Podcasts about chris not

En este episodio, mi invitada es Alf Bojórquez, novelista y ensayista yucateca. Su primera novela, Pepitas de calabaza (2023) salió en la editorial Fondo Blanco. Se segundo libro, No existe dique capaz de contener al océano furioso. Potencia, alegría y anarquismo, apareció hace unos meses. Fue ganadora del premio Moving Narratives (2024) de Prince Claus Fund y el British Council. Ha hecho giras en América Latina, Europa, Estados Unidos, Marruecos y Filipinas haciendo lecturas de su obra y dando talleres sobre narrativa, arte y teoría crítica. Tiene un programa de radio sobre lo mismo que se puede escuchar gratis en cualquier aplicación de podcasts: Un sueño largo, ancho y hondo. Ha colaborado con varios colectivos y organizaciones abajo y a la izquierda.Notas del Episodio* La traduccion de Joyful Militancy a Militancia Alegre* Diferencias en el radicalismo rigido entre norte y sur* Recuperando la miltancia y el contexto contemporaneo en militancia alegre* Tejiendo a la Organización Revolucionaria* La perdida de propiedad comunal en Mexico y la llegada del turismo* Las redes sociales como una arma del imperio* La imagen y la gestion, el usuario y el premio* Contraturismo como peregrinajeTarea* Pagina profesional - Instagram* Un sueño largo, ancho y hondo - Instagram* No existe dique capaz de contener al océano furioso - Volcana - Polilla - Utopicas - Traficantes de Suenos - Novedades don Gregorio (OAX)* Militancia alegre: Tejer Resistencias, florecer en tiempos toxicas* Pepitas de calabazaTranscripcion en espanol (English Below)Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenida al podcast El Fin del Turismo, Alf. Un placer hablar contigo hoy. Alf: Ajá. Chris: Este me gustaría empezar preguntándote donde te encuentras hoy y cómo se ve el mundo a través de tus ojos? Alf: Este hoy me encuentro en mi cocina. Desde ahí trabajo yo. En la ciudad de México, en una colonia se llama Iztaccihuatl. Cómo se ve el mundo? Pues mira, yo no tengo una vista tan mala. Este no es un edificio grande, pero tengo una vista linda, no? O sea, no me tapa la vista otro edificio ni nada. Se ven muchas plantas. Y bueno, supongo que sabes que yo soy de provincia. Entonces yo siempre he sentido que aquí donde yo vivo es como una, un poquito provincia en la capital, porque no hay edificios tan grandes.Este y bueno, desde aquí se ve, se me olvida que estoy en CDMX ahora, sabes a Chris: Gracias. Pues eres entre otras cosas, autora de varios [00:01:00] textos entre ellos Pepitas de Calabaza y el muy reciente No Existe Dique Capaz de Contener al Océano Furioso. También coordinaste la traducción al español del texto en inglés de Militancia Alegre:Deje Resistencias Florecer en Tiempos T óxicos. (o Joyful Militancy) A esa traducción le siguió un podcast complementario con Pamela Carmona titulado Alegría Emergente: Deshaciendo el Radicalismo Rígido. Entonces, para empezar, me gustaría preguntarte cómo conociste, el libro Joyful Militancy y qué te llevó a traducirlo. Alf: Yo conocí ese libro. Lo cuento un poquito en el prólogo, pero yo conocí ese libro, en Estados Unidos, porque yo tenía una banda. Yo toqué en una banda de hardcore punk muchos, muchos años, la batería. Y entonces así accedí a Estados Unidos y estando [00:02:00] en el underground americano, que fue una parte importante de mi de mi de mi vida, estando en en California en concreto.Me encontré ese libro como en una cafetería y yo me enamoré. Entonces lo traje y primero lo leí en inglés con alguna gente y muy lentamente empecé a trabajar con ese libro, traducir. Eso es una historia más larga que está ahí bien en el prólogo, pero bueno, llevo años como militando ese libro. También hubieron una serie de coincidencias de gente muy amable como Tumba a la Casa, como los autores canadienses, los derechos nos los regalaron. Se metió la gente de Traficantes de Sueno.O sea, en realidad hay un montón de gente. Es como una red de redes, ese libro y una serie de casualidades y favores y gestos agradables de mucha gente que logró que eso saliera como salió, la verdad. O sea, yo pienso mi irrepetible, esa esa serie de factores. Ajá. Chris: Ah chingón. Muy bien, Bueno, pues ese libro originalmente [00:03:00] se publicaron en 2016. A leer, reeler y traducir ese texto, tengo curiosidad por saber que crees que ha cambiado de este entonces, o qué diferencias principales has visto entre el radicalismo rígido descrito en el libro de la anglosfera o America norte, Anglosajona y la hispanesfera o Latinoamérica? Alf: Este? Pues muchas cosas que decir, no. La parte que confirmé yo fui trabajando ese libro, eh? Porque digamos que yo, todavía este año presenté ese libro. O sea, y le fue muy bien en Costa Rica. Fue la última. A mí se me acabaron los ejemplares. Y digamos, terminé mi labor con con Militancia en Costa Rica hace dos, tres meses.No es tanto, no? O sea todavía después de la del programa de radio con Pamela, se hizo en Costa Rica de presentación y le fue muy bien, eh? Y se [00:04:00] reimprimió ese sí. Ese libro fue un éxito de muchas maneras, no? Y fíjate a mí. Una cosa que con por me pasaban los años, no me gustó, es que yo siento que tiene un lado como muy liberal, osea, hay un lado donde es demasiado suave, no? O sea, al criticar lo rígido, siento que se pasa de flexible, por decir así. Entonces, y eso pasa un poco como con ciertos radicalismos del norte, que tienen que ver con la retórica de la amistad de la ternura como tan enfocados en el cuidado.Y así, yo siento que sin querer como por llevarle la contraria al opuesto, como el machismo lo rígido, bla, bla, bla, caen en una cosa un poco... o sea yo siendo que ese el libro o por lo menos mi lectura de ese libro, ya estas alturas, si lo siendo demasiado suave, porque yo creo que la parte negativa de militar y de organizarse, pues es importante, no, eh?Es importante de hablar, no? Entonces, cierto que en el libro, se pasa de buena onda, por [00:05:00] decirlo asi. Creo que por eso es un éxito porque hay lado "pop" en ese libro, un lado suavecito, dulcecito, que se mastica bien. Y está bien para los activismo, pero hay una parte en mi que dice bueno, pero hay que hablar del resentimiento, hay que hablar del odio.Hay que hablar de la importancia de romper entre nosotras, de pelearnos entre nosotros, sin caer en el castigo y la culpa y la persecución. Pero yo sí, creo que la ruptura o la negatividad en general ese el libro no lo logra del todo. Habría que ir a otros lados y pienso que de un año para acá, desde que se recrudeció el genocida ahora, pues justo toca repensar el antiimperialismo, toca repensar cosas que no pueden ser tan flexibles, no? O sea, pues están matando, están cayendo bombas y no se trata de vamos a ver si nos cae el 20 o no, o cuando nos cae el 20.Pues hay un imperio gestionando un genocidio que se recrudeció muy fuerte el último año. Y eso implica, se endurece, se endurece. O sea, ha cambiado el panorama político. Y hay [00:06:00] procesos donde podemos ser muy flexibles y pacientes, pero hay procesos donde no, donde hay que responder porque la bomba te ca en la cabeza, o sea, y ya está.Entonces me recuerdo un poco como en los del paso de los 60s a los 70s, o el paso hacia los 20, no? O sea, históricamente esto ha pasado. Se acaba el hipismo y y llega la guerrilla. Se acaba el anarquismo y empieza el partido comunista. O sea, hay momentos donde la historia te come y se vuelve un poquito más pues no te voy a decir duro, pero pero sí, incluso en el norte, los anarquistas que venían de escribir ese libro como muy ticunistas se están volviendo más de izquierda, más revolucionario, más leninistas mucho. Y yo creo que eso tiene que ver, bueno, una especie el leninismo, pues moderno o buena onda.El tipo zapatismo en versión anglo, pero yo creo que eso tiene que ver con las condiciones actuales. Yo creo que antes de la pandemia, después de la pandemia, son dos planetas, tanto por el reconocimiento de genocidia, como porque lo que se [00:07:00] hizo toda la década que para mí acaba en pandemia. Pues tenía un lado muy chido, pero también a un lado muy de todo es válido.La insurrección ya está aquí. Y pues ahora decimos no, pues no está aquí. No estamos parando a Estados Unidos este el imperio, no lo estamos parando. En otros momentos de la historia, si se la podido o poner ciertos límites al imperialismo." No del todo, pero se han ganado algunas luchas.Entonces, bueno, ese libro creo que fue de su época. O sea, 2016 y ese anarquismo de la amistad y de hay que conectar y fluir y todo ese lado que para un poco hippie. Creo que es muy de su momento, de la década pasada, pero yo creo que esa época, ya no es la nuestra, por las por las condiciones. O sea, porque estamos reaccionando y respondiendo y organizándonos frente a otros problemas.Chris: Claro, claro. Y si podrias actualizarlo en tus propios palabras, cuáles serían los temas más importantes [00:08:00] para cambiar o reemplazar? Alf: O sea, mira te voy a contar de otro libro, pero también es del norte.Entonces, pues no me encanta darle tanto entre ellos, pero un libro que, por ejemplo, le respondería fuerte de ese libro, sería este que me regalaban los de Traficantes, ahora que trabaje con ellos en en Madrid, que se llama Hacia Una Nueva Guerra Civil Mundial, de Lazzarato, no?Entonces digo, lo que pasa es que él es un leninista, no? Entonces, le pega duro, le pega duro. O sea, pero esto ha pasado siempre, pero hay varias banda que está respondiendo, no? O sea, por ejemplo, en el caso de este libro que te a acaba de mencionar Lazzarato.Pues él dice que los últimos 50 años, incluido militancia, que estaría al final de 50 años, lo político como tal no se habló? Entonces, si le aplicas Lazzarato a Militancia Alegre, efectivamente, nunca se habla de que a ver, o sea, el gobierno estadounidense control el mundo y va ganando. O sea, y hubieron luchas en los 60s, 70s, que lograron más o menos parar [00:09:00] ese imperialismo, los liberaciones nacionales, por ejemplo.Las luchas de empezamos por Vietnam, Malher y Cuba y acabando con otras. Si más o menos se le pudo parar a ese imperialismo de ese momento? Pero por ejemplo, Militancia en ni un solo momento habla de política en un sentido duro, no? O sea anti-Trump, por ejemplo, anti-global como global north o norte y global. O sea, en el sentido que gobiernan en el mundo, no?Y eso no se habla no? O sea, en ningún momento se dice bueno, nosotras, como norte, tenemos una deuda con el sur, no solo económica, sino política, no? O sea, en cuanto a no permitir la autonomía de los sur. Y palestina y Líbano es el, pues es el caso más extremo, no? Aunque aquí es lo mismo, no? O sea, la lucha la guerra contra los zapatistas es el mismo genocidio, con la misma bala. O sea el mismo inversionista, las mismas ganancias. Es el mismo genocidio. Entonces, pero no hablar de eso, no hablar de lo meramente político, [00:10:00] no? O sea de como Morena trabaja para el gobierno gringo y mata a los zapatistas y los centroamericanos. Al no hablar de este tipo de cosas como duramente políticas.O sea, como Trump controla a la milicia mexicana, la la la. Pues sí que es un libro hippie, no? O sea, en el sentido de que, ahí los leninistas tienen un punto. En este caso, Lazzarato pero mucha otra banda, al contestarle a la banda anárquica. Si muy chida la amistad y muy chida la... Lets tune in.O sea, está bien, pero tú estás parada en un mundo que de beneficia de destruir este mundo donde tú y yo estamos parada, no? Entonces, de muchas maneras: lo real, lo simbólico en lo económico. El turismo, para mí solo es un capítulo de esa serie de industrias de muerte. Entonces no, al no hablarlo.Yo pienso que es un libro que omite el lugar de enunciación principal, que es el imperio si habla del imperio, pero yo siento que si le faltó lo político político. Osea, como el norte domina y controla [00:11:00] al sur, el gobierno del norte en concreto. Al no hablar eso pues si hizo darle un libro que pues no sé cómo va a envejecer. O sea, digo, bueno, a ver cómo le va, porque porque sí que sirve para lo que sirvió Tiqqun y esas cosas en su momento que era contestarle a la izquierda vertical, por decir así. Pero ese momento, por lo menos en el norte, ya pasó, no? Y ellos esos mismos ya regresaron a la verticalidad.O sea, los que atacaron al leninismo, estamos en esta otra. Entonces chistosasto porque ellos tienen sus propios ciclos y nosotras tenemos otros ciclos de lucha, no? Y otras genealogías y otras retóricas. O sea, es muy diferente. Ahí la traducción. Por eso milita tanto ese libro porque, había que defender nuestro propio contexto, no?Y decir bueno, es la genealogia de ellos, la nuestra tiene otras conceptos. O sea, ha ganado guerras y revoluciones. Hay muchos triunfos en nuestra historia del sur. De hecho, en la del norte hay más derrotas y en cambio, [00:12:00] las liberaciones nacionales, pues prácticamente todas triunfaron, si las piensas, contra el imperialismo. Claro que ya no está de moda hablar de eso porque de colonial ya está en otra... ya se fue a otro lado. No? La mayoría de de anticolonial ya no está viniendo su genealogía en las luchas de liberación nacional y o la violencia?Ya la violencia pasó de moda y justo este libro tiene algo de eso? Como de no hay que hablar de cómo en México tuvimos que tirar balazos para recuperarlo un poco que tenemos. No! Hay que hablar de la amistad del amor, la ternura. Esa parte es la que yo pienso que ya no le habla mucho a nuestro tiempo y a ver qué va a pasar después, a ver qué va a pasar después.No, aunque tienes utilidad, no? O sea, mucha gente que está en el activismo vive con mucho, cariño de ese libro y está bien. O sea, Creo que está bien. Yo creo que le falta la parte política y negativa, pero bueno, no lo pudimos pedir todo a un solo libro. No. Eso es lo que hicieron los europeos con nosotros, traer la biblia y [00:13:00] matarnos pretexto de un solo libro. Entonces yo creo que no hay que caer. Eso es, es colonial quererle pedir todo a un solo libro. Si ese libro dio lo que tuvo que dar en su contexto y ese contexto para mí pasó este listo. O sea, fue una herramienta útil que respondió y ya este lo que sigue. Chris: Pues sí, este recuerdo que hubo una, una nota de pie en en el libro, de Silvia Federici y la tengo.La cita aquí decía que"lo que más importa es descubrir y recreer la memoria colectiva de las luchas pasadas. En los Estados Unidos, hay un intento sistemático de destruir esta memoria. Y ahora esto se está extendiendo por todo el mundo. Revivir la memoria de las luchas del pasado nos hace sentir ser parte de algo más grande que nuestras vidas individuales y de esta manera de un nuevo sentido a lo que estamos haciendo y nos da coraje, porque nos hace tener menos miedo en lo que [00:14:00] nos puede pasar individualmente." Y siento que hay algo allá como también la, no sé si está impulsado desde arriba o si es solo una falta de memoria, pero sí, siento que es, es muy fuerte que hay una falta de linaje, en la política en el día de hoy, en los momentos sociales contemporáneos. Pero pues, quería preguntarte un poco de tus experiencias también con el turismo. Me gustaría preguntarle de qué tipo de reacciones recibiste, recibieron cómo resultado del podcast y si esas conversaciones cambiaron sus ideas sobre los temas tratados.Alf: Este una parte había que preguntárselo directo a Pame porque yo creo que ella lo vivió a su forma también. Pero bueno, pues fue muy chido. Primero que nada, lo lo bonito. Ese programa varias cosas. Primero, ese programa fue apoyado por el instituto de estudios anarquistas americano, y eso [00:15:00] fue lindo, tener el apoyo. O sea, no precarizarnos tanto. Y tampoco tener que pedirle dinero a gente de mierda para hacer co chidas no, eso siempre se siente bien. Como no traicionar el contenido, o sea que vaya mucho la forma con el fondo, no. Entonces, de entrada, eso fue muy alegre. De segunda gran alegría, yo siempre trabajo a puerta cerrada.Yo soy un poco celosa de mi trabajo. Entonces, pues a abrir la puerta y trabajar con no solo dos, vieron un podcast que éramos cuatro, cinco. Eso es rarísimo. Yo nunca había hecho eso. Yo no suelo hacer eso. Si, trabajo con gente, pero no con el micrófono, normalmente no, eh?Siempre trabaj o con grupos y movimientos y cosas, pero digamos que a puerta cerrada por decir así o o coyunturas específicas. Entonces, primero la congruencia que yo siento que tuvo ese programa, como alinearnos en un anarquismo internacionalista, que yo creo que hay que recuperar.El internacionalismo en general, eh? Y creo que a [00:16:00] veces la lucha contra el turismo sin querer se vuelve muy nacionalista y no distingue entre migrante y turista esas cosas, como en un México, es mejor que todo lo demás. Un poco raro, pero bueno, antes de perderme, yo creo que ahí hubo un gesto internacionalista lindo.O sea, entre anarquistas del norte con los del sur primero y segundo, pues, abrir el micro porque que yo no es algo que suelo o solía hacer hasta hace hasta este año, por decir, o sea, yo llevo en un monólogo de locutora varios años porque mi parte social la hago cuerpo a cuerpo, por decir así. Y ya te podría platicar muchas cosas.Pero a mí me emociono muchísimo el programa con Tejiendo a la Organización Revolucionaria, eh? La verdad me encantó. O sea, a mí ellos me parece que hacen un trabajo importante. Y me parece que nuestro tiempo se está pensando desde los revolucionarios también. No necesariamente como la decada pasada la insurreccional y el todo se vale.Este, yo creo que está [00:17:00] cambiando un poco esos enfoques y justo ellos que llevan más de 20 años y son como 50 personas organizadas desde abajo con mucha claridad y mucha fuerza. Pues hicimos un puente muy chido, no entre en anarquismo y otras partes de la izquierda radical, que normalmente no nos damos la mano y no platica.O sea, no es común ni es fácil. Y cuando se da, suele ser tenso. Y no hubo para mí nada de tensión, al revés. Hubo una complementación muy chida contorno. Es el último capítulo de Emergente. Bueno, o sea, y siento que conecta con Militancia Alegre. O sea, llamarla en militancia y no "activismo alegre" era una provocación de los autores.Y yo creo que movimiento es como ?, entre muchos otros que se mencionan justos son militantes, no activistas, no? O sea que el activista tiene genealogía muy del norte y muy de los noventas para acá. Y yo creo que ellos como que leídos por "los cool" que Militancia Alegre sigue siendo el libro más cool, como que no suelen voltear, la gente cool, no suele voltear a ver a ese tipo de militancias como Thor. [00:18:00] Todos estuvieron muy chidos, pero yo le tengo especial cariño, a ese último, porque sí, pienso que hay que pensar alianzas insólitas, como todas las izquierdas radicales, tratar de articular. Y para mí, eso lo más cercano fue contorno. Y yo lo sigo reescuchando. Y hay cosas que me dejar pensando, por ejemplo, lo que dicen de los sectores de la clase trabajadora, que hay un sector indígena, entonces se pelean entre ellos y como son sectorizados, en fin a mí, hay varias cosas que ellos me hacen pensar. Me hacen pensar mucho. Y su chamba es muy chida. Solo que, como no es la más cool y como nice. No tiene este super diseño ni nada. Pues mucha gente no les presta atención. Entonces yo, para mí, fue importante darles el micro a ellos y más bien me faltaron programas con ellos, la verdad.Entonces, para mí, eso fue muy lindo, con el pretexto del libro, porque la verdad, casi ni hablamos o muy poquito. Ya haber podido entrevistar, por ejemplo, a Raquel Gutiérrez. De poder pues yo hubiera [00:19:00] entrevistado a John Holloway. O sea, yo me hubiera seguido. Lo que pasa es que la chamba entrevistadora es muy distinta a la que yo hago como locutora, o sea, es otro camino. Y pues, el recurso. Pues no lo hay. Claro. Claro. Porque esa lo pudimos hasta pagar un poquitito de dinero a la gente que entrevistamos. Pudimos autocobrar un poquitito. Pagarle a la diseñadora. Fue muy distinto a todo lo que yo hago. No este ese ese programa.Insisto por el apoyo internacionalista que poco o mucho, pues fue muy lindo tener, porque normalmente no se puede pagar entrevistas y cosas, que es chistoso tanto tanto de lucha de clases, con compas que pu pues obviamente les cuesta venir para acá. Chris: Ya no, pues es muy difícil, pero sí, fue un episodio muy bonito. Y lo voy a poner en el sitio web d El Fin de Turismo cuando lanzamos este podcast y también por los que quieren saber, es el último episodio de Alegría Emergente. Pues, hablando de tus obras Alf [00:20:00] en Pepitas de Calabaza, exploras algunos temas periférico de turismo, desde la Merida en la que creciste, los chiqui loteros o aquellos que dividen grandes lotes en lotes pequeños para venderlos a un precio normalmente superior, a veces a extranjeros. Es uno de esos temas.Cómo influyó tu tiempo en Merida en tu comprensión del turismo? Alf: Primero, extender un poco la la invitación a la lectura de mi trabajo. Este el tema de la propiedad y del turismo y del colonialismo, básicamente atraviesa toda toda mi obra, pero medida en concreto que que te interesa con Pepitas también es algo que menciono en el libro nuevo.