find Tracy or I on Twitter, you can always message Jay Phelps on Twitter. That's important. @_JayPhelps. Really. TRACY: Yeah. [Laughter] BEN: You'll find us. CHARLES: [Chuckles] Look for Jay in the show notes. [Laughter] CHARLES: Alright. Well, thank you so much for all the stuff that y'all do, code and otherwise. And thank you so much Ben, thank you so much Tracy, for coming on the show. BEN: Thank you. CHARLES: Bye Elrick and bye everybody. If you want to reach out to us, you can always get in touch with us at @TheFrontside or send us an email at contact@frontside.io. Alright everybody, we'll see you next week.

Buying properties under market value is still possible in today’s market. Ben recently purchased one for $80,000 under market value. Here’s the secret to finding under market value properties yourself. Ryan: And Melissa, to you, is asking is there a special trick to buying under market value? Ben: There’s a couple of tricks to buying […] The post The Secret To Find Properties Under Market Value appeared first on On Property.

The developer of celebrated adventure games Ben There, Dan That and Time Gentlemen, Please is building his own take on Spelunky. And living in the middle of nowhere.

Kole, Ben, and David talk about Gamescom announcements, Grand Theft Auto V pre-release junk, and miscellaneous games. The Brief Sony stuff from Gamescom. Grand Theft Auto V hype train. Xbox Un. Amnesia: A Machine for Pigs. The Grind Ben: Dishonored. Kole: Surgeon Simulator 2013. Ben There, Dan That. Gone Home. David: Max Payne. Links of Note: Losing My Edge (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xG4oFny2Pk)

Hello and welcome back! It's been a turbulent few weeks here in the Asylum with upheavals both large and small, but we’ve managed to take a break from all of the moving and shaking to do some Pointing and Clicking! This episode we recommend you some fantastic Point and Click adventures, get put on the spot with a listener question, do a little cross promoting and even manage to wrangle out a competition! So just step inside, make yourself comfortable and listen out for some Indie gems and a seriously  spooking prize up for grabs. 1. Samorost 1+ 2 / Questionaut / Machinarium 2. Decay Part 1 / 2 / 3 (Coming soon) all for 240 MS Points each. 3. Ben There, Dan That / Time Gentlemen, Please / Privates Mentions Alice Is Dead - Ep 1 / Ep 2 / Ep 3 Puzzle Bots - £3.49 Little Wheel - Free Sam & Max – Includes two free demos, one for Season One and one for Season Two – Tell Tale Games Digital Cowboys – Xbox Live Indie Games Special with LeeNygma and SilentHitoshura Sanctuary4Gamers – Two Girls One Pup podcast Follow Indie Asylum on Twitter - @IndieAsylum Don’t forget to listen in for our competition and you can enter by following and sending us an @ on Twitter, or by leaving your reply in the comments!

This week's ''What We've Been Playing'' features some more discussion on Risen, Sonic & Sega All-Stars Racing, Silent Hill: Homecoming, Killing Floor, Time Gentlemen, Please!, Ben There, Dan That!, and plenty more. We follow that up with some live call-ins including calls from Derrick Hopkins of Dead Pixel Live [sorry about the XBL Indie mix up] and Jamie Creese of Vault Reviews. We hope you enjoy the show and don't forget to rate/review us on iTunes (we could use some fresh reviews). You can also leave us a voice mail and hear yourself on the show by calling us at 707-520-4263. Don't forget to visit the site: http://pixelatedsausage.com

Hosts: Michael "Boston" Hannon and Brad Fellers Running Time: 55:11 Music: Final Fantasy Tactics (PSX) We got a rare warm day here at the TVGP Studios, so we had to tear ourselves away from the sunshine to talk about some games. We chatted about the Halo Wars demo, the Original Halo, 3-on-3 NHL, Galax-E-Mail, The Maw, Burnout Paradise, Ben There, Dan That, and Tiger Woods 07. We also spend a bit more time talking about the second checkpoint in TVGP Plays...Final Fantasy XII Battlefield 1943 announced! Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 also announced And you'll be smacking around zombies with giant, oversized cell phones in Dead Rising 2 Don't forget to join the forums!