Él No Existe Dique Capaz de Contar y hablo específicamente de cómo el turismo, la industria del turismo ha ido como arrebatándonos a quienes venimos de las clases populares. Crecimos abajo y demás, sobre todo el placer, el ocio. Olvídate de la [00:21:00] tierra. Si el acceso al agua, una serie de cosas, no.Entonces ahí se trabaja un poco más elabor adamente pero efectivamente desde Pepitas. Pues a mí, es un tema que me, central en mi trabajo. El tema del colonialismo, porque para mí, hablar de turismo se hablar de colonialismo actual, colonialismo interno externo, pero es el colorismo vigente. O sea, es un desplazamiento, parte de un proceso de desplazamiento em.Entonces, en Pepitas, pues efectivamente eso es un protagonista, que digamos es el burgués nacional, por decirlo como muy teóricamente el chiquilotero, le decimos regionalmente, que es el es el terrateniente. No es Carlos Slim. O sea, no es el más rico, el lo rico, pero es, digamos, el terrateniente de mediano alcance que puede comprar tierra y fragmentarla y venderla, especular con la tierra, al final. Pero en el sur resiste, el año pasado, para para subir el tono a lo político otra vez... El el año pasado en el sur [00:22:00] resiste, nos decía el Congreso Nacional Indígena, que la mitad de la tierra en México es propiedad social, no? Y esto lo platicaba presentando no Existe Dique con Yasnaya Aguilar porque Oaxaca es un caso distinto y da mucha envidia.Tiene una tercera forma de tierra que en la tierra comunal, pero no vamos entrar a las legalidades. El sureste de México, como representa a Paco y hablo en mi segundo libro también este de ah, el turismo ha entrado porque legalmente, desde el 92 se cambió la constitución y se ha roto la propiedad ejidal y ha entrado la propiedad privada, no?Entonces, para llevarlo lo meramente político, luchar en contra del turismo hoy en México sería exigir que no se pueda vender, como en Oaxaca existe la propiedad comunal, no en ninguna otra parte del país hasta donde yo sé, que no se pueda legalmente vender esa tierra. Entonces, para no abstraer, o sea para ir a concreto, el turismo avanza, por el primermundista, coludido con [00:23:00] con con el tercermundista de la clase alta, en este caso, Paco, para romper la la propiedad social y meter la propiedad individual o privada, no? Si hubiera un mecanismo que la revolución mexicana nos heredó, ese mecanismo legal no podría existir el turismo en México, por lo menos no legalmente. Entonces, como desde el 92, se terminó de caer lo que nos quedaba de revolucion mexicana y que se peleó a balazos. Hay que recuperar esa negativa. En el 92 se cambia, es perdemos eso que habíamos ganado la revolución. Y entonces el turismo ya explotan. Y eso es muy notorio para gente que somos del sur.O sea, si yo te cuento cómo fui a Tulum por primera vez, y cuando volví a Tulum 10 o 20 anos después, o cómo fui a Zipolite por primera vez. Y eso es el resultado. O sea, te puedo escribir 30 libros, pero todo eso es result resultado específicamente una partecita de la constitución que menciona en mi segundo libre, legal, que permitió destruirlo lo que ganamos en la revolución mexicana, [00:24:00] que es la propiedad colectiva, en algunos casos propiedad indígena en otros casos, simplemente propiedad social de las clases populares.Y esto lo he trado mucha gente y me fui enterando estando con la gente en territorio, por ejemplo, con la asamblea de defensores de territorio Maya Muuch Xiinbal, ellos en la práctica, me enseñaron toda esta serie de mecanismos y defensas caminando con los pueblos, estando ahí. O sea, porque hay que estar ahí a veces para entender la magnitud.O sea, si tú lo piensas, el los muchos pueblos indígenas y clases populares son dueñas de hectáreas, el 40% del país, está en sus manos a nivel de propiedad legal, pero la propiedad privada va ganando, no, no. Y para mí, el turismo solo es un pedacito de ese proyecto colonizador actual, que va, va quitándonos, lo poquito que ganamos en la revolución mexicana. Bueno, ganamos varias cosas: la educación pública, salud pública, todo eso lo van privatizando. Pero es muy loco tierra y territorio, porque es muy específico. O sea 40 percent versus [00:25:00] 60 percent, un artículo de constitución, no hay que perdernos, osea. Ahí está. Pero mira el ombligo del pedo. Ajá. Chris: Mm, gracias. Me gustaría proponer algunos algunas preguntas, algunas provocaciones. Quizás respeto de cómo el turismo y más bien, más recientemente, las entrecomillas invasiones de turistas, nómadas digitales a México desde la pandemia y otras partes también. O sea, no es solo México, pero obviamente hay otros lugares.Y pues, hay ciertas cosas que ha surgido en otros episodios de podcast, respeto de el radicalismo rígido, y como lo veo a veces culturas de descartabilidad, que siento que es algo fundamental y también como desconocido en cómo funciona, pues la modernidad, la colonia, toda ese trayectoria [00:26:00] de mierda. Pero lo vemos mucho. Siento, siento yo en los redes sociales. Entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, qué piensas sobre los efectos de las redes sociales en los contextos de las luchas contemporáneas, pero también bajo de este contexto de turismo, de las invasiones en México. Entonces mi pregunta es, cómo crees que las redes sociales contribuyen al radicalismo rígido?Alf: Eh? Pues mira, yo creo que no solo contribuyen radicalismo rígido, o sea, respondiendo muy rápidamente. Yo creo que el algoritmo está diseñado y eso lo sabe la mayoría, espero, supongo este para generar estos echo-chambers que le llaman. Entonces, yo creo que lo mínimo, o sea, lo más x es que genere radicalismo rígido yo creo que en realidad la [00:27:00] ultraderecha está ganando en el mundo por las redes sociales. Y esto no lo digo yo. Esto está demostradisimo. O sea, Milei, Trump y todo el fascismo en el poder que desgraciadamente es, yo calculo la mitad del planeta, Bukele, etcétera, Bolsonaro, tienen mucho que ver con lo que aquí sería Chumel Torres, con lo que aquí sería Eduardo Verastegui. Tiene todo que ver, no?Y yo creo que eso, el pensamiento crítico, como le nos queremos llamar a este el otro lado antifascista sea, no hemos tomado suficientemente en serio eso como un enemigo, no? Porque volviendo la negatividad, el resentimiento, pues hay ese es un nuevo enemigo. Para mí, hay que destruirlo este.Acomodé lugar, o sea, como tenga que hacer. Entonces, esto lo hablaba también con Benja, la pareja de Yasnaya, el día de mi presentación en Volcana. O sea, qué pasa que mucha izquierda, mucho pensamiento crítico y todo, no quiere hacer pop. Entonces la derecha sí que está haciendo [00:28:00] pop y por eso ganó Trump, y por eso está Milei en el poder, porque hacen un un tipo de redes sociales poperas. No tienen miedo a reducir el pensamiento, a provocar. No tienen miedo porque tienen el poder, obviamente, controlan el mundo. En concreto, Trump, no? Entonces, nosotras desde el miedo y desde un un clasicismo extraño, un machismo raro, como que decimos el "pop" está mal porque reduce. Ser influencer está mal porque hace de lo abstracto. Lo reduce. Lo simplifica. Y ese es un problema. Es un problema grande que tiene que para mí tiene que ver con el problema de la es escolarización. Pero para contestarte, y yo creo que las redes sociales sostienen al fascismo actual, más que cualquier otra cosa, yo creo que más que ninguna otra cosa. Y por eso nos gobiernan celebridades y estamos en una fase nueva de la política como espectáculo. Y no estábamos ahí, volvemos a militancia como un libro que ya no responde a esta época, yo no siento que Obama era eso.Yo no [00:29:00] siento que el PRIismo y el PANismo era eso. Estamos en otro momento, entonces, como siempre la izquierda o como lo quieras llamar, el pensamiento, el antifascismo general, que a mi me da igual los conceptos, como siempre estamos lentas, lentas en reaccionar. Porque? Pues porque nos asusta. Las redes sociales, yo pienso que nos están bombardeando, emocionalmente con el genocidio. Yo creo que la manera en que están manejando la imagen del genocidio está tronando la salud mental, terminando de tronar, si no, es que ya la había tronado de buena parte de de de quienes estamos contra de Trump y Milei, por decir el amor que yo espero que seamos más o de la mitad de la tierra otra vez, este me gusta creer. Entonces eso, yo creo que estamos lentas porque quieren ellos porque nos han tronado la la salud mental. Y eso hace que nos aletargamos en responder con la fuerza con la que ellos, o sea nos faltan influencers un poco más rudos, para decirlo como es, o sea un poco más tan fuertes y provocadores como ellos.Yo [00:30:00] siento que los influencers de este lado hacen un trabajo importante, pero muy suave. O sea, está muy abajito. Muy bien portado. Cuando tú escuchas a Bukele, tú escuchas hablar a Milei o Trump y son los provocadores, realmente. Este, no le tienen miedo a decir pendejadas. Y la izquierda, sí. Sí, le tienen miedo a cagarla. Cuando no se dan cuenta que lo que están haciendo ellos es provocar para mover, no? O sea, la gente sabe que es una exageración. Los votantes de Milei de Bukele y de Trump saben que dicen mucha, es un borracho, que está diciendo pendejadas, pero van y votan. Chris: Claro. Alf: La izquierda no está logrando subir el tono. Al revés. O sea, entre más, baja en el fondo y más banderitas de palestina, como que más bien portadas, somos. Y entonces, ah, "pues vamos a hablar de la cultura de palestina, que es muy importante. Es muy bonita. Pero yo te apuesto que se hubieran influencers diciendo vamos a tirarles bombas y vamos a matar sería más fuerte, no? O sea, le daría [00:31:00] miedo a ellos como ha pasar, si ha pasado la historia en los 70. Esto sí que pasó. Si le dábamos miedo a ellos. Ya no le damos miedo. Y yo creo que eso tiene todo que ver con como el imperialismo hoy, es un algoritmo. Antes era otra cosa, y es un imperialismo de la mente y de las emociones.Y es meramente como manejan la imagen. Osea, da igual lo que nos muestren, sino la manera en que se utiliza el discurso de Trump y la manera en que se utiliza la imagen del genocidio, no el genocidio. Eso a ellos no les importa, sino el uso, nos truenan, nos truenan todo el tiempo.Entonces no logramos articular. No logramos reconocernos. Empezamos a competir, nos peleamos y es porque ellos van ganando. Han habido otros momentos de la historia donde este lado de veras le daba miedo sin idealizarlo porque también puede ser muy machista. Este le daba miedo a Trump y a los Trumps. O sea, se [00:32:00] cagaban de me decían no, no.Entonces, bueno, van a matar, no? Y entonces, había algo positivo ahí. Había algo positivo ahí y eso se perdió, nuestra propia capacidad de dar miedo y defendernos. Se ha ido perdiendo. O sea, y es muy material, porque matan defensores del territorio cada semana, así como palestinos y libaneses con la misma pistola, la misma arma. Cada semana los matan. Entonces, pues, claro que da miedo de subir el tono. No porque siento que te van a matar. Hay un fantasma. Entonces, yo creo que las redes sociales se tienen toda la culpa y que están gestionadas maravillosas, perfectas, las redes sociales y y el internet porque permitió que el imperialismo, se vuelva.O sea que lo cargues a todos lados, que desees el fascismo. Y eso está en las pantallitas y en el celular. Lo manejaron muy bien. El que lo explica más bastante bien es, Adam Curtis, en Can't Get You Outta My Head. Y creo que eso hay que tomarlo [00:33:00] todavía más enserio, porque la gente nada más dice "ah, pinche Chumel Torres". No, wey. O sea, es el cáncer de esta sociedad. O sea, no se explicar. Es un verdadero enemigo y "ah x solo es un panista ahí raro." Lo que quiero decir es que no le damos la seriedad, como que no estamos leyendo el imperio en su nueva fase y cómo se maneja. Chris: Pero entonces, tú crees que las maneras que podemos socovar el algoritmo es de, quitarnos de la pantalla? O sea, pero cómo está también el algoritmo no solo internalizándose según yo en los movimientos, pero en las mentalidades de la gente y dentro de los movimientos?Alf: Claro que yo no tengo una respuesta, pero a mí se me ocurre que esto ya se intentado muchas veces como crear nuestros propios tecnologías. Lo que pasa es que nunca van a ser igual de atractivas y poderosas, como clase de quienes controlan la tierra, porque pues por algo [00:34:00] las controlan y van ganando no? Porque tienen todos los recursos y toda la inteligencia puesta ahíEntonces, si los movimientos ya les pueden tener redes sociales, pero pero sus posts no tienen ningún alcance y eso está gestionado desde arriba. Entonces este es un problema más profundo que tiene que ver con el problema de la imagen y su gestión. O sea, al controlar el algoritmo, el imperio, lo que está controlando son las imágenes y las narrativas. Las gestionan, a eso me refiero con imperialismo. O sea, vemos lo que el imperio quiere que veamos y se acabó. O sea, es una nueva fase porque no necesariamente tienes al gringo gobernando a tu país como lo fue antes de la revoluciones nacionales, por ejemplo, pero tienes el celular que sólo te va a mostrar lo que le conviene al gobierno gringo o mayoritariamente.Entonces quebrar el algoritmo es quebrar el imperio, o sea la verdad, o sea, no es otra cosa que eso . Y eso hace que lo [00:35:00] cool sea cool y lo no cool que suele ser más importante, no se vea y no tenga acceso recursos y no generar imágenes chidas. Y si logras de una imagen, no tiene ningún alcance. O sea, es muy notorio para mi trabajo.O sea, si yo subo mi gatito 500 views, si yo subo el tipo de cosas que estamos platicando 5. Sí, claro. Es super evidente, no el manejo de la imagen y la gestión. Entonces, pues hay que volver. Hay que volver a la auto publicación. Hay que volver a los medios libres como se estuvieron haciendo hasta si varias decadas. O sea, y rehacerlo recuperarlos, repensarlos. La gente que se está yendo a Mastodon en redes sociales. La gente que se está saliendo de los algoritmos, los más feos. Digo, no sé qué tanto lo vamos a lograr. O sea, por eso yo, mi parte política, la vivo más en presencial. O sea, yo voy. Trato de ir ahora que se cumplen 50 años de Lucio cada año, hacer pueblo, estar con el pueblo, ser pueblo. O sea, porque [00:36:00] claro que si yo no voy, nunca me voy a enterar.Y si no camino con, como te conté, la asamblea maya, aunque sea cinco minutos, yo no me entero de que el pedo principal de todo esto es simplemente un artículo de la constitución, no? Entonces, o sea, pon tú que ellos postan en internet. Quién lo escucha? Nadie muy poca gente, pero eso es por quien controla.Que la info no llegue no. Entonces, claro. Entonces a eso voy, o sea, hay un problema con la imagen. O sea, hay un gran problema con la imagen porque también lo que la ultra derecho y el fascismo ha logrado perfectamente bien en nuestra época. Es que la gente prefiere el reconocimiento y el like, el premio no que la reparación real.Y entonces las redes sociales están basadas en un nuevo modelo de contra insurgencia y de pacificación y neutralización política, que es, yo voy, te doy un premio, yo voy y te muestro, yo te doy un like, pero para que ya te calles, no. Y para que no digas las cosas, [00:37:00] estamos decían, es un solo artículo.Si echamos para atrás de artículo, pues vamos a parar buena parte de los capitales colonialistas y turísticos hoy, etc. O sea a lo que voy es que van y te premian, van y te likean para que te vayas pacificando. Y ahí hubo un cambio estrategia que también estamos muy lentas en sí, porque los setentas te mataban, a las clases medias organizadas políticamente. Hoy no. Hoy no es así.Hoy matan a la gente de abajo, a los defensores que viven y habitan las clases populares, el territo y a la clase media la premia pa que te calles. Entonces, cómo te premian haciendo que el algoritmo te vea mucho y hables mucho y produzcas mucho contenido, pero es un contenido. Te repito muy bien portado.Es un contenido suave, que omite las partes políticas que omite temas de imperialismo contra insurgencia, bla, bla, osea. Habla de todo lo demás, formas de vida, ternura radical, [00:38:00] consumo alternativo, sororidad solidaria, todo lo que tú quieras, excepto si no le cortamos la cabeza a Trump, esa condición no para. O sea, no sé si me explico.Menos lo más importante, digo, lo estoy caricaturizando. Cortando la cabeza de Trump no vamos a parar el periodismo, pero me estás entendiendo. Están manejando la censura y estamos ya hablan de tecno tecnofeudalismo. Estamos regalándole un contenido que soporta el imperialismo y no nos damos... estamos tan enajenadas en este momento con el algoritmo que trabajamos para el gratis.No? Y me incluye, o sea mis PDFs, son gratis. Mi radio es gratis. Yo soy una esclava del internet y se acabó, no? Y entonces, en la medida en que no lo sepamos, sentir la negatividad de ese despojo y de cómo todas trabajamos para el imperio. Nos gusta no poco mucho, este pues más nos enajenamos no? O sea, porque yo no cobro por mis ramas de radio.Yo no cobro por el PDF [00:39:00] literal. Me despoja y me precariza en un sentido duro, directo. El pedo es que decirlo es fuerte porque la gente, pues como escucha en tu programa o el mío, y nos va MXN $5. Bien, pues la gente se compra la amiga y dice que padre, el internet me ven. Cuando solo te está viendo la gente que piensa como tú. Y ya nadie más. O sea, ni un solo seguidor más. Gente que ya pensaba como tú, antes de llegar a tu contenido. Entonces, en realidad no estamos logrando hacer propaganda, no? Y yo creo que es super importante, porque porque en la medida siempre trabajamos con los que piensan como nosotras, no estamos empujando el ese 50 percent fascista, al reves, lo respetamos y decimos, bueno, yo trabajo con el 50%. Me quedo en el 40% de la propiedad social y nunca empujo la propiedad privada o el 50% fascista.Y ya ahí te quedas que es muy cómodo también hablar entre nosotras. Pues que nadie te también te madres que nadie te mande [00:40:00] bots. Porque a mí lo que hacen es que me atacan en internet, no? Entonces, cada vez que digo lo que hay que decir, pues me mandan bots y me asustan me, como mucha gente, no, te amenazan.Y todos eso esta perfectamente gestionado, en México desde Peña Nieto, del Peña bots. Se siente muy claramente esas tecnologías. Muchas veces israeles. Se siente muy clarito, no? Y funcionan perfectamente bien, porque pacifican y neutralizan maravillosamente. Ya la gente deja de lo que hay que decir porque tú sientes que... o sea, porque tú sientes lo general, el efecto contrario, las censuras se siente como premiOChris: total. Muchas gracias. Alf. me gustaría provocar un poco ese idea que la algoritmo sólo nos este en suavece. En suaveza, dijiste? En suavece. Ajá. Ajá, porque pues, [00:41:00] también a mí parece que algoritmo está pidiendo, metiendo, reforzando la rabia.Y hace hace poco descubrí, descubrí un libro llamado Discard Studies en inglés, Estudios de Descarte, que intenta formular hipótesis no solo en torno a las historias sociales de la basura y contaminación, pero sino también del exilio y desplazamiento. Y la idea en los estudios del descarte es que todas estas cosas están muy relacionadas entre sí.Las redes sociales creen una plataforma para los también expulsiones sociales en forma de cancelaciones o escrachees, por ejemplo. Alf: Mm-hmm. Chris: Entonces, también que si el el algo ritmo está imponiendo, invitándonos a ser más pacíficos, siento que hay una manera que está imponiendo, impulsando, invitándonos a descartar, tirar, la [00:42:00] gente entre los movimientos sociales, o sea, entre movimientos sociales, también en la manera interpersonal.Y quería preguntarte sobre eso y las consecuencias a las luchas de largo plazo. Alf: Mm-hmm. Mira, yo siento que si se habló particularmente en el segundo capítulo de Alegria Emergente con un invitado que se llama Tomás Calles. Con él, se habló eso. Mira, yo siento que que es bien complicado este tema, porque para mí, el escrache pues que últimamente más sé hoy es el escrache que llegar con el género, con abuso sexual. Y a la vez, yo creo que hay que hacerle su genealogía completa el escrache porque el escrache cada vez... o sea, si lo sacamos de género y lo metemos a la política, clase, a raza, y a todo lo demás, este de si tú te das cuenta, todo el tiempo, volviendo al 50 facho y al no facho, el 50% facho ha estrechado al 50% no facho. Todo este es el tema del control de las narrativas y las imagenes. O sea, [00:43:00] si tú ves la imagen, por ejemplo y para mí, es una forma de escracheeo pre nuestra época. Si tú ves como Estados Unidos, creo la imagen de Cuba, es una forma de escrache, no? O sea, como, voy a hablar super mal de esos wey. Voy a decir. Voy a publicar todos los libros y todos los contenidos que hablen mal de Cuba, no?Y para mí, hay un escracheeo ahí, un pre escracheeo, por decir así. Entonces, en términos políticos, que te vuelvo a decir que siento que son los cabezas, nos faltan en toda esta discusión. Siempre ha existido y va a existir formas de manipular y de destruir cuando la gente está haciendo cosas más o menos chidas, pues te van a buscar dónde y ahí te van a chingar, no?Y el gobierno también participa eso con sus bots, no? Y su manejo de la información, de la distribución de la información en concreto. Entonces, yo siento que el escrache hay que verlo como también como parte de la contra insurgencia, no todos los escrachees, porque hay escrachees que, por ejemplo, no se vuelven públicos y se vuelven en procesos, por ejemplo, [00:44:00] de... o sea, no es la denuncia pública el punitivismo como ejercicio de castigo ejemplar público, hay escrachees o denuncias en concreto, que más bien se vuelven en ejercicios de justicia reparativa, puertas cerrada, que han sido efectivos.Y yo me he enterado de varios y me han invitado a varios procesos. Este y con varios movimientos. Yo me he dado cuenta de la justicia ejercía por nosotras mismas. Sí, llevada a cabo reparar cosas concretas con soluciones concretas sin hacer una imagen, sin darle al algoritmo lo que nos quita todo el tiempo - tiempo, energía, sin darle la fotita donde dice "para hacer tu eescrache chido habla..." o sea, simplemente resolver, es lo que muchas cosas en internet no hacen. Hablan pero no acciones, y tú puedes hablar lo que quieres siempre y cuando no actúes. Ese es el gran truco de la red social. No hablemos todo, mientras no cambiemos nada.Este entonces nada. Yo siento que el escrache pues hay que verlo así como, tiene una parte [00:45:00] chida para mí, sobre todo a puerta cerrada, como de procesos que yo llamaría, justicia reparativa, restaurativa, osea que no tienden a la imagen, puede crear una imagen, pero no es su fin su objetivo final, sino reparar daños específicos con soluciones específicas, no caso por caso, sin abstraer a ese, este versus un tipo de escrache liberal, blanqueado, espectacular, chafa, que lo único que ha hecho es contra insurgencia. Cada vez que hay liderazgos. "Ah, es un macho," no? Cada vez que hay movimiento sociales, "ah, trabajan para los rusos, trabajan para los chinos, este, reciben dinero, reciben dinero de tal, este." Ose y el escrache, si es una de las mejores herramientas, porque genera volvemos en el tema de narrativas y imágenes, no que contraponen lo que ha ganado.Osea, yo te voy a dar un fondo a ti como activista para que hables del turismo, todo lo que tú quieras, siempre y cuando no hables de esto y de esto, okey, [00:46:00] entonces tu envía a cobrar y te va a super bien. Y te voy el súper famoso y que chido.Pues esa es la lucha que nos vaya bien materialmente a todas. Pero a ti te censuraron. Te dijeron sólo hablas de, entonces, fíjate, volvimos al tema del escrache. O sea mucha de esa gente eescracheada. Voy a poner uno. Miguel Peralta. El caso de Miguel Peralta, para mí sería un caso de escrache, no este Miguel Peralta hoy está perseguido por el estado mexicano y mucha gente te va a decir que es un machista. Te va a decir muchas cosas, pero no te va a decir la otra parte, no? La parte política de su lucha, contra un gobierno que el gobierna, por no decir Samir Flores como un escrache, por no decir Hortensia Telesforo con un tipo de escrache.O sea, si me estás cachando? O sea, y entonces que pasa que que desde arriba, como controla la narrativa y controlan la imagen y la distribución de la información. Te dicen a ver, yo te voy a pagar por una cosa, pero cállate la otra. Entonces pon la banderita de colores. Y ya CDMX es gay y es trans, [00:47:00] pero nunca vuelves a hablar de clase social.Por favor que el pobre siga siendo pobre. Ella solo habla Alf de trans, no? Si te das cuenta, es como el escrache. O sea, el escrache dice vamos a destruir el liderazgo político de Miguel Peralta poniendo ultra énfasis en su lado machista, que que yo no dudo que haya tenido como muchos líderes y como mucha gente, o sea, yo no estoy diciendo que no, solo estoy diciendo la manera en que se utiliza ese tipo de denuncias es para destruir el lado político. Muchas veces no todas. Mm, pero para poner un solo caso, y hoy, por hoy te estoy hablando de un caso de criminalizacion actual, como podríamos hablar de Samir Flores o Hortensia Telesforo y toda la contrainsurgencia. La contrainsurgencia es un tipo de escrache. Es que eso ya cambió.También te repito, la gente más visible van y le dan premios y le dan atención. A la gente menos visible, la matan o la criminalizan como Miguel. Están a punto de meterlo a la cárcel 50 años si no le prestamos atención [00:48:00] a ese caso, no? Que es lo que quieren, que no le prestamos atención. Entonces a eso voy, o sea, casi que ni importa el crimen, casi que no importa la falta del daño, sino el manejo. Hay como una economía, fíjate, hasta te diría yo, una economía de las quejas y una economía de la imagen que no estamos siendo conscientes. Estamos tan alejanadas, que nos vamos, por lo primero que nos dan "Ah, ese ese wey era un macho." Listo. Todo quedó o ese wey trabajo para china y hasta todo el trabajo que haya hecho, como trabaja para china, o como hablan de, por ejemplo, piensan las narrativas sobre ve Venezuela y Nicaragua y Cuba.O sea, es impresionante. Es escrache, o sea. Quién te va a hablar bien de ese tipo de países? Está difícilisimo Chris: o o al menos decir como, "no sé, no sé"... Alf: o al menos decir, "no sé," pero lo que quiero decir es que el independientemente lo que han hecho Venezuela y los machismos de izquierda, [00:49:00] el manejo de ese error.O sea, supongo, sí, yo creo que comete errores como toda la gente cometemos. El manejo es la parte más como las redes sociales, la distribución de esa información, es la que a mí me preocupa más. O sea, como, solo vamos a hablar de lo mierda, déjate claro, porque a Estados Unidos le conviene, que Miguel Peralta está en la cárcel, que Venezuela solo se una mierda, que China solo se una... que yo no dudo que tiene un lado de mierda, pero es interesante los límites del discurso.No puedes hablar de lo hecho. En el momento en el que dice es algo bueno. Cancelada. A la cárcel. Se acabó el pedo. Entonces a mí eso me llama la atención, porque la gente cree que es un momento de libertad discursiva. El fascismo va ganando, no? O sea, y eso es Trump, pero y eso es el genocidio Palestino y Libanes.Pero pero pero hay un síntoma de eso en que no podemos, no podemos hablar. Yo siento que el [00:50:00] internet es mucho más facho que lo previo. O sea, yo me siento mucho más censurada que lo que yo veo que ha pasado en el siglo 20. Me explico? La verdad. O sea, yo veo los discursos del Che Guevara y digo no, pues en ese tiempo podías hablar.Habla así hoy, balazo en la frente. Así es fácil. No amaneciste. Te desapareceria. Entonces digo, ganamos o perdimos en términos discursivos? No, yo pienso que perdimos porque tu ves la tele el siglo 20 y está hablaba sin que le den un balazo. Hoy, ya no hoy. Samir habló, lo mató Morena. Ya. Listo. O sea, hoy hablaban los Palestinos todos muertos.O sea, entonces yo creo que perdimos con internet. No ganamos, pero yo pienso que el turismo te repito, o sea, y el colonialismo, entonces solo es como una partecita. Sinceramente, yo pienso que es como un pedazo chiquitito, de todo una cosa más grande. Claro que es una industria que ha [00:51:00] ido ganando mucha fuerza, pero para mí se habría un contra turismo y un peregrinaje.Yo siento que hago peregrinaje. Fíjate, qué es lo que destruyó el o el turismo está reedificando cuando trato de acercarme los movimientos sociales, desde mi clase, o sea, desde mi color piel y todos mis contradicciones. Pues yo sigo a veces caminando, con gente que me ha enseñado cosas que nunca van a salir en el celular.Adrede no sabemos la verdad. Aunque las posten, no me van a llegar. Y entonces yo creo que si hay un contraturismo y un yo pienso que tendríamos que ir a buscar en el tema del peregrinaje o la hospitalidad radical . Por qué? Porque había un tema sagrado, no? O sea, había algo sagrado en el peregrino. No era turismo nada más de placer, aunque tenía a su lado del compartir y ocioso, pero para mí se recuperáramos la capacidad de defendernos, varias cosas que nos han quitado, la capacidad de hablar que yo creo que nos la quitaran a base de premios y views, no a base de castigos, pues habría un [00:52:00] peregrinaje, por el lado político, no?.Por ejemplo, me cuentan que el año que viene va haber en Brasil. No, mucha gente va a estar yendo a Brasil de diferentes latitudes. Y ese para mí, eso es contra turismo y peregrinaje político sagrado. No. Entonces la gente va o el Anticop, vas, o sea, el ir es súper importante porque tiras el suelo de la basura y estás cuerpo a cuerpo con una realidad que que el algoritmo imperialista quiere que no nos llegue, tu salir. Claro. El problema es que te insista. Está tan de moda, "muerte al turismo," que no es fácil hablar de que hay contraturismos muy importantes. Siempre lo han habido no? O sea, cuando los zapatistas dicen vengan, pasan cosas que no pasan.O sea que hay que ir, no. A huevo, hay que ir. Entonces, y eso es un contraturismo. Y el zapatista está super consciente. No viene puro gringo aquí, puros güerito. Cuál es el pedo así se politizan. Sí, yo creo que es más de clase media no tratar de [00:53:00] buscarle la deriva y darle la vuelta a la industria. Mmm. Y simplemente decir merte a todo el turismo. Pues sí, en la teoría suena muy bien, pero en lo práctica va ganando. Chris: Mmm, claro, y así pues me gustaría preguntarte también de ese hospitalidad radical, pero siento que muchos caen intentar a definir lo que es.Pero entonces me gustaría nada más de preguntarte igual de peregrinaje, si quieres, de si has en tus viajes o en casa, o sea en tu colonia barrio, encontrado lo que llamarías tu hospitalidad radical, en el camino.Alf: Mira yo, esto es algo que aprendí. O sea lo que lo que llama hospitalidad radical es algo que yo hice en la práctica toda mi vida y solo después empecé a elaborar. Pues yo me moví toda mi vida y me sigo moviendo principalmente en el underground. Queda de contracultura. Y pero por ejemplo, yo en el punk, en las [00:54:00] patinetas, como en la izquierda radical en general, con todas sus ramas, toda la vida, he ido y han venido.Y mi casa siempre ha sido la casa de mucha gente y es una práctica que no me había sentado a pensar, no?. Ese no quedarse en el hotel, ese tú llevar a la gente a pasear y mostrarle los lugares ocultos de la ciudad, no los lugares como limpios y en inglés. O sea, es algo que en el Punk y en el anarquismo de esas cosas está muy metido, no?Y yo tengo casa en muchos lugares del mundo porque también he dado casa a mucha gente de muchos lugares del mundo, desde muy chavita, desde tours de skate cuando tenía 14 años, llegaba gente de todos lados y se quedaban en mi casa y yo no me daba cuenta de que es algo, que si tú te vas al peregrinaje, la hospitalidad radical o como queremos llamar, a lo previo a los boom's inmobiliarios, turísticos. Pues siempre existió no? Siempre he existido, no? Entonces nada. Para mí es raro hablarlo porque porque para mí, no se cuestiona, no? O sea, yo recibo gente todo el tiempo y me [00:55:00] recibe gente todo el tiempo de de mucho. Últimamente ya se hizo más internacional. Pero antes era más entre pues, las sociedades chiquitas, lo que sea.Entonces yo te podía contar toda mi historia, a partir de ese eje, si tú quieres. Pero pero mi punto es que es una práctica que yo tengo integrada. O sea, no, nunca me la cuestioné. O sea, y yo como mucho lo que queda en la contracultura, lo que queda underground o sea, mucha gente así lo vive este. Y cada vez que a mí me invita, por ejemplo, la última vez que me invitaron a un pueblo, fue Yasnaya, que ya habíamos quedado de ir.Porque el programa lo escuchan los Mixes y todo. Y yo le dije "claro que sí." O sea a mí en el momento en que me digas cuando voy, yo voy. Y para mí hay algo, o sea, tiene que venir de un pueblo como el Mixe, la invitación para que no sea turismo. Para mí, tiene que haber un receptor explícito y una invitación. O sea, es parte de la economía del regalo y esas cosas que, que en los sures siempre hemos hecho y en el abajo siempre hemos hecho consciente o inconscientemente.Creo que ahora hay que empezar [00:56:00] a elaborarla también. Ahora que empezar a teorizarlo y pensarlo porque conforme avanza, la propiedad privada de la colonización, pues se va perdiendo esos comunalismos, porque son prácticas que los pueblos tienen, que las clases populares tienen, que los undergrounds. La gente se mueve todo el tiempo, todo el tiempo.Solo no se mueve de maneras fancy y y cool. O sea, la foto no es la bonita del Instagram. Entonces, por lo tanto, esa práctica que a mí lo interesa es la práctica, no tanto la conceptualización o la imagen. Pues no la logramos reproducir y va ganando el turismo comercial. Por darte otro ejemplo, varios pueblos en el sureste también me hablaban de turismo alternativo. Y, por ejemplo, armaban varias cosas con los pueblos alrededor pidiéndole permiso, volviendo al al 40% de la propiedad social y esa parte la constitución que habría que pedir que nos regresen, le pedían permiso a todos los ejidos. Entonces ibas en bici o pajareando [00:57:00] las cosas que hacen turismo normal, pero hablaban con los dueños de los ejidos con el de la propiedad social que yo y los zapatistas y mucha gente defendemos y le decían bueno, "voy a traer gringos que que como quieren que le hagamos. Pues da tu caguama" o "cuánto les vas a cobrar?" Y para mí es contraturismo, fíjate, y caminando con ellos en esos territorios. Lo aprendes. O sea, escuchando programas de radio y leyendo libros va a estar cabrón. O sea, hay que ir, no este y fíjate que interesante, porque ese 40% de esa propiedad social, pues bien, que podría recibir la lana, que se le da el hotel? No? Porque mucha de esta gente está muy precarizada, entonces no simplemente decir "ah, a la verga, el dinero en el turismo," sino a quien se lo damos y por qué. Cuando fíjate, yo veo en los pueblos ya iniciativas muy chidas de redistribución para este lado. Hay un montón de cooperativas muy chidas que redistribuyen lo opuesto a lo que hay un hotel. Pero volvemos al tema, pues como "no [00:58:00] son cool" y no tienen el diseño más chido y y no son influencers."Pues nadie se entera que que hay prácticas comunalistas que incluyen la movilidad de entre pueblos y entre personas muy chidas. O sea, la verdad. Yo he visto muchas proyectos de cooperativismo contraturístico increíbles. Entonces, bueno, eso. La gente que hace caminantes informativas, como pedagogías de caminantes como contraturísticas. Hay un montón de gente y un montón de cosas, historiadores radicales, ahí que hacen sus sus contradiscursos y llevan a la gente. Osea, yo creo que hay muchas, para mi, hay mucha esperanza ahí. Lo que pasa es que no la conectamos. O sea justo el algoritmo hace que no la alcances a ver y que te quedes, o sea, esa información, pon tu que la postan, no te va a llegar, no? O sea, está diseñado pa que no te llegue. Entonces, pero hay un montón de cosas muy chidas. Yo no vivo esa [00:59:00] distopia triste, que mucha gente vive de "yo valio verga". "Hay que dejar de movernos." Yo no lo vivo. Tampoco hay que ultra movernos. Yo pienso que el nomadismo en la clase media ya es una forma de de despojo también. Hay como no forzado en las clases medias. No abajo. Pero bueno, yo no lo vivo con esta doom ccomo sea. Condena. O sea, como de, ah, todo movimiento está de la verga, que hay gente muy esencialista que tu dice. "Todo turismo es una mierda."Y diría, bueno, pues vives con mucha culpa. Wey está muy bien. Se llama catolicismo. Y y lo conozco muy bien. Hay otras formas. O sea sin tanta culpa, le puedes dar tu lana a gente chida y no va a solucionar el problema, pero vaya que está más chido que dárselo al hotel y al colonialista y al que rompió la propiedad social.O sea, estás si algo haces, no es mínimo, pero algo haces. Pues eso a mi me ha tocado ver cositas que digo bueno, aquí hay algo no, [01:00:00] aquí hay algo. Pasa que también muchas veces iniciativas como rechazan "lo cool" no quieren ser muy visibles y no quieren ser muy famosas, pues ahí es el problema del comercio justo y el comercio alternativo, que busca, busca hacer un poco invisible a veces.Eso es problemático, no? Porque entonces, como mandamos a la banda con la banda chida, si la banda chida no quiere que le manden banda siempre. O sea, no quiere hacer negocio, no quiere hacer negocio porque se vuelve capitalistas. En fin. Pero ese, ese es otro problema, no el problema del cooperativismo.Chris: Claro. Ya pues, sobrebordando con temas y plática hermosa, Alf, pero si puedo antes de de terminar, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. No Existe Dique Capaz de Contener al Océano Furioso. Nos podrías contar un poco de que trata y cómo tus trabajos anteriores han influido en [01:01:00] ese nuevo?Alf: Sí, Chris: has mencionado un poquito, pero Alf: ajá. Este es un libro que que pueden comprar en varias librerías Volcana, en Polilla y ahí donde estás con don Gregorio, pronto queremos tener en Jícara, en Utópicas, en casa Casa Tomada y conmigo en internet, y lo pueden descargar en el PDF. Envíos. Yo hago también a todo el mundo. Pero, bueno, es un libro que básicamente, para decirlo en una frase, es mi experiencia y mi elaboración sobre el anarquismo o la izquierda radical en general. Básicamente. O sea, te cuenta un poco mi historia de vida y como yo lo viví, lo recibí. Y qué es lo que yo he investigado y pensado sobre una práctica? Que en este momento la historia le podría unos ya anarquismo, pero en otro me momento se llama otras formas, pero sí, como antiautoritaria, etcétera. Entonces, el libro es eso. O sea, es un ensayo personal, pero también es un [01:02:00] ensayo político filosófico, no? Entonces van las dos. Te voy narrando mi vida, pero también te voy narrando la historia de estas ideas y cómo las hevisto, en la práctica y practicado hasta dónde he podido.Mmm. Chris: Pues este me voy a asegurar que esos lugares en al menos en Oaxaca y además en línea, van a estar listados en el sitio web del fin de turismo cuando lance el episodio y este, pues en nombre de nuestros oyentes Alf, me gustaría expresarte mi más sincero agradecimiento por tu disposición de acompañarnos hoy, hablar estos temas complejos y garantizar que esta disidencia tenga un lugar en el mundo.Muchísimas gracias. Y cómo podríamos este encontrar tu trabajo en línea? O sea por redes sociales o Alf: Si? Lamentablemente, me encantaría que no, no tuviera que ser por ahí. Pero no, no me [01:03:00] quedó de otra. Si, mi trabajo principalmente yo tengo dos libros afuera que se consiguen las librerías que mencioné. Lo que hago como locutora se encuentra gratis en todos lados, es Un Sueño Largo Ancho y Hondo. Es u arroba @1slaaahh en varias redes sociales. Y nada le ponen ahí en internet y les va a salir gratis y como lo platicaba antes, pues todo va muy junto. Mi parte de ficción y mi parte pedagógica y política va bastante unificada.Es más o menos la misma onda pero si, digamos lo más inmediato es escucharla lo que hago, llevo varios años haciendo, como locutora. Entonces nada más le da un click y ya está. Y les pido ahí que me den likecito que me den el porque hasta ahora no, no hay quien si, o sea, yo no trabajo para una [01:04:00] radio difusora que se encargue en mis redes y que yo nada más llegue a grabar y estaría bien a gusto, pero no, pues yo la autogestiono.Entonces, por ahora, si es necesario, el likecito y el compartir. Chris: Claro. Pues también esos van a estar en el sitio web de fin de turismo cuando lanza el episodio. Entonces, pues muchísimas gracias Alf. Alf: Gracias, Chris.English Transcription.Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Alf. Nice to talk to you today.Chris: I'd like to start this off by asking you where you are today and how the world looks through your eyes?Alf: Today I am in my kitchen. I work from there. In Mexico City, in a neighborhood called Iztaccihuatl. How does the world look? Well, look, I don't have a bad view. This is not a big building, but I have a nice view, right? I mean, my view is not blocked by another building or anything. You can see a lot of plants. And well, I guess you know that I am from the provinces. So I have always felt that where I live is like a little bit of a province in the capital, because there are no such big buildings.This one and well, from here you can see it, I forget that I'm in CDMX now, you knowChris: Thank you. Well, you are, among other things, the author of several [00:01:00] texts, including Pepitas de Calabaza and the very recent No Existe Dique Capaz de Contenedor al Océano Furioso. You also coordinated the translation into Spanish of the English text of Militancia Alegre:Let Resistance Bloom in Toxic Times. (or Joyful Militancy) That translation was followed by a companion podcast with Pamela Carmona titled Emerging Joy: Undoing Rigid Radicalism. So, to start, I'd like to ask you how you came across the book Joyful Militancy and what led you to translate it.Alf: I knew that book. I tell you a little bit about it in the prologue, but I knew that book, in the United States, because I had a band. I played drums in a hardcore punk band for many, many years. And so that's how I got to the United States and being [00:02:00] in the American underground, which was an important part of my life, being in California specifically.I found that book in a cafe and I fell in love with it. So I brought it and first I read it in English with some people and very slowly I started to work on that book, translating. That's a longer story that's right there in the prologue, but well, I've been campaigning for that book for years. There were also a series of coincidences with very kind people like Tumba a la Casa, like the Canadian authors, the rights were given to us. The people from Traficantes de Sueno got involved.I mean, there are actually a lot of people. It's like a network of networks, that book and a series of coincidences and favors and nice gestures from many people who made it come out the way it did, really. I mean, I think it's unrepeatable, that series of factors. Aha.Chris: Oh, cool. All right. Well, that book was originally [00:03:00] published in 2016. After reading, re-reading, and tran

In this episode of Building Texas Business, I welcomed Jen Sudduth, CEO of Sudduth Search, for an insightful discussion on her journey in the executive search industry. Jen shared her story of transitioning from Taylor Winfield to launching her boutique firm focused on transformative growth companies. I learned how Sudduth Search crafts a supportive work culture that prioritizes both productivity and well-being. Our dialogue also uncovered nuances around balancing work responsibilities with life's pleasures. As we wrapped up, Jen reflected on life lessons from mentorship to her commitment to the Special Olympics community SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Jen Sudduth shares her transition from Taylor Winfield to founding Sudduth Search, focusing on middle market private equity and emphasizing the need for leaders who can drive change. We explore the importance of having a business and marketing strategy before starting a venture, as well as considering when to hire based on company growth and values alignment. Strategies for maintaining work-life balance in recruitment are discussed, including setting boundaries and fostering a culture that supports employee well-being alongside business success. The episode delves into the comprehensive selection process for executive search, particularly for pivotal roles such as CFOs, and the role of retained search firms in this process. Jen reflects on the role of empathy in leadership and the importance of mentorship, drawing from her own experiences and her involvement with the Special Olympics. Personal joys, such as a preference for Tex-Mex cuisine and planning for sabbatical destinations like Maine and Santa Fe, are shared as part of achieving a joyful living. The conversation covers the initial opportunistic hiring during COVID and the shift towards a more strategic hiring approach to raise the team's overall expertise. Chris and Jen discuss the benefits of leaving a company the right way, honoring agreements, and how transparency can lead to unexpected opportunities. Jen advises on the importance of planning for success, not just the startup phase, by having operational projections and growth strategies in place. The episode also touches on Jen's past experience as Director of Talent at a consultancy, highlighting how internal hiring insights can improve external recruitment advice. LINKSShow Notes Previous Episodes About BoyarMiller About Sudduth search GUESTS Jen SudduthAbout Jen TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Chris: In today's episode, you will meet Jen Sudduth, co-founder and CEO of Sudduth Search, a boutique executive search firm. Jen's advice to aspiring entrepreneurs is to be intentional and purposeful in your business planning, and don't forget to plan for success. Okay, jen, first off, welcome to Building Texas Business. Thanks for being here. Jen: Thank you. Chris: So I'm excited to have this conversation with you today. I want to start by just allowing you to introduce yourself and tell us what your company, Sudduth Search, is known for. Jen: Sure. So we are a seven-person boutique executive search firm, but I think what we do is a little bit unique. We work with the middle market private equity. Probably 75% of our clients are private equity backed. The other are public, private you name it individually owned, it doesn't matter. I think the common denominator with all of them is that all of the companies are going through some sort of transformation, and most of the time that's growth. It could have been that they raised capital. That's a trigger to bring us in and go and replace some of your leadership team. Could be some of our bigger companies going through some sort of culture change. We did 10 positions for a Blackstone-backed company and basically they wanted to pull from outside of their industry and they didn't know how to do that, and so we helped them come up with a concept of how to do that completely, you know, changed their recruiting processes from how they were doing them before, and then they brought in a whole new culture and that's what they wanted. They wanted a different culture than they had before. So it's just, it doesn't matter what the trigger is, but it's usually some sort of change, transformation. You need a leader that can drive that change right. You need someone that is fearless. A lot of times that can come in, and they're you. You know they can make things happen. Right and that's where we play most of the time. Chris: Well, what I find interesting about that is how laser focused it is what inspired you to kind of start a search firm that was so focused on that kind of niche industry. Jen: So I've actually done it for over 20 years and the firm I was with before was called Taylor Winfield. I only bring that up because a lot of people know Taylor Winfield. I started with Taylor Winfield and kind of worked my way up and that's what they focused on. They were more. You know that was 2000, so there was a lot of venture money out there, there was Silicon Valley and they worked a lot in California we did. I was just a lowly junior recruiter back then and that's where I learned the business and that's where I kind of learned that world. And it's not for everyone, both as a candidate and as a recruiter, because sometimes candidates will go well, what are they going to sell? Am I going to still have a job? I'm like, well, you're really not, you're not right for this, because that's not the mentality that we look for in a candidate. But so that's how I got my start and that's how I learned it. And then when I started this up my practice five years ago, I kind of I don't do a whole lot of venture. I have a few here and there. Usually they're a little bit more mature as a company. I think. As I've aged I'm not as patient with the venture. I think they've got a great thing going. But it's just a different world and I think sometimes those, the people that are willing to go and do something really earlier stage, are not the same people that I'm looking for the middle market series, b series, c type folks. So so that's how I had got into. It was really that's kind of what I've done my whole career. Chris: Gotcha. Well, I know that you started this company Suddeth Search around five years ago. Jen: Exactly. Chris: So you had to make some decision to leave and just start fresh on your own. Let's talk about that a little bit. What drove that decision? Jen: So the company that I worked for was actually owned by and I don't usually say this, so you're getting new information here by my stepmother, connie Adair, and I bring that up because she's fully retired now. She's been retired for about two years. But she brought me into the business, not as a multi-generational business. I had to earn my keep, earn my way Right, just like everyone else. She was very big on treating me like everyone else. Chris: The benefit for you that she did that. Jen: Absolutely and I learned from the best. She was really known as one of the best in the industry so I kind of got to see that world and that process. But she sold to private equity and it was a private equity roll up. Like some of them, it didn't go really well. The integration piece was a little rough. Chris: Not unique in that regard, right and I got no benefit from it. Jen: To be quite honest. I stuck around to try to support her and she did well. And then she got another bite of the apple and I tried for two years. I wasn't a big company person and I realized if I can make this kind of money for someone else, I should be doing it for myself. And so I kind of did it because I could, and she fully supported me. She knew that retirement was on the horizon and so when I told her she said you know, I think you should go for it. So that's what I did. Chris: That's great. Well, I mean good to have that encouragement for someone that you were close with but considered to be a trusted mentor Absolutely. So got to be a little bit trepidatious to just start out on your own, even though you know what you're doing and you, I think you can't do that unless you have confidence that it's going to work and confidence that it will work isn't a guarantee that it will Absolutely. But you know what were some of the things you did to kind of set yourself up in those early days of starting your own company, to try to pave the path towards success. Jen: So I will start with the fact that I had a very strict non-compete. I did not get any clients from the company or from her, and I am a devout follower of non-competes. Chris: Well, it's funny, you say that you bring that, yeah, you know, now we devise people, I mean literally every day, on both sides of those, and right because because they exist and obviously you know there's a lot of buzz recently because the ftc came out with the rule to ban them, uh, which is, you know, probably not going to take effect because lawsuits have already been filed to challenge it. Jen: But it's going to be interesting to see how that plays out yeah in the next, over the next few years, I think yeah, and not to say I don't think some non-competes go overboard. I have heard some ludicrous non-competes as I'm interviewing, so sure, I do think a lot of them go overboard. I think the fdc is in the is moving in the right direction with some of them, because I think they're a little too restrictive. Chris: But that's not your question yeah, and even as the rule's written, it doesn't apply to executives, so it wouldn't change your world. Jen: It wouldn't, and I'd been there a long time. Everything I got was under their umbrella. So what I did do was I planned for a long time. I've owned businesses before and so I had a business plan, I had a marketing plan, I had a strategy. The other advantage I had was that I had been I've been asked to be on the board of ACG and so that was a. I knew that was going to be great PR. It's gonna be great relationships there. That's how I met Steve Kasten here at the Boyer Miller and a few others, and so I knew that was coming. But it was pretty far out. You know my tenure had just started. Didn't know I was gonna be president, but I knew that was gonna be on the. I'd have a lot of visibility. So that helped quite a bit. I think that was one factor. Fun story unrelated to your question the day before I quit, the day before my last day, I gave like four months notice and they knew I was leaving. I was unwinding. I had some really big searches, so I was unwinding those and finishing those up for clients, kind of on the bench, but just doing that. So the day of the last day of employment I get a call from that client that I just mentioned wanted to change their culture Blackstone Back Company. He said I got 10 searches for you, jim. I said, well, I can't do them, I'm leaving, today is my last day. And he's well, I'm not doing it without you. And so I called the company and I said here's what's happening. Would you, would we, can we do a fee split? Didn't know that was coming, but that was really great cash flow. And they said yes, and so we worked out a fee split. I continued I worked with that client and then they brought in their team, but it was great cash flow right out of the gates. And and then they brought in their team, but it was great cash flow right out of the gates. And then I developed brand new clients from that point on. But I knew the industry. I think the industry knew me. Chris: So even if it wasn't somebody, I'd worked before, I had a plan and I went after those people. That's a really cool story to hear and there's a lesson. There's probably many lessons, but one that just struck me right between the eyes is the lesson in leaving the right way, when you leave a company versus leaving the wrong way and you just laid out a roadmap for the listeners. If you're thinking about leaving, you left the right way, honoring your agreements, and then, with the transparency to get the slug of business for your new business, for your new company, because you went to them and said here's the deal, because you've done everything else right. It's good to hear that. I guess they could have not honored that, but they did the right thing in my mind too, yeah, by saying yeah, it'd be fair to share this and, by the way, we should. Customer comes first. That's what they want. Let's make them happy. Jen: So customer comes first. That's what they want. Let's make them happy. So, yeah, and I completely agree and I try to tell people and I know there's exceptions, I know there's bosses that are just difficult and if they know you're even looking there, you're gone. I know that happens, but I think majority of the time people are reasonable and if you come to them and sometimes I'll have friends come to me and say I'm thinking about making a change- Grass is greener Right and I'm like I know they're in a great situation. I'm like have you had a really difficult conversation with your boss before you leave, before you start thinking about? Have you told them that you're unhappy You've been there? Chris: 14 years or you've been there seven years. Jen: Have you talked about it? And usually the answer is no, and so I try to encourage them to say go talk to them first and then if it's still you know, in a month you still feel like it's just not fulfilling then talk about leaving. Yeah, but you need to give them a chance. Chris: It's great advice. People unfortunately right. It's kind of human nature to avoid the difficult, uncomfortable conversation, or at least I'll say this, the ones we perceive have it that they're going to be difficult or uncomfortable. And to your point, I think, a lot of times if you actually have the courage to go have it, they usually aren't as difficult or uncomfortable as you work them up in your mind to be. Jen: Absolutely. Chris: And you know I can speak. You know as well as you can. If you give your employer, where you've been otherwise happy for a while, the chance to have that conversation most people if there's a tweak or two that would keep you there, it's probably going to save the company a ton of money. To consider that. Jen: And it might benefit the company. Talk to them about. You know I'd really like to do more sales. You know I'd really like to take on bigger projects. You know what We've been looking for someone that wants to take on bigger projects. You just never know what the company needs. Chris: So we can go back. You mentioned, and just for the listeners ACG Association of Corporate Growth. Jen: Yes. Chris: Indice Group industry in the kind of M&A, a lot of private equity. So sounds like part of that marketing plan was to plug yourself in to the right kind of networking system where you would meet people and build relationships. Jen: That's correct. Yeah, yeah, and I eventually was asked to be president I don't know if you know that and so it was a lot of it was a lot of visibility as well. That's half the battle. Chris: Yes. Jen: Because there's a lot of top of mind search firms out there. Yeah, getting top of mind and helping them see that. I understand private equity, I understand what their challenges are. I understand what they're trying to achieve. I understand how capital's raised. You know I've got the knowledge base to be able to convey that to candidates and to help find the right one that's going to fit that. So I think that helped a lot and it's it was educational for me. You know, going to conferences, hearing panels speak. I know a lot about a lot or a little about a lot. Chris: Let me rephrase that I shouldn't admit that, but it's true, but it does. Jen: It's real educational to hear those conversations and to hear what's happening in the market. You know from your peers that are in the organization. Chris: A couple other takeaways from what you said. That I hope people listening caught is that you had a plan before you did this right, absolutely. You sat down and put it to paper a business plan, a marketing plan, a strategy. Look, I think those are so important and can be overlooked. When people say, look, I'm just going to go chase this dream, that's great because you need the inspiration, but you also need some substance behind it, because if you eventually do go to and most will go to a bank or an investor or something, they're going to be asking about that. So you better be prepared. Jen: Absolutely. Chris: So one of the things and you and I were talking about this, I guess before we got the recording going, and that is you know about this, I guess before we got the recording going, and that is you know, you now have seven employees. Let's talk a little bit about you know. I think there's a few conversations. One is what was it that triggered you each time to make the decision Now it's time to take on an employee or another employee, because those are big investments and then how did you go about making sure they were the right fit? Jen: Yeah. So it was growth that predicated the need. That was the part I didn't plan was when am I going to hire what? You know what? At what point do we need to bring on another person? At what point do we need to bring on a junior person, et cetera, et cetera. I didn't plan that piece of it and I probably should have, but it was really just my bandwidth and being able to do what I needed to do. You know, we were super busy during COVID, which sounds really strange, but I had some. I had that one big client that was still going. I had just so, if you think about I had been in business for about a year and so that year I had been really busy doing marketing and business development and getting out there and making relationships, and so it just it paid off and I think a lot of those people one of my biggest clients I don't know if you know Dave Marchese, he'd be a good guest. Let's do it. He called me out of the blue in the middle of COVID and we had met like five years prior, but he had seen my posts and my marketing and my emails and so he said I can't go out. I'm not going to go out and interview five interview candidates, but we're in the or excuse me search firms because we're in the middle of COVID. So what you got Jen, and so I took it on, and we've probably done 15 different positions over three or four years. Wow, so he's one of our biggest clients. So there that, I think the prior relationships definitely helped us make it. You asked about employees, though. Chris: Yes, well, before we go there. Yeah, one of the things you so interesting. You said I didn't plan for growth. Yeah, probably should have. Jen: Yeah. Chris: So, looking back, what do you think you could have done in that regard that you might offer as advice to someone that you know is maybe about to do something similar that you did five years ago? You know, what have you learned? Looking back, to say I would have, if I was going to do it again, I would plan for growth in this way. Jen: Plan for success. I think I was so focused on how am I going to get there that I didn't say if, when I get there, if when I get there, how am I going to get to the next level? I never did that. I never said, okay, I can handle 12 searches, or whatever it is, at different in different phases. So if I get 14, what do I do? At what point do I, you know? Do I need to start hiring when I get to 9 searches, whatever it? So maybe it was a revenue. I think I should have projected and said, because I've been in the business a while, I know how many searches I can do by myself or with a team, and so I think that would have been very helpful to do kind of like an FB&A analysis, but on the operational side. Chris: Right, Very helpful, that's very helpful. Okay, so now let's go back to kind of set a search. You starting to decide I've hit the point, I can't do this all, I've got to bring someone on. Yeah, you know how did you go about sourcing. I know obviously you've probably had a lot of contacts, but you know just the whole process of how you interviewed to make sure they were going to be a good fit for your company. Jen: So my first hire, I got really lucky because she was a neighbor, a friend who got laid off during COVID and so we brought her on just to do some of this data pushing type stuff. She made phone calls, cold calls, she's fearless, and then she grew into being a really good recruiter. After that first hire it was, oh my God, I can't handle this. I just need a body that can help do, a professional person that can do all this. After that hire I was much more purposeful. After that it was we want experience. We want, you know, degree Now she was degreed. But we want degreed individuals that understand the business world, that understand you know degree Now she was degreed. But we want degreed individuals that understand the business world, that understand, you know. I think every time I made another hire I kind of elevated my expectations. Chris: Right. Jen: And not to say the first hire was. She was a phenomenal employee, but I think every time after that I was much more purposeful about how I, who I wanted to hire and what my expectations of them were. Chris: Yeah, that makes sense to me and you're right, it's not a condemnation of the earlier hires. It's if you're doing things right, I believe you're always learning and your processes can always get better, and it doesn't mean you didn't make bad hires before, but you can get more intentionality around the decisions you're making and I think that's part of growth and when you're a one person show or two because my husband did join me about six months in it's harder to attract talent you know, Now we're about to make an offer to a pretty senior person and we had a really good slate of people that were interested, that were like, yeah, I want to join a boutique firm, I want to do what you're doing. Jen: So it changes too. Advert: Hello friends, this is Chris Hanslick, your Building Texas business host. Did you know that Boyer Miller, the producer of this podcast, is a business law firm that works with entrepreneurs, corporations and business leaders? Our team of attorneys serve as strategic partners to businesses by providing legal guidance to organizations of all sizes. Get to know the firm at boyermillercom. And thanks for listening to the show. Well, that's validating. So you've gone through this process of sourcing people for your company, right, and what have you? What has that process and the learning? Jen: through that done to help you better advise your clients or vet candidates for them. What else about that I'm actually gonna go back to. So I took about five years. I left the executive search world and went to a consultancy and they I was director of talent. We tripled in size in about five years time and then they sold to Accenture about two years after I left. When I left, I think oil and gas was zero. The barrel, the barrel. Chris: I remember that yeah. Jen: So they made a strong comeback and then eventually sold. But being on the inside like that was the best education I could get, because it was. This is what happens when you make a really bad hire. This is what happens to the entire company when you make a really good hire. And we weren't huge I think we ended up being about a hundred but but it was really helpful to me to see. I also learned you know really short tenures on people's resume. There's a reason you know, I know there's reasons that people have to leave jobs absolutely there's good reasons, but when it's over and over and over, and then you hire that person because you're desperate for a data manager or whatever it is. You're desperate for that skill. You're going to find out why they can't stay in a job longer. I learned a lot being on the inside, you know, and I think that job is really what taught me kind of the hard knocks of making a mishire. Chris: Right. Well, I think you're to your point, right, it's if you look there are red flags, pay attention to them, and I know from our we're not perfect either in this business that I have, and you know sometimes you can convince yourself to overlook a red flag here or there, and more times than not you shouldn't. Right, there's exceptions to every rule, but we don't want to run a business based on exceptions necessarily You've got to be purposeful about those hires is really what it taught me. Jen: You know very purposeful. Chris: So just to kind of come back to Sutter's search a little bit so you have seven, about to have eight, and you talked about doing a search for a client where it was a culture change. Let's talk about culture at Sutter Search. What are you, as the kind of co-founder and CEO, doing to try to cultivate a culture? How would you describe it? And what are you doing to kind of, you know, foster it and breathe life into it? Jen: Yeah, it's hard with seven people, eight people, you know, to kind of create that, because you're like oh, we're just eight people, but they need it. Employees need training, they need to be developed, they need to evolve, they need to expand and grow, and so we actually started EOS at the beginning of this year. Are you familiar with entrepreneurial operating system? Chris: Yes. Jen: I think I don't know if Allie was the one that told me about it, but you know I've heard a lot of business owners that have done it, and so we actually started it and I think it's been evolutionary and I'm not selling it, I don't sell anything they do but it has really helped us be very purposeful about what we're doing for our employees, and so my one of our other managing directors is. She's in charge of kind of the HR and training, and so we have a weekly training every single week and it's sometimes it's heavier than others, but we have a weekly training every week and one of the employees actually gives it, so they have to go out and learn themselves and then they come and teach the rest of us. I try to. I'm a big advocate in the old school headhunting world is just dog eat, dog work, and so when I started my firm I was like I don't want to be that way. We're not working 12-hour days, we're not working both coasts, we're going to have a great and I hate to use the words work-life balance because I know it's overused. Chris: That's right. Jen: But we are, we're going to edit that part out. I'm kidding it is overused, but I think in some aspects it's important because you're a better employee if you take your vacation, if you didn't have to work until 9 pm the night before, if your managing director isn't calling you at 6 in the morning because she happens to be on the East Coast that is not the culture that we have. I'm always telling them you're going on vacation. Who's taking your emails? You're going on vacation. Who's taking your emails? You're going on vacation. Who's taking your calls? Did you put your out of? We require out of office messages to be turned on and I'm just, I'm always preaching that. I really think it's important to separate yourself and give your brain a break, because what we do is very, it's very repetitive, it's very. You know you may, if you have ten searches, that you have four candidates at least on what we usually have a hundred, but you have four finalists going through to offer yeah you think about the ups and downs every single day. Chris: It's a lot well, I mean, to your point, what you're doing, I mean, has to be stressful because you're affecting people's lives. Absolutely right, you got four candidates and or maybe see this as a great opportunity and are very hopeful, and you got a, a client, that needs to fill a hole and every day they don't have that whole field, they're losing money. So I can get that yeah to your point, the work-life balance and we could do a whole podcast on that. But I think what my experience has shown, or at least what I feel like I've learned through that, is our work-life balance is different at different times of our career. So it's hard to institutionalize that when everyone's at different stages. We try to use the term more like professional development. Developing our people to be great professionals means you tend to your business, but you tend to you have a life as well and you got to figure out how to manage both in a healthy way, knowing that the way it works for me now is totally different than it was 15 years ago right and that's okay because everything changes and we have new employees here that are going through totally different life stuff than I go through now. but how do we help give them the tools, the training to manage that and still be successful both in the office and in their personal life? Jen: Yeah, and we do we have different? Everybody kind of has a different work methodology. I shouldn't say hours, it's more like hours, you know a 20-something. They like to kind of work late in the day and have their workouts in the morning or whatever. Like everybody's kind of different. And then Hazel and I are about the same age and we like to not be disturbed until 8.30 or something. You know, like we like to go do our thing in the morning and work out and whatever. Read the paper and everybody's a little different, but we are very understanding of each other's different lifestyles. Right To your point. Chris: The key there comes to communication right. Yeah absolutely Absolutely, and so do you have. What is it that you're using as such to make sure those conversations are happening? Yeah, so that people understand how each other works differently, but together you can work for success. Jen: Yeah, we talk about it when they're hired. I say I'm not going to track your hours unless your productivity is not working Right, and then we're going to talk about it. Do you have too of a workload? Or, let's be honest, are you not working enough? You know, because last week you didn't have very many searches. This week you've got a lot. So if I need you to work till six, you gotta admit that last week you didn't have to. And they're very honest with me. A lot of times they'll say, hey, not going to be online until 10 or so, but I'm going to be working late or whatever. Or I stayed up for four hours last night sourcing. So you know I'll be available on phone but I'm not online. Perfectly okay, and we're very flexible that way. It's a little hard sometimes. You know, I'm always like are you working? I'm on the back of my brain and then I have to call myself and go. Of course they are, it's not producing. Chris: So that comes down to two fundamentals no matter what industry, communication, yeah, and what you're willing to do is have what some people might feel like is the harder conversation or uncomfortable conversation, but you approach it with kind of support and transparency. Jen: Yeah. Chris: The other thing. It comes down to productivity. Jen: Yeah, right. Chris: Absolutely. If we're running a business, we're running a for-profit business. We have to be productive to make the business go. So you can't lose sight of that. Some people, I fear at times the extracurriculars overweigh what we do to make our money and what is our. You go into the. This is what fuels our economic engine. We can't lose sight of that. It won't matter how many out-of policies or things we do, we won't have a business to support it. Jen: So it's finding a balance there, right? Yeah, I'd say the common denominator with all my employees is they thrive on success. They thrive on accomplishing things. They're not going to just shut things off if they're not done and they haven't accomplished what they set out to accomplish. They're very driven that way. That's a common denominator. Chris: Very good. So a little bit about your business. So you were saying you know, middle market focused, we're kind of approaching mid-year 2024, which is like just blows my mind that we're, you know, that far into the year already. But you know there are businesses out there that either use services like yourself or maybe contemplating that, and I know, at least in your world there's at least two different ways to go about it Retain, searches or kind of the contingency model. Can you just share maybe a little bit about what each is, the differences, pros and cons, and maybe flow into what a company should consider going one versus the other? Jen: Yeah. So I want to make it clear that I am not pro or con. Either way, I think there's a contingency, there's absolutely a place for it. I have several friends that are in the contingency recruiting world and they say I will never be in the retained world. So there is a place for it and I think if you have a large number of hires, you have a position or a company that is attractive to candidates and you want to get all the resumes you can get and then choose because they want to come to you, that's great. You can use contingency. What we do is a consultancy. So if you're a middle market working with a middle market firm right now, it's a downhole tool. Cfo position this position is critical that they get it right because they have big plans. I'm not going to tell you what those big plans are. They're private equity backed and they have big plans and it's going to happen, but if they don't have a financial expert that can devote time and devote, then it's not going to happen. And so it's critical, and in that situation you absolutely need to find the best person that you can find, and you need to interview a lot of people to make sure that you are choosing the right person, and so that's what we're doing. That's where we come in, and it doesn't have to be a CFO role. We can do. We do VPs and we do directors sure directors but we're going to look at 150 people that we know could do this job, and then we're going to reach out to every one of them and then we're going to interview 20 or 30. I'm going to interview half of those and then I'm going to present and rank the top. So it's not like we're going out and finding five people that are qualified and handing them to you. We're going out and finding 10 times that many maybe not 10 times, but a lot more than that and then finding you the best and ranking those for you to interview. So if it's a critical hire for your company to succeed, I would absolutely recommend retained, because they should be a retained firm, should be a consultancy, they should help you find that person. Chris: So that's really helpful, and hearing you describe it makes the difference very clear for me. I hope for the listeners and what I hear is you're doing a lot more upfront work on the retained side and I guess, as a consumer of these services, you should expect that your retained firm will do a lot more upfront work and vetting the best clients to bring to you. Jen: Yeah, absolutely. And the other thing I think that's important for my clients to know is our database is completely open. Our kimono is open. Is that a bad thing to say? Chris: No, we don't have video, so we're good. Jen: They can see everything we're doing, when we're doing, how we're doing. It's not a we'll talk to you in a month or two and we'll give you three great people. There's no magic thing that happens like that. It's a database they can go in. They can be like ooh, I know that guy and not going to work. Chris: Right, whatever reason, work right, whatever reason. So through, I guess, an online portal that you give them access to. Jen: okay and so it's a process to get to the fine. We meet once a week and I say here's why we chose, here's why we interview these people. What do you think? And a lot of times I'll say you know what? That company doesn't hire well, or they might be an acquisition on the horizon with that company. We can't talk to their people, so we have weekly conversations that get us closer and closer to the best person. And so it's a process, it's a very thorough process that gets us there. But that's 15, 30 minutes a week from our client, that's it. Chris: Okay, Well, they have to be invested, especially in these that are so critical. The positions to fill the client has to be invested. That's right and I like the somewhat. Maybe it's not. It sounds innovative to me that you are creating that opportunity for them to vet and see what's going on whenever they want. Right, but have those weekly check-ins. You know, it sounds like a kind of a white glove service, if you will. Jen: Yeah, and I think a lot of times people are scared, overtained. They're like what if it doesn't? What if you don't find someone? I'm like never happened in the history of 23 years, because we're talking to you and if we're not finding the right people, we're going to pivot, we're going to merge, we're going to figure out why is that happening. Is it the company reputation? Is it our pitch? Is it the way we're describing it? I mean, we're going after the wrong people. We will figure it out. We always fill the positions. Chris: Right Always, because you're invested in it. Right, right, it's not which. Jen: Because it's and it's not a. Here's three resumes, let me know. Chris: Right. Jen: That's not how it works. I got it. Chris: That makes sense. So a little bit, I just want to ask you're obviously, you know, leading this company. What, what would you or how would you describe your leadership style and how would you say that maybe has evolved over time based on your experience? Jen: So I would describe my leadership style as real. It's too real. I like to be pretty open with my employees and I have weekly calls with almost all of them I shouldn't say almost all of them. My fellow managing director we talk almost every day, so I don't have a weekly calls with almost all of them, I shouldn't say almost all of them. My fellow managing director we talk almost every day, so I don't have a weekly call with her. But the others, who I may not speak with, I have weekly calls. We talk about what's happening, what's going well, what is their workload like? I ask them what was the most challenging? Because we all work remote, so that's the other thing. We don't see each other every day right and I'll say what was the most challenging thing and what are you most proud of. And sometimes I had no idea. They're like oh well, I met that candidate at that event. I went to one of my. One of my employees told me that I'm like, I had no idea. Like you went to this networking event and happened to meet the right guy. So you know, just things like that. I try to have the communication very open yeah and they can tell me listen, I'm just not feeling well today or I'm mentally having some issues with home. I'm not going to tell you what it is, but I just need to sit back and I'm like, take the time, whatever you need to do. So I like to think I'm a pretty real manager. Chris: Yeah Well, it sounds like there's a lot of empathy that comes across in those calls, so they feel safe. Yeah, empathy, that comes across in those calls so they feel safe, and I think that's an important thing for a leader to be able to show empathy so that people will be more open and responsive, at whatever level your leadership is in the organization, is an important quality. It's interesting too, I think, that you asked about challenges, because I find it to be helpful to if you're kind of forced to reflect on what was really good about the last week and maybe what was a challenge, because we learn from both. Right, well, that's really good. Anything that you mentioned your stepmother earlier as a mentor, any learning from her that you kind of feel like you're implementing today and kind of carrying on some of the things you learned along the way from her Well, she is my free consultant, so you know, so I call her all the time. Jen: I'm like, okay, more free. Chris: Don't let her listen, she might start charging. Jen: She's fully retired, so she's like no problem. No, I think, being a peer to your clients and telling them no, sometimes you know she's not a yes man and I think I learned that, that you know you've got to push back. When you know, because of your 20 years experience, that something's wrong, you have to call the elephant in the room yeah and you have to say you, you may not skip this recruiting. You know, a lot of times my clients will get very excited about a candidate and they're like, well, can you just come see me tomorrow? And I'm like, no, he cannot because that's too fast for the candidate. They need time to process. You look too eager. I had one client that said it. He said I'm not coming to the first date with a diamond ring. You cannot come to the first date with a diamond ring, you have to let the process happen. But she was always very good about not being a yes man and I've learned that works and it pays off to help your clients be successful. Chris: It's funny that works and it pays off for to help your clients be successful. It's funny that reminds me there's an analogy that applies in all kinds of situations. But it's the cake right. So, just like you were saying, don't be too fast. Yeah, you can have all the right ingredients, mix it up, put it in the oven. If you pull it out too quick, it's going to flop yeah right. So you got to let the process, trust the process, let the process play out, and that applies in so many different aspects of business yeah, and these are humans that we're dealing with. Jen: These are people and they weren't thinking about a job change most likely. Chris: So you've got to let that change management process happen in their head, you know, let them go through that as well so good point to make and we'll repeat it that for what you're doing with these targeted executive searches, most likely the right person was not looking. The ones that are looking there could be one of those red flags there, Not always right, not always, but yeah. So, jen, this has been a fun conversation. Congratulations on your success, thank you. I want to ask you just a few things to wrap up. Yep, so obviously you've been in the search world, or executive search world, for you said 20 plus years. What was your first job? Jen: I remember you asked somebody else this, so I actually worked at a daycare for intellectually disabled kids and adults. Not that fun story that you wanted to hear, but it was fun. I absolutely loved it. I worked every summer. 0:36:20 - Chris: There had to be a lot of life lessons learned in that. Jen: Very challenging. These were kids that were not accepted at other daycares, even for special needs kids. And so I made $4.25 an hour. I was just telling this story because now I'm the chairman of the board for Special Olympics. Chris: Are you really? Jen: I am, and so they asked me my why, and I was like well, I did this for about five years, six years, all through college. I did summer camps and stuff, and so that population has a very soft spot in my heart. Chris: I love how that's come full circle in your life to be able to be doing what you're doing with Special Olympics. As an aside and maybe a plug, isn't Houston hosting the Special Olympics? Jen: next year, next year, I did not tell you that you didn't, but I just know we are right at rice, and is it 2025? Yeah, so that's a big deal, so huge those. Chris: Any listeners in houston, be on the lookout to go support that, what a great cause thank you, appreciate that all right. So my favorite question tex-mex or barbecue? Jen: tex-mex. I'm not a barbecue fan. My husband loves it, but I don't. Chris: Well, you know, you had no problem answering that question. Jen: Some people struggle so I love that In Texas only probably Right. Chris: So another question I get travel ideas from. So if you could do a 30-day sabbatical, where would you go and what would you do? Jen: Maine. Chris: Maine. Jen: We. If you could do a 30-day sabbatical, where would you go and what would you do? Maine, maine. We went to Maine last year. Oh my God, it's beautiful. We're empty nesters and so we're doing two-week working vacations. We just got back from Santa Fe and then we're hoping the next spring we're going to do Maine. Chris: Good for you. Yeah, I like that, kenny. Jen: Bunk or somewhere around there. Chris: Okay Well, you didn't let me finish a sentence, oh sorry, no, so I know you meant it right. Some people have to think about it. Jen: Oh, I knew. Yeah. Well, we're thinking about where we want to go now, so we've got a whole list. Chris: That's a fun process to go through. Yeah, it is so well, jen. Thanks again for coming. Special Guest: Jen Sudduth.

If you missed the first episode with thoughtbot Incubator Program partcipants and founders Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito of Goodz, you can go here first (https://www.giantrobots.fm/s3e2incubatorgoodz) to catch up! Startup founders Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito are participating in thoughtbot's eight-week incubator program. Mike, with a background in the music industry, and Chris, experienced in physical computing and exhibit development, are collaborating on a startup that creates physical objects linked to digital content, primarily in music. Their goal is to enhance the connection between tangible and digital experiences, starting with a product that resembles a mixtape, using NFC technology for easy access to digital playlists. This project is unique within the thoughtbot incubator as it's the first pure consumer product and involves both physical and digital elements. The team is engaged in user interviews and market validation, with the aim of launching a physical product with a digital backend. They are exploring various marketing strategies for the product and are in the process of building its technical backend. Transcript: LINDSEY: All right. I'm going to kick us off here. Thanks, everyone, for tuning in. We're doing our first update with two founders that are now going through the Startup incubator at thoughtbot. thoughtbot, if you're not familiar, product design and development consultancy. We'll help you on your product and make your team a success. One of the very fun ways we do that is through the startup thoughtbot incubator, which is an eight-week program. So, with us today, I myself am Lindsey Christensen, marketing for thoughtbot. We also have Jordyn Bonds, who is our Director of Product Strategy and runs the thoughtbot incubator. And then, as I mentioned, we've got two new founders who are going to tell us a little bit about themselves and what they're working on. Mike Rosenthal, let's kick off with you. Can you tell us a little bit about maybe your background and what brings you to present day? MIKE: Sure. First of, thanks for having us. It's been a lot of fun doing this over the last [inaudible 01:03]; it's only two weeks, two and a half weeks, something like that. It feels like a lot more. I come from a music industry background, so worked in sort of marketing and strategy for artists for a long time; worked with a band called OK Go back, sort of starting in 2009 or so. I did a lot of early kind of viral music video stuff. And we were sort of early to the idea of sort of leveraging fan engagement and revenue, honestly, kind of beyond sort of just selling their music and touring, so sort of exploring other ways that artists can make money and connect with their fans and was with those guys for five years. And then, I went on and worked at an artist management company in Brooklyn called Mick Management and ran the marketing department there, so doing similar type of work but for a roster of 2025 major label bands. And so, really got to see fan engagement on all different levels, from really large bands down to baby bands who were just getting started. And then, yeah, started my first startup in 2018, so doing sort of fan engagement work, and NFTs, and blockchain-type stuff working with bands, but then also sports and entertainment properties. Yeah, that kind of brings me here. So, always been sort of on the music side of things, which ties into a lot of what Chris and I are working on now, but more generally, sort of fan engagement and how to, you know, drive revenue and engagement for artists and deliver value for fans. LINDSEY: Very interesting. All right, Chris, going to head over to you. Chris Cerrito, can you tell us a bit about your background? And it sounds like yours and Mike's paths; this isn't the first time you've crossed. CHRIS: No. Mike and I have been working together since 2007, I believe. Yeah, that's a great place to start. I've always been kind of a maker and a tinkerer, always been interested in art materials, how things are put together. And that kind of culminated at grad school, where Mike and I met at NYU, where we both studied physical computing and human-computer interaction, making weird things that kind of changed the way that people interact and play with technology in their day-to-day lives. I think the first project he and I worked on together was a solar robotic band that we played with light in front of a bunch of people. It was very wonderful and confusing at the same time. After grad school, I was lucky enough to become a resident artist and then an exhibit developer at a museum in San Francisco called the Exploratorium, which is a museum of science, art, and human perception. I spent ten years there working on exhibits teaching people things ranging from, let's see, I built a dueling water fountain to teach visitors and users about the prisoner's dilemma. I built a photo booth that used computer vision to teach people about the microbiome that lives on their face, like, just all kinds of weird things like that that fuse the digital and the physical worlds. I loved my time there. And then kind of COVID hit and I realized that everything I had been working on for ten years was locked up in a museum that I no longer had access to. And it really gave me a desire to kind of bring my ideas into the physical world. I wanted to make things that people interact with and use in their lives on a day-to-day basis. And I would say that's really what brought me here to this point. LINDSEY: Very cool. Very interesting backgrounds, in my opinion. What is the new idea? What is the thing that you're bringing into the incubator? Mike, I'll start with you. Tell us a bit about what you're working on. MIKE: Chris and I are working on physical objects that connect to digital content is sort of the broadest way that I could describe it. I think, you know, as Chris kind of mentioned, you know, we've both been working on sort of physical things that have interactivity for a lot of our careers. I think we both come from an era of a lot more physical objects in your life, whether that's, you know, VHS cassettes at your parent's house growing up, or records and tape cassettes, and just sort of physical things that remind you of the things that you love. And I think that, you know, cell phones are great, and the sort of the smartphone era is amazing and having, you know, every single song, and movie, and television show and podcasts, et cetera, in a black box in my pocket is great. But I think we've sort of gotten to a point where it's more of an organizational problem now than anything else. And we sort of forget the actual things that we love in this world. And so, we're working on basically making physical objects to tie to digital content, and we're starting with music. And that's what we've been working on at thoughtbot is sort of how we can create physical things that basically you can tap, and that will take you to streaming content. One of the first things we're working on literally looks like sort of a little mixtape on a piece of wood, and you can just load that up with any sort of playlist that you might have on Spotify, or Apple Music, or YouTube, or whatever, and tap it, and it will take you there. And so, it's just sort of that idea of like, oh, we used to be able to sort of flip through a friend's music collection and judge them ruthlessly, or become even better friends with them based on kind of what you saw there. And we think that the time is ripe for, I don't know, a blend of that nostalgia with actual sort of, like, real-world utility that people could be into this right now. Chris, what am I missing there? CHRIS: I'd say just to expand on that a little bit, it's, you know, we spend so much time in the digital world, but we still exist in the physical. And a lot of the things, like, you might spend a really long time editing a photo for your parents or making a playlist for a friend, and there's, like, a value there that might not translate because it's digital. It's ephemeral. And I think tying these digital assets to a physical thing makes them special. It gives them, like, a permanent place in your life, something to respect, to hold on to, and maybe even pass down at some point. LINDSEY: Yeah, and I think before we logged on, we actually had Jordyn and Mike grabbing cassette tapes from the room there and to show us -- MIKE: [inaudible 06:49] LINDSEY: What [laughs] was some of their collection and to prove some of the power of these physical –- MIKE: Nothing, like, just old mixtapes. LINDSEY: Mementos. MIKE: Yeah. We were just talking about this on our sync with the thoughtbot crew. They're, like, there's sort of two levels of nostalgia. There's nostalgia for people like us who, yeah, [crosstalk 07:09] mixtapes, right? For people who actually grew up with this stuff and still have it lying around or don't but, like, look at something like that that gives you, like, instant flashbacks, right? You're like, oh my God, I remember scrolling on that little j-card or, like, getting a mixtape for my first, you know, boyfriend or girlfriend, and having it just mean everything. So, there's people for whom that was a thing. And there's, you know, generations of people for whom that is, like, their only connection to that is, you know, Stranger Things or, like, you know, the mixtape exists in pop culture as a reference. So, there's still, like, a very strong attachment there, but it's not a personal one, right? It's a cultural one. But I think everybody has that connection. So, that's kind of why we're starting with the mixtape, just because I think everyone can kind of relate to that in some way. LINDSEY: Yeah, no, yeah. When I hear mixtape, it goes immediately to crushes. You make a mixtape for your crush. CHRIS: Exactly. LINDSEY: It's a huge, powerful market, powerful. MIKE: Oh my God, so powerful. I mean, yeah, I don't know anybody -- LINDSEY: What's more motivating? MIKE: [laughs] Yeah, exactly. CHRIS: Or even just I have a really good friend who I don't get to see as often as I'd like. And he and I are constantly sending each other, you know, Spotify links and text messages. And it's great. I love that interaction. But at the same time, you know, I might forget to add that to a playlist, and then it's kind of lost. If I had taken the time to make something and send it to him physically or vice versa, it just becomes so much more special and so much more real. MIKE: Yeah. I mean, honestly, I first made these...I mean, we can go to this origin if we want. But, like, I literally just went on moo.com, right? The business card company. And they let you upload, you know, 50 different images, and they'll send you all of those as business cards. And so, I literally went on and just made business cards of all the album covers of, like, albums that I loved growing up, right? And their cheapest is this little piece of cardboard. But I had 50 of these, and I'd put them all out on my coffee table, just as something I wanted to have around. And people kept coming, you know, friends would come over, and you would just have these conversations that I haven't had in 10 or 15 years, right? Because no one's going to come to my house and pick up my phone and look at my Spotify collection. But if these things are all just sitting out, they're like, "Oh shit, you're into that? Like, I haven't thought about that album in 15 years." Or like, "Oh, I didn't know you were into that. I'm, like, a crazy super fan of that artist as well." And all of a sudden, we're having these conversations that we just weren't having. Yeah, there's something there where it's all been nostalgia coupled with the kind of prompting of conversation and connection that we've kind of lost, I think. CHRIS: And I think just to clarify a little bit on what Mike's saying, is, you know, this mixtape will be our first product launch, and then we're hoping to move into collectibles for artists and labels. So, shortly after we launch this tape, we're hoping to launch some kind of pilot with a label where you will be able to buy a version of this for your favorite music artist at a merch table in a concert, possibly online. Our dream is to have these sitting there on the table with T-shirts, and records, and other things that artists sell so you can express for the artists that you love. This is a way of expressing your fandom. LINDSEY: Jordyn, heading over to you, this feels like maybe the first consumer product that has gone through the incubator, would you say? Or how do you think about it? JORDYN: Yeah, if you're a consumer -- LINDSEY: Or is it different than other types of products? JORDYN: Yeah, the first incubator project we did with Senga was, I think, what you would call prosumer. So, it was sort of a consumer thing but directed at folks who had kind of freelancing in sort of a business context. It's got a lot of dynamics of the consumer. But this one, for sure, is the first pure consumer play. Though now that I'm thinking about it, you know, AvidFirst had some consumer elements to it, but it was, you know, it was, like, more complex tech [laughs] [inaudible 10:46] totally different thing -- LINDSEY: But definitely the first of the physical, physical [inaudible 10:52] JORDYN: Oh, sure, the first of the physical thing. Right. Absolutely. LINDSEY: Does that change any of, like, the approach of the programming, or it's kind of -- JORDYN: I mean, no, not fundamentally, though it does add this layer of operations that you don't have with a pure software play. So, we have to be, there is a thing that needs to get shipped to people in the world, and that takes timelines, and it takes -- LINDSEY: Supply chain. JORDYN: Yeah, exactly. And Chris is doing most of that stuff. I don't want to, you know, this is not, like, the main focus of our team necessarily, but it intersects, right? So, this isn't the first one of these types of products I've worked on personally in my career. But there's something, like, really, for me, very fulfilling about, like, there's software. There's a big component of software. There's also this physical object that needs to exist in the world. And partly, what's so compelling about Goodz is that it gives you the promise of a physical, like, the sort of good aspects of a physical product, a thing you can hold in your hand and look at and really connect with in that physical way. But it has this dynamic digital, like, essential quality as well. So, it's very compelling as a product because it sort of marries the things that we like about both the physical world and the digital world, which is partly why the team was really excited about working on it [laughs]. LINDSEY: Well, that was going to be my next question is, you know, what stood out to you about the Goodz application for the incubator and the interview process that made you and the team feel like this was going to be a great project to work on? JORDYN: Yeah. So, I think just the team really resonated with the sort of idea in general, and it seemed fun. There was, like, it's a very positive thing, right? It isn't so much about solving problems and pain points. And, sometimes the, you know, when you're very focused on solving problems, it can feel a little doomy because you actually have to, like, immerse yourself in the problems of the people that you're making software for. And sometimes, you start to feel like the world is just full of problems. What Goodz is doing is sort of it is solving a problem in a sense, but not in that kind of way. It's really, like, a fun upside kind of thing, which I think a lot of the folks on the team were very excited about. But, like, the software component, actually, is very interesting to us from a technological standpoint as well. There's a lot of opportunity here to do interesting things on the backend with an object that's essentially functioning as a bookmark out in the world. What all can you do with that? There's something super compelling and technically interesting about it. And I think, also, the team was just sort of excited by Chris and Mike, you know, the energy and the kind of background they were bringing to the table was also super interesting. And then, above all else, what I say every time you ask me this question, which is stage fit, y'all, good stage fit. They're right at the beginning. They haven't built the product yet [laughs]. Gotta say it. It's a good stage fit. They know who they're building for broadly but not super specifically. Got a good vision but, like, haven't made that first step with the software. Perfect stage fit for us [laughs]. LINDSEY: Great. So, Chris, we were talking a bit before about how you two have been collaborators in the past, worked on business ideas before. Why bring this idea into the thoughtbot incubator? What are you hoping to, you know, achieve? CHRIS: One of the main reasons why we wanted to bring this into the incubator was just for support, momentum, and then, also, I would say validation for our idea. I mean, we came to the incubator with a very, yeah, I would say it was a fairly developed idea that needed to be proved, and we, quite frankly, needed help with that. You know, Mike and I have our own expertises, but we don't know how to do everything. We're more than willing to jump in where we need to go. But having people with expertise to work with has proven to be incredibly helpful and just having kind of fresh faces to bat ideas around with after he and I have been staring at each other for months now on Zoom calls and meetings. And just, you know, being able to talk about these ideas with fresh faces and new people and get new perspectives has been so very, very helpful. I think something that's also great from the momentum standpoint is that because there's a time limit to this experience, we've got the time that we have with you guys, and we've been able to set goals that I think are very achievable for things we want to occur in the next couple of months, and it feels like we're going to get there. And I think by the end of this, I mean, our hope, and I think we're on track, is to have a functioning physical product that we're going to offer to consumers with a digital backend to support it, which is, in my mind, amazing. That'll totally validate this idea and prove if we have something or not. LINDSEY: I was going to ask if you're open to sharing what those goals specifically are. Is that it? Is it that by the end, you have -- MIKE: Is that it? Lindsey, that's a lot. [laughter] CHRIS: It's a lot. I mean, yeah. I mean, we're going to have a physical object in the world that you can buy via an e-commerce site -- JORDYN: Sounds like we need Lindsey on the team if Lindsey feels like this is so achievable. [laughter] CHRIS: Yeah, yeah. Lindsey...yeah. We're in the beginning [crosstalk 15:47] LINDSEY: I meant, is that the goal? CHRIS: That is the goal. LINDSEY: Is that all? CHRIS: I was going to –- LINDSEY: Is that all you got? CHRIS: Mike, do you agree? MIKE: Yeah. Is that the goal? Yes, that is the goal. I mean, you know, when we sat down with the thoughtbot team kind of week one, you know, they're sort of like, "All right, let's define kind of the experiment." So, we refer to them as experiments, which I think is helpful because, like, what are the experiments that we want to be doing during our time here? And, you know, we talked about it a lot. And yeah, I think it's, you know, having a physical product out in the world, having a website in which to sell it. But also, it's really, like Chris was saying, it's like, it's market validation, and just making sure we actually have something that people want. It's like, you know, running a startup takes so long and, like [laughs], you know, you'll do it for so many years. It's like bands when people say, like, "Oh, that's an overnight sensation." It's like, you know, that band has been slogging it out in tiny, little venues for four years before you ever heard of them. It's like, that's what so much of the startup world feels like to me, too. It's like, "Oh, you're just getting started as a startup?" It's like, "Well, we've been working on this forever." And I know how long this can take. And so, I think we want to learn as early as possible, like, is this something people actually want? Because if they don't, like, we'll just go do something else. I don't want to spend years making something that people don't want. So, I think the biggest goal, for me, is just validation, and then that is sort of how we get there is like, okay, how do we validate this? Cool. Let's identify some, you know, assumptions of personas that we think are people who do actually want this and then try to go sell it to them. And all the implications from that are, okay, well, you need a website where somebody can buy it. You need a physical product that somebody can actually buy. So, all those things sort of come out of that, but, for me, it's like, proving that assumption, is this thing real? Do people actually want this? And everything else is like, okay, how do we prove that? LINDSEY: Jordyn, what does that look like in these first few weeks here? User interviews, I assume, how are the user interviews going? JORDYN: Always. Always. So, you know, we kick it off by just, like, doing the exercise where we list everybody who might want this. And the team, you know, it's a fun product. Everybody brought their own assumptions and ideas to the table on that. You know, we had a lot of different scenarios we were imagining. It's super fun getting that stuff out of people's heads, just, like, what are we all thinking? And then, you know, we get to negotiate, like, okay...I always encourage everyone to think, like, if everyone else on the team was on the moon, you had to make a decision about a market segment to pick; which one would you pick? And then we kind of argue about it in a productive way. It really helps us get at, like, what are the dynamics that we think matter upfront? And then we pick one, or, in this case, we have a few. We have a handful. And we're running interview projects where we just recruit people to talk about people that meet this persona, talk about a specific problem. We're in the middle of that right now. And it's fun, fantastic. These conversations are super interesting. We're validating a lot of the things that Mike and Chris, you know, walked into this with, but we're learning a bunch of new things as well. And, like, really, part of the aim there is to validate that there's a hole in the market that we might fill but also to hear the language people are using to describe this stuff. So, when people talk about buying music, merch, you know, making playlists, et cetera, like, what language do they use to talk about that? So that we make sure we're speaking the language that our customer uses to describe this stuff. And we're, you know, we're right in the pocket of doing that, learning stuff all the time. And it helps us kind of hone the messaging. It helps us know where to go talk to people about it, how to talk about it, but it's, you know, it all kind of fits together. And it's just this, really...the early stages. It's just a bunch of us in a room, a virtual room, in this case, sort of, like, tossing ideas around. But out of it crystallizes this sense of alignment about who this is for, how to talk to them about it, and with a goal. And, you know, Mike and Chris walked in with the exact right mindset about this, which is, yes, it's experiments. We need to validate it. Let's make sure there's a there-there. If there's a there-there, let's figure out where it is [laughs], like, all those things. And we're running these experiments, and it was really [inaudible 19:36]. We got down to business quite quickly here. It was really great. LINDSEY: Like you said, it's not necessarily a problem or, you know, the typical framing of a problem. How do you start those user interview questions around this? Do you feel a gap between the physical and the digital sound? [laughter] JORDYN: No, no. LINDSEY: It's maybe not it [laughs]. JORDYN: Yeah, no. Well, I can tell you what our startup questions are. One of them is, tell me about the last time you bought music merch. Go for it, Lindsey. Tell us. LINDSEY: The last time I bought music merch I went to a Tegan and Sara concert a few weeks ago, and I bought a T-shirt. JORDYN: Tell me about buying that T-shirt. Why'd you buy it? LINDSEY: Because I wanted to remember the show and my time with my friends, and I wanted to support the artists. I know that buying merch is the best way to support your favorite touring artists. JORDYN: So, it's just, you know, we could spend the rest of this time talking [laughter] [crosstalk 20:34], and it would be awesome. So, it's really a lot of things like that. LINDSEY: Gotcha. JORDYN: You don't ask, "What problem are you trying to solve by buying this t-shirt?" Right? Like, that's not, you know, but we ask you to tell us a bunch of stories about when you did this recently. You know, and if you make playlists for friends, you know, that's a different persona. But we would have asked, you know, like, "Tell me about the last playlist you made. You know, who did you share it with? You know, what happened after that? What happened after that? What happened after that?" It's a lot of questions like that. And there's just nothing better. People love to tell you what's going on with them. And it's great [laughs]. LINDSEY: Yeah. As you all have been doing these interviews, Mike and Chris, have you been surprised by anything? Any interesting insights that you're seeing already? CHRIS: I mean, I haven't done really much in the way of user interviews in the past. This is a really new experience for me. And then we're, obviously, not on the calls because that would be weird and probably intimidating for people. But we're getting lots of highlights from folks who are doing them, you know, in our daily sync. And I'm surprised at how many, like, really intense, like, playlist nerds we have found even just in, like, the few people we've talked to, like, in the best possible way. Like, people who are like, "I make playlists all the time." Like, you're talking about, like, a vinyl fan or, like, a...Jordyn, what's the story? It's, like, the guy who there was so much out-of-print vinyl that he started a vinyl label just to get the albums in vinyl. [crosstalk 21:56] JORDYN: Yeah. There were a bunch of releases that he feels really passionately about that were never released on vinyl that he knew would never be released on vinyl. And so, he started a vinyl record label. And we just found this guy [laughter]. CHRIS: Is that indicative that that's, like, an entire persona we're going to, like, target? Absolutely not. But it's just, like, it's amazing that even just in the few user interviews we've done, that we've found so many very passionate people. And it's sent me down, like, a TikTok rabbit hole of, like, TikTok, like, music nerd influencer-type folks who are posting playlists. And they, like, hundreds of thousands of likes on these videos that are literally just, like, screen with text on it that you're supposed to, like, pause the video [laughs] and, like, look at, like, the songs that they're recommending. And it's like, who does that? And it was like, these people do that. And it's like, so there are...it's been very encouraging to me, actually. I was worried that we were going to find not as much passion as we had suspected, and I think the opposite has proven to be true. So, it's exciting. CHRIS: Yeah, I completely agree with Mike. It's been so encouraging. I think, for me, what we're doing is an idea that I'm very excited about and have been very excited about for a long time. But hearing the responses that we're getting makes me confident in the idea, too. That's great. I mean, I think that is everything that a founder needs, you know, is excitement and confidence. MIKE: Well, and just the whole user interview experience has, like, made a lot of my other conversations sort of I've tried to frame parts of them as user interviews because I'm talking to a lot of, like, label folks now, and artists, merch people. And, you know, I ended up just sort of, like, asking them, I mean, yes, trying to explain the product and work on kind of partnership stuff, but a lot of it is really just geeking out with them. And just, like, hearing their thoughts about, like, what they love about merch because these are people that clearly think about this stuff all the time. So, it's definitely kind of, like, tuned my other conversations into trying to get unbiased feedback. LINDSEY: Yeah. Everything is a little user interview now. MIKE: Yeah, exactly. LINDSEY: Get that angle in there. All right, so some early validation and excitement. That's really cool to hear. Any challenges or, you know, other kinds of learnings early on? Anything that's been invalidated? MIKE: I don't know that we're there yet. [inaudible 24:02] Chris, I don't know. I'm happy to find that some things are invalidated, but I don't really feel...you know, some of the personas that we decided or maybe just one of the personas we decided to pursue, I think we're having a hard time having those user interviews kind of really bear fruit, but that's helpful, too, actually. I mean, it's like, okay, well, maybe that's not a group that we target. JORDYN: Yeah. It's about, like [inaudible 24:24]. I encourage folks not to think about this like a 'no, not that,' and instead think of it as like a 'not yet.' And that's, I think, the dynamic here with a couple of the personas we were interested in. It's just been turned into kind of, like, a not yet for reasons that we very quickly figured out, but we'll get there. It's just a matter of figuring out we had some other personas take precedence because they're more sort of red, hot in a way, right? It's just easier to get in contact with these people, or it's, like, clear what they're going for or what they need from the market. So, you know, we have this whole list, and it was not clear at first who was going to kind of stand out. But we've kind of found some focus there, which means, invariably, that there's things that are falling out of the frame for now, and you're kind of de-prioritizing them. But it really is, like, a we'll get to that [laughs]. We'll eventually get to that. LINDSEY: Yeah. And part of the process, who's going to rise to the top right now? JORDYN: Yeah, exactly. LINDSEY: Do you have anything you can show and tell with us today or not yet? MIKE: So, Chris has been hard at work on all the physical side of this stuff and going back and forth with our manufacturing partner and all that good stuff. But we have a final version of the mixtape product. LINDSEY: For when this gets pulled into the podcast, Mike's showing us a physical card. CHRIS: It's a small card, and we call them Goodz. And it's printed on three-millimeter plywood using a UV printing process, super durable. And this is something you can put in your pocket. You're not going to wreck it. I think you could actually (Don't quote me on this.), but I think you can even, like, put it through a washing machine, and it would be fine. Embedded in this card is a chip that can be read by your phone, and that's pretty much what we're working with. MIKE: Yeah, so the idea is you just sort of tap this, and it'll take you to a streaming version of a playlist. And then Chris has also been making these adorable crates. And [crosstalk 26:10] LINDSEY: The little crates I love. MIKE: And we actually have some wooden ones, too, in the testing that's [crosstalk 26:15] LINDSEY: And then the mixtapes get stored in the little crates [crosstalk 26:19] MIKE: Yeah. So, you could have -- LINDSEY: Throw it on your desk. CHRIS: Each crate can hold about, I think, 15 of these things. What's really cool about this product on the physical side is we are using a tried-and-true technology, which is NFC chips. These are things that make Apple Pay work, make Google Pay work. They are in your E-ZPass when you drive through a toll booth. This is stuff that's been around for years. So, we're just kind of leveraging this technology that's been around for so long in a new way. MIKE: Yeah, I think it's similar to kind of the evolution of QR codes, right? It's like they were sort of around forever, and then it was, like, COVID and restaurant menus kind of kicked those into mainstream. Like, NFC has been around for a long time. It's very tried and true. It's affordable. But I want to say Apple only turned it on by default, like, the NFC reader in the iPhone in the last, like, 18 to 24 months, right? Like, it started...like, it's been around for a while, but they're sort of slowly kind of...and now you just sort of see it everywhere. People are using it on the subways in New York to scan for tickets or for accessing stuff. I was also just showing Chris has been prototyping with the ability to sort of keep these on a key ring. So, we have, like, a little chain hole on them. It is [inaudible 27:22] to sort of have this on your backpack or, you know, on a key ring, or something like that. And friends could kind of, like, come up to you and just, like, scan one that looks interesting. CHRIS: And yeah, something that's awesome about this is you don't need an app. You don't need to download anything. As long as your NFC reader is on when you scan this, it will bring you to the music that it's linked to, which I think is awesome. So, I mean, my dream is to have these, like, hanging off of people's backpacks so I can, like, scan them in the subway or, you know, it's such, like, an easy thing to do. And it requires so little technical time on the user's end to be able to do it. LINDSEY: Oh, we got a question here. "So, Moo used to offer NFC cards. What made you decide to do the thicker plywood model?" CHRIS: Durability is really what it comes down to. We wanted something that felt like an object that you can have and treasure. Like, these have weight, you know, these feel like something, not just a piece of paper. This is something that you can have and [inaudible 28:22] your desk, and it's not going to fade in the sunlight. It's not going to disintegrate over time. This is something that's going to last. MIKE: Yeah, the cards would definitely, like, as I would sort of carry them around and show them to people and stuff, the cards would start, you know, breaking. It's like having a business card in your pocket, right? Eventually, it's going to kind of wear out. And plus, we had, like, the stickers were visible on the back of them. And we were, like, having the sticker just completely disappear inside the wood it just feels a little bit more like magic. LINDSEY: Well, thanks for demoing there. I put you on the spot a little bit. But they are...I had seen them in the Slack, and they're very cool [laughs]. So, I had to ask if we could show them off a bit. MIKE: Of course. CHRIS: I think another thing to think about, too, is we've been talking a lot about the user experience. But if and when we get to the point of making these for artists, artists will be able to collect so much data off of the way that people buy and collect and use these things over time, which is something that we're really, really excited about. And also, you know, we're working on a way to make the link in the object updatable over time. So, artists will be able to change what a card points do to inform their users about the latest and greatest thing. LINDSEY: Very cool. Jordyn, what's next on the programming agenda for Chris and Mike? JORDYN: It's really sort of we're in this, like, iterative cycle. So, we're talking to folks. We're working on the website. The conversations we're having with people are informing how we're framing this first experiment with the mixtape, how we're marketing it, who we're marketing it to. I think next up is probably a Google Ad experiment to really see if we can piggyback on some stuff or at least figure out a new consumer product. It's so tough, right? It's also not a thing people are searching for. So, we have to come up with some experiments for how we get people to that website [laughs]. So, you know, Google Ads funnels is just something you kind of have to do because it's very interesting to figure out what people are responding to, what people are searching for. But we're going to have a bunch of other experiments as well and non-experiments. Outbound experiments: can we go to people? Can we get listed in a gift-buying guide for the holidays? Or, like, we don't know. There's a bunch of experiments we need to do around that, which is really just this iteration. We won't stop talking to users but, you know, everything we're hearing from them will inform where we go and how we talk to the folks in those places where we end up. And really, it's just about starting...once this is up and, you know, there's, like, an orderable thing, there's, like, a whole data cycle where we start to learn from the stuff we're testing; we actually have some real data for it, and we can start to tweak, iterate and change our strategy. But the bigger thing, also, is this bigger platform. So, the next thing really, the big next thing, is to sort of start to scope and create an architecture idea. What's it going to take to build the actual backend thing? And it's the thing that thoughtbot really [laughs] excels at, which is software. So, you know, that's the big next kind of project. Once the mixtape experiment is sort of out and in flight and we're getting data, we really need to turn our attention to the technical backend. LINDSEY: Exciting. Another comment/question from Jeff, who maybe needs a user interview. "Love the crate more than the actual albums. Maybe offer collections of artists." MIKE: Yeah, that's the plan. CHRIS: Yeah, definitely. It's a good idea. Yeah, it's, I mean, and labels get to, especially, like, small indie labels get really excited about doing, like, crates worth of collections of different artists or, like, you know, digging through their back catalog, their subscription services. There's a lot of different angles for sure about that idea. LINDSEY: [inaudible 31:55] Chris and Mike, going into this next section of the programming, for anyone watching right now, or watching the recording, or listening to the recording, any action items from them? You know, are you looking for any user interviews or have any survey or any destinations you'd like to send people yet? CHRIS: Not quite yet, but soon, I would say. Well -- MIKE: I mean, [inaudible 32:19] plug the website, I mean, you know, I think we've got, like, an email to sign up from there, right? The URL is getthegoodz.com and I [crosstalk 32:27] LINDSEY: Goodz with a Z. MIKE: Goodz with a Z. CHRIS: With Z. MIKE: So yeah, if you want to go there, you can sign up. I think there's an email signup on there to learn more. LINDSEY: Perfect. All right. getthegoodz.com email sign up. To stay up to date on Goodz and the incubator, you can follow along on the thoughtbot blog. You know, as always, send us any questions you might have, and we're happy to get to those. But otherwise, thanks for listening. And thank you all — Jordyn, Chris, and Mike. Thanks so much for joining today and sharing and being open about your stories so far. MIKE: Thank you. CHRIS: Yeah, thank you, Lindsey. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions.

This episode introduces the second participants of the season's thoughtbot's Incubator Program, Mike Rosenthal and Chris Cerrito. Mike has a background in music industry marketing, and Chris is a maker and tinkerer with experience in exhibit development. They're developing a product combining physical objects with digital content, starting with music. Their concept involves creating physical items like wooden mixtapes with NFC chips linking to digital playlists. This blend of physical and digital aims to revive the tangible aspects of fan engagement in a digital era. Their project, named Goodz, is the first pure consumer product in the Incubator program, adding complexities like supply chain and manufacturing considerations. The team is conducting user interviews to validate market interest and refine their messaging. They aim to have a functioning physical product and a supporting digital backend by the end of the program. Challenges include defining the target market and understanding how to attract customers to a new product type. The thoughtbot team is excited about the project due to its fun nature and technical aspects, offering a fresh perspective compared to problem-focused startups. The conversation also explores the broader implications of bridging the digital and physical worlds in fan engagement, with the potential to collect valuable data for artists and create lasting, meaningful connections for fans. Follow Josh Herzig-Marx on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/joshuaherzigmarx/) or X (https://twitter.com/herzigma). Visit his website at joshua.herzig-marx.com (https://joshua.herzig-marx.com/). Follow thoughtbot on X (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: LINDSEY: All right. I'm going to kick us off here. Thanks, everyone, for tuning in. We're doing our first update with two founders that are now going through the Startup incubator at thoughtbot. thoughtbot, if you're not familiar, product design and development consultancy. We'll help you on your product and make your team a success. One of the very fun ways we do that is through the startup thoughtbot incubator, which is an eight-week program. So, with us today, I myself am Lindsey Christensen, marketing for thoughtbot. We also have Jordyn Bonds, who is our Director of Product Strategy and runs the thoughtbot incubator. And then, as I mentioned, we've got two new founders who are going to tell us a little bit about themselves and what they're working on. Mike Rosenthal, let's kick off with you. Can you tell us a little bit about maybe your background and what brings you to present day? MIKE: Sure. First of, thanks for having us. It's been a lot of fun doing this over the last [inaudible 01:03]; it's only two weeks, two and a half weeks, something like that. It feels like a lot more. I come from a music industry background, so worked in sort of marketing and strategy for artists for a long time; worked with a band called OK Go back, sort of starting in 2009 or so. I did a lot of early kind of viral music video stuff. And we were sort of early to the idea of sort of leveraging fan engagement and revenue, honestly, kind of beyond sort of just selling their music and touring, so sort of exploring other ways that artists can make money and connect with their fans and was with those guys for five years. And then, I went on and worked at an artist management company in Brooklyn called Mick Management and ran the marketing department there, so doing similar type of work but for a roster of 2025 major label bands. And so, really got to see fan engagement on all different levels, from really large bands down to baby bands who were just getting started. And then, yeah, started my first startup in 2018, so doing sort of fan engagement work, and NFTs, and blockchain-type stuff working with bands, but then also sports and entertainment properties. Yeah, that kind of brings me here. So, always been sort of on the music side of things, which ties into a lot of what Chris and I are working on now, but more generally, sort of fan engagement and how to, you know, drive revenue and engagement for artists and deliver value for fans. LINDSEY: Very interesting. All right, Chris, going to head over to you. Chris Cerrito, can you tell us a bit about your background? And it sounds like yours and Mike's paths; this isn't the first time you've crossed. CHRIS: No. Mike and I have been working together since 2007, I believe. Yeah, that's a great place to start. I've always been kind of a maker and a tinkerer, always been interested in art materials, how things are put together. And that kind of culminated at grad school, where Mike and I met at NYU, where we both studied physical computing and human-computer interaction, making weird things that kind of changed the way that people interact and play with technology in their day-to-day lives. I think the first project he and I worked on together was a solar robotic band that we played with light in front of a bunch of people. It was very wonderful and confusing at the same time. After grad school, I was lucky enough to become a resident artist and then an exhibit developer at a museum in San Francisco called the Exploratorium, which is a museum of science, art, and human perception. I spent ten years there working on exhibits, teaching people things ranging from, let's see; I built a dueling water fountain to teach visitors and users about the prisoner's dilemma. I built a photo booth that used computer vision to teach people about the microbiome that lives on their face, like, just all kinds of weird things like that that fuse the digital and the physical worlds. I loved my time there. And then kind of COVID hit, and I realized that everything I had been working on for ten years was locked up in a museum that I no longer had access to. And it really gave me a desire to kind of bring my ideas into the physical world. I wanted to make things that people interact with and use in their lives on a day-to-day basis. And I would say that's really what brought me here to this point. LINDSEY: Very cool. Very interesting backgrounds, in my opinion. What is the new idea? What is the thing that you're bringing into the incubator? Mike, I'll start with you. Tell us a bit about what you're working on. MIKE: Chris and I are working on physical objects that connect to digital content is sort of the broadest way that I could describe it. I think, you know, as Chris kind of mentioned, you know, we've both been working on sort of physical things that have interactivity for a lot of our careers. I think we both come from an era of a lot more physical objects in your life, whether that's, you know, VHS cassettes at your parent's house growing up, or records and tape cassettes, and just sort of physical things that remind you of the things that you love. And I think that, you know, cell phones are great, and the sort of the smartphone era is amazing and having, you know, every single song, and movie, and television show and podcasts, et cetera, in a black box in my pocket is great. But I think we've sort of gotten to a point where it's more of an organizational problem now than anything else. And we sort of forget the actual things that we love in this world. And so, we're working on basically making physical objects to tie to digital content, and we're starting with music. And that's what we've been working on at thoughtbot is sort of how we can create physical things that basically you can tap, and that will take you to streaming content. One of the first things we're working on literally looks like sort of a little mixtape on a piece of wood, and you can just load that up with any sort of playlist that you might have on Spotify, or Apple Music, or YouTube, or whatever, and tap it, and it will take you there. And so, it's just sort of that idea of like, oh, we used to be able to sort of flip through a friend's music collection and judge them ruthlessly, or become even better friends with them based on kind of what you saw there. And we think that the time is ripe for, I don't know, a blend of that nostalgia with actual sort of, like, real-world utility that people could be into this right now. Chris, what am I missing there? CHRIS: I'd say just to expand on that a little bit, it's, you know, we spend so much time in the digital world, but we still exist in the physical. And a lot of the things, like, you might spend a really long time editing a photo for your parents or making a playlist for a friend, and there's, like, a value there that might not translate because it's digital. It's ephemeral. And I think tying these digital assets to a physical thing makes them special. It gives them, like, a permanent place in your life, something to respect, to hold on to, and maybe even pass down at some point. LINDSEY: Yeah, and I think before we logged on, we actually had Jordyn and Mike grabbing cassette tapes from the room there and to show us -- MIKE: [inaudible 06:49] LINDSEY: What [laughs] was some of their collection and to prove some of the power of these physical –- MIKE: Nothing, like, just old mixtapes. LINDSEY: Mementos. MIKE: Yeah. We were just talking about this on our sync with the thoughtbot crew. They're, like, there's sort of two levels of nostalgia. There's nostalgia for people like us who, yeah, [crosstalk 07:09] mixtapes, right? For people who actually grew up with this stuff and still have it lying around or don't but, like, look at something like that that gives you, like, instant flashbacks, right? You're like, oh my God, I remember scrolling on that little j-card or, like, getting a mixtape for my first, you know, boyfriend or girlfriend, and having it just mean everything. So, there's people for whom that was a thing. And there's, you know, generations of people for whom that is, like, their only connection to that is, you know, Stranger Things or, like, you know, the mixtape exists in pop culture as a reference. So, there's still, like, a very strong attachment there, but it's not a personal one, right? It's a cultural one. But I think everybody has that connection. So, that's kind of why we're starting with the mixtape, just because I think everyone can kind of relate to that in some way. LINDSEY: Yeah, no, yeah. When I hear mixtape, it goes immediately to crushes. You make a mixtape for your crush. CHRIS: Exactly. LINDSEY: It's a huge, powerful market, powerful. MIKE: Oh my God, so powerful. I mean, yeah, I don't know anybody -- LINDSEY: What's more motivating? MIKE: [laughs] Yeah, exactly. CHRIS: Or even just I have a really good friend who I don't get to see as often as I'd like. And he and I are constantly sending each other, you know, Spotify links and text messages. And it's great. I love that interaction. But at the same time, you know, I might forget to add that to a playlist, and then it's kind of lost. If I had taken the time to make something and send it to him physically or vice versa, it just becomes so much more special and so much more real. MIKE: Yeah. I mean, honestly, I first made these...I mean, we can go to this origin if we want. But, like, I literally just went on moo.com, right? The business card company. And they let you upload, you know, 50 different images, and they'll send you all of those as business cards. And so, I literally went on and just made business cards of all the album covers of, like, albums that I loved growing up, right? And their cheapest is this little piece of cardboard. But I had 50 of these, and I'd put them all out on my coffee table, just as something I wanted to have around. And people kept coming, you know, friends would come over, and you would just have these conversations that I haven't had in 10 or 15 years, right? Because no one's going to come to my house and pick up my phone and look at my Spotify collection. But if these things are all just sitting out, they're like, "Oh shit, you're into that? Like, I haven't thought about that album in 15 years." Or like, "Oh, I didn't know you were into that. I'm, like, a crazy super fan of that artist as well." And all of a sudden, we're having these conversations that we just weren't having. Yeah, there's something there where it's all been nostalgia coupled with the kind of prompting of conversation and connection that we've kind of lost, I think. CHRIS: And I think just to clarify a little bit on what Mike's saying, is, you know, this mixtape will be our first product launch, and then we're hoping to move into collectibles for artists and labels. So, shortly after we launch this tape, we're hoping to launch some kind of pilot with a label where you will be able to buy a version of this for your favorite music artist at a merch table in a concert, possibly online. Our dream is to have these sitting there on the table with T-shirts, and records, and other things that artists sell so you can express for the artists that you love. This is a way of expressing your fandom. LINDSEY: Jordyn, heading over to you, this feels like maybe the first consumer product that has gone through the incubator, would you say? Or how do you think about it? JORDYN: Yeah, if you're a consumer -- LINDSEY: Or is it different than other types of products? JORDYN: Yeah, the first incubator project we did with Senga was, I think, what you would call prosumer. So, it was sort of a consumer thing but directed at folks who had kind of freelancing in sort of a business context. It's got a lot of dynamics of the consumer. But this one, for sure, is the first pure consumer play. Though now that I'm thinking about it, you know, AvidFirst had some consumer elements to it, but it was, you know, it was, like, more complex tech [laughs] [inaudible 10:46] totally different thing -- LINDSEY: But definitely the first of the physical, physical [inaudible 10:52] JORDYN: Oh, sure, the first of the physical thing. Right. Absolutely. LINDSEY: Does that change any of, like, the approach of the programming, or it's kind of -- JORDYN: I mean, no, not fundamentally, though it does add this layer of operations that you don't have with a pure software play. So, we have to be, there is a thing that needs to get shipped to people in the world, and that takes timelines, and it takes -- LINDSEY: Supply chain. JORDYN: Yeah, exactly. And Chris is doing most of that stuff. I don't want to, you know, this is not, like, the main focus of our team necessarily, but it intersects, right? So, this isn't the first one of these types of products I've worked on personally in my career. But there's something, like, really, for me, very fulfilling about, like, there's software. There's a big component of software. There's also this physical object that needs to exist in the world. And partly, what's so compelling about Goodz is that it gives you the promise of a physical, like, the sort of good aspects of a physical product, a thing you can hold in your hand and look at and really connect with in that physical way. But it has this dynamic digital, like, essential quality as well. So, it's very compelling as a product because it sort of marries the things that we like about both the physical world and the digital world, which is partly why the team was really excited about working on it [laughs]. LINDSEY: Well, that was going to be my next question is, you know, what stood out to you about the Goodz application for the incubator and the interview process that made you and the team feel like this was going to be a great project to work on? JORDYN: Yeah. So, I think just the team really resonated with the sort of idea in general, and it seemed fun. There was, like, it's a very positive thing, right? It isn't so much about solving problems and pain points. And, sometimes the, you know, when you're very focused on solving problems, it can feel a little doomy because you actually have to, like, immerse yourself in the problems of the people that you're making software for. And sometimes, you start to feel like the world is just full of problems. What Goodz is doing is sort of it is solving a problem in a sense, but not in that kind of way. It's really, like, a fun upside kind of thing, which I think a lot of the folks on the team were very excited about. But, like, the software component, actually, is very interesting to us from a technological standpoint as well. There's a lot of opportunity here to do interesting things on the backend with an object that's essentially functioning as a bookmark out in the world. What all can you do with that? There's something super compelling and technically interesting about it. And I think, also, the team was just sort of excited by Chris and Mike, you know, the energy and the kind of background they were bringing to the table was also super interesting. And then, above all else, what I say every time you ask me this question, which is stage fit, y'all, good stage fit. They're right at the beginning. They haven't built the product yet [laughs]. Gotta say it. It's a good stage fit. They know who they're building for broadly but not super specifically. Got a good vision but, like, haven't made that first step with the software. Perfect stage fit for us [laughs]. LINDSEY: Great. So, Chris, we were talking a bit before about how you two have been collaborators in the past, worked on business ideas before. Why bring this idea into the thoughtbot incubator? What are you hoping to, you know, achieve? CHRIS: One of the main reasons why we wanted to bring this into the incubator was just for support, momentum, and then, also, I would say, validation for our idea. I mean, we came to the incubator with a very, yeah, I would say it was a fairly developed idea that needed to be proved, and we, quite frankly, needed help with that. You know, Mike and I have our own expertises, but we don't know how to do everything. We're more than willing to jump in where we need to go. But having people with expertise to work with has proven to be incredibly helpful, and just having kind of fresh faces to bat ideas around with after he and I have been staring at each other for months now on Zoom calls and meetings. And just, you know, being able to talk about these ideas with fresh faces and new people and get new perspectives has been so very, very helpful. I think something that's also great from the momentum standpoint is that because there's a time limit to this experience, we've got the time that we have with you guys, and we've been able to set goals that I think are very achievable for things we want to occur in the next couple of months, and it feels like we're going to get there. And I think by the end of this, I mean, our hope, and I think we're on track, is to have a functioning physical product that we're going to offer to consumers with a digital backend to support it, which is, in my mind, amazing. That'll totally validate this idea and prove if we have something or not. LINDSEY: I was going to ask if you're open to sharing what those goals specifically are. Is that it? Is it that by the end, you have -- MIKE: Is that it? Lindsey, that's a lot. [laughter] CHRIS: It's a lot. I mean, yeah. I mean, we're going to have a physical object in the world that you can buy via an e-commerce site -- JORDYN: Sounds like we need Lindsey on the team if Lindsey feels like this is so achievable. [laughter] CHRIS: Yeah, yeah. Lindsey...yeah. We're in the beginning [crosstalk 15:47] LINDSEY: I meant, is that the goal? CHRIS: That is the goal. LINDSEY: Is that all? CHRIS: I was going to –- LINDSEY: Is that all you got? CHRIS: Mike, do you agree? MIKE: Yeah. Is that the goal? Yes, that is the goal. I mean, you know, when we sat down with the thoughtbot team kind of week one, you know, they're sort of like, "All right, let's define kind of the experiment." So, we refer to them as experiments, which I think is helpful because, like, what are the experiments that we want to be doing during our time here? And, you know, we talked about it a lot. And yeah, I think it's, you know, having a physical product out in the world, having a website in which to sell it. But also, it's really like Chris was saying, it's like, it's market validation, and just making sure we actually have something that people want. It's like, you know, running a startup takes so long and, like [laughs], you know, you'll do it for so many years. It's like bands when people say, like, "Oh, that's an overnight sensation." It's like, you know, that band has been slogging it out in tiny, little venues for four years before you ever heard of them. It's like, that's what so much of the startup world feels like to me, too. It's like, "Oh, you're just getting started as a startup?" It's like, "Well, we've been working on this forever." And I know how long this can take. And so, I think we want to learn as early as possible, like, is this something people actually want? Because if they don't, like, we'll just go do something else. I don't want to spend years making something that people don't want. So, I think the biggest goal, for me, is just validation, and then that is sort of how we get there is like, okay, how do we validate this? Cool. Let's identify some, you know, assumptions of personas that we think are people who do actually want this and then try to go sell it to them. And all the implications from that are, okay, well, you need a website where somebody can buy it. You need a physical product that somebody can actually buy. So, all those things sort of come out of that, but, for me, it's like, proving that assumption, is this thing real? Do people actually want this? And everything else is like, okay, how do we prove that? LINDSEY: Jordyn, what does that look like in these first few weeks here? User interviews, I assume, how are the user interviews going? JORDYN: Always. Always. So, you know, we kick it off by just, like, doing the exercise where we list everybody who might want this. And the team, you know, it's a fun product. Everybody brought their own assumptions and ideas to the table on that. You know, we had a lot of different scenarios we were imagining. It's super fun getting that stuff out of people's heads, just, like, what are we all thinking? And then, you know, we get to negotiate, like, okay...I always encourage everyone to think, like, if everyone else on the team was on the moon, you had to make a decision about a market segment to pick; which one would you pick? And then we kind of argue about it in a productive way. It really helps us get at, like, what are the dynamics that we think matter upfront? And then we pick one, or, in this case, we have a few. We have a handful. And we're running interview projects where we just recruit people to talk about people that meet this persona, talk about a specific problem. We're in the middle of that right now. And it's fun, fantastic. These conversations are super interesting. We're validating a lot of the things that Mike and Chris, you know, walked into this with, but we're learning a bunch of new things as well. And, like, really, part of the aim there is to validate that there's a hole in the market that we might fill but also to hear the language people are using to describe this stuff. So, when people talk about buying music, merch, you know, making playlists, et cetera, like, what language do they use to talk about that? So that we make sure we're speaking the language that our customer uses to describe this stuff. And we're, you know, we're right in the pocket of doing that, learning stuff all the time. And it helps us kind of hone the messaging. It helps us know where to go talk to people about it, how to talk about it, but it's, you know, it all kind of fits together. And it's just this, really...the early stages. It's just a bunch of us in a room, a virtual room, in this case, sort of, like, tossing ideas around. But out of it crystallizes this sense of alignment about who this is for, how to talk to them about it, and with a goal. And, you know, Mike and Chris walked in with the exact right mindset about this, which is, yes, it's experiments. We need to validate it. Let's make sure there's a there-there. If there's a there-there, let's figure out where it is [laughs], like, all those things. And we're running these experiments, and it was really [inaudible 19:36]. We got down to business quite quickly here. It was really great. LINDSEY: Like you said, it's not necessarily a problem or, you know, the typical framing of a problem. How do you start those user interview questions around this? Do you feel a gap between the physical and the digital sound? [laughter] JORDYN: No, no. LINDSEY: It's maybe not it [laughs]. JORDYN: Yeah, no. Well, I can tell you what our startup questions are. One of them is, tell me about the last time you bought music merch. Go for it, Lindsey. Tell us. LINDSEY: The last time I bought music merch, I went to a Tegan and Sara concert a few weeks ago, and I bought a T-shirt. JORDYN: Tell me about buying that T-shirt. Why'd you buy it? LINDSEY: Because I wanted to remember the show and my time with my friends, and I wanted to support the artists. I know that buying merch is the best way to support your favorite touring artists. JORDYN: So, it's just, you know, we could spend the rest of this time talking [laughter] [crosstalk 20:34], and it would be awesome. So, it's really a lot of things like that. LINDSEY: Gotcha. JORDYN: You don't ask, "What problem are you trying to solve by buying this t-shirt?" Right? Like, that's not, you know, but we ask you to tell us a bunch of stories about when you did this recently. You know, and if you make playlists for friends, you know, that's a different persona. But we would have asked, you know, like, "Tell me about the last playlist you made. You know, who did you share it with? You know, what happened after that? What happened after that? What happened after that?" It's a lot of questions like that. And there's just nothing better. People love to tell you what's going on with them. And it's great [laughs]. LINDSEY: Yeah. As you all have been doing these interviews, Mike and Chris, have you been surprised by anything? Any interesting insights that you're seeing already? CHRIS: I mean, I haven't done really much in the way of user interviews in the past. This is a really new experience for me. And then we're, obviously, not on the calls because that would be weird and probably intimidating for people. But we're getting lots of highlights from folks who are doing them, you know, in our daily sync. And I'm surprised at how many, like, really intense, like, playlist nerds we have found even just in, like, the few people we've talked to, like, in the best possible way. Like, people who are like, "I make playlists all the time." Like, you're talking about, like, a vinyl fan or, like, a...Jordyn, what's the story? It's, like, the guy who there was so much out-of-print vinyl that he started a vinyl label just to get the albums in vinyl. [crosstalk 21:56] JORDYN: Yeah. There were a bunch of releases that he feels really passionately about that were never released on vinyl that he knew would never be released on vinyl. And so, he started a vinyl record label. And we just found this guy [laughter]. CHRIS: Is that indicative that that's, like, an entire persona we're going to, like, target? Absolutely not. But it's just, like, it's amazing that even just in the few user interviews we've done, that we've found so many very passionate people. And it's sent me down, like, a TikTok rabbit hole of, like, TikTok, like, music nerd influencer-type folks who are posting playlists. And they, like, hundreds of thousands of likes on these videos that are literally just, like, screen with text on it that you're supposed to, like, pause the video [laughs] and, like, look at, like, the songs that they're recommending. And it's like, who does that? And it was like, these people do that. And it's like, so there are...it's been very encouraging to me, actually. I was worried that we were going to find not as much passion as we had suspected, and I think the opposite has proven to be true. So, it's exciting. CHRIS: Yeah, I completely agree with Mike. It's been so encouraging. I think, for me, what we're doing is an idea that I'm very excited about and have been very excited about for a long time. But hearing the responses that we're getting makes me confident in the idea, too. That's great. I mean, I think that is everything that a founder needs, you know, is excitement and confidence. MIKE: Well, and just the whole user interview experience has, like, made a lot of my other conversations sort of I've tried to frame parts of them as user interviews because I'm talking to a lot of, like, label folks now, and artists, merch people. And, you know, I ended up just sort of, like, asking them, I mean, yes, trying to explain the product and work on kind of partnership stuff, but a lot of it is really just geeking out with them. And just, like, hearing their thoughts about, like, what they love about merch because these are people that clearly think about this stuff all the time. So, it's definitely kind of, like, tuned my other conversations into trying to get unbiased feedback. LINDSEY: Yeah. Everything is a little user interview now. MIKE: Yeah, exactly. LINDSEY: Get that angle in there. All right, so some early validation and excitement. That's really cool to hear. Any challenges or, you know, other kinds of learnings early on? Anything that's been invalidated? MIKE: I don't know that we're there yet. [inaudible 24:02] Chris, I don't know. I'm happy to find that some things are invalidated, but I don't really feel...you know, some of the personas that we decided or maybe just one of the personas we decided to pursue, I think we're having a hard time having those user interviews kind of really bear fruit, but that's helpful, too, actually. I mean, it's like, okay, well, maybe that's not a group that we target. JORDYN: Yeah. It's about, like, [inaudible 24:24]. I encourage folks not to think about this like a 'no, not that,' and instead think of it as like a 'not yet.' And that's, I think, the dynamic here with a couple of the personas we were interested in. It's just been turned into kind of, like, a not yet for reasons that we very quickly figured out, but we'll get there. It's just a matter of figuring out we had some other personas take precedence because they're more sort of red, hot in a way, right? It's just easier to get in contact with these people, or it's, like, clear what they're going for or what they need from the market. So, you know, we have this whole list, and it was not clear at first who was going to kind of stand out. But we've kind of found some focus there, which means, invariably, that there's things that are falling out of the frame for now, and you're kind of de-prioritizing them. But it really is, like, a we'll get to that [laughs]. We'll eventually get to that. LINDSEY: Yeah. And part of the process, who's going to rise to the top right now? JORDYN: Yeah, exactly. LINDSEY: Do you have anything you can show and tell with us today or not yet? MIKE: So, Chris has been hard at work on all the physical side of this stuff and going back and forth with our manufacturing partner and all that good stuff. But we have a final version of the mixtape product. LINDSEY: For when this gets pulled into the podcast, Mike's showing us a physical card. CHRIS: It's a small card, and we call them Goodz. And it's printed on three-millimeter plywood using a UV printing process, super durable. And this is something you can put in your pocket. You're not going to wreck it. I think you could actually (Don't quote me on this.), but I think you can even, like, put it through a washing machine, and it would be fine. Embedded in this card is a chip that can be read by your phone, and that's pretty much what we're working with. MIKE: Yeah, so the idea is you just sort of tap this, and it'll take you to a streaming version of a playlist. And then Chris has also been making these adorable crates. And [crosstalk 26:10] LINDSEY: The little crates I love. MIKE: And we actually have some wooden ones, too, in the testing that's [crosstalk 26:15] LINDSEY: And then the mixtapes get stored in the little crates [crosstalk 26:19] MIKE: Yeah. So, you could have -- LINDSEY: Throw it on your desk. CHRIS: Each crate can hold about, I think, 15 of these things. What's really cool about this product on the physical side is we are using a tried-and-true technology, which is NFC chips. These are things that make Apple Pay work, make Google Pay work. They are in your E-ZPass when you drive through a toll booth. This is stuff that's been around for years. So, we're just kind of leveraging this technology that's been around for so long in a new way. MIKE: Yeah, I think it's similar to kind of the evolution of QR codes, right? It's like they were sort of around forever, and then it was, like, COVID and restaurant menus kind of kicked those into mainstream. Like, NFC has been around for a long time. It's very tried and true. It's affordable. But I want to say Apple only turned it on by default, like, the NFC reader in the iPhone in the last, like, 18 to 24 months, right? Like, it started...like, it's been around for a while, but they're sort of slowly kind of...and now you just sort of see it everywhere. People are using it on the subways in New York to scan for tickets or for accessing stuff. I was also just showing Chris has been prototyping with the ability to sort of keep these on a key ring. So, we have, like, a little chain hole on them. It is [inaudible 27:22] to sort of have this on your backpack or, you know, on a key ring, or something like that. And friends could kind of, like, come up to you and just, like, scan one that looks interesting. CHRIS: And yeah, something that's awesome about this is you don't need an app. You don't need to download anything. As long as your NFC reader is on when you scan this, it will bring you to the music that it's linked to, which I think is awesome. So, I mean, my dream is to have these, like, hanging off of people's backpacks so I can, like, scan them in the subway or, you know, it's such, like, an easy thing to do. And it requires so little technical time on the user's end to be able to do it. LINDSEY: Oh, we got a question here. "So, Moo used to offer NFC cards. What made you decide to do the thicker plywood model?" CHRIS: Durability is really what it comes down to. We wanted something that felt like an object that you can have and treasure. Like, these have weight, you know, these feel like something, not just a piece of paper. This is something that you can have and [inaudible 28:22] your desk, and it's not going to fade in the sunlight. It's not going to disintegrate over time. This is something that's going to last. MIKE: Yeah, the cards would definitely, like, as I would sort of carry them around and show them to people and stuff, the cards would start, you know, breaking. It's like having a business card in your pocket, right? Eventually, it's going to kind of wear out. And plus, we had, like, the stickers were visible on the back of them. And we were, like, having the sticker just completely disappear inside the wood; it just feels a little bit more like magic. LINDSEY: Well, thanks for demoing there. I put you on the spot a little bit. But they are...I had seen them in the Slack, and they're very cool [laughs]. So, I had to ask if we could show them off a bit. MIKE: Of course. CHRIS: I think another thing to think about, too, is we've been talking a lot about the user experience. But if and when we get to the point of making these for artists, artists will be able to collect so much data off of the way that people buy and collect and use these things over time, which is something that we're really, really excited about. And also, you know, we're working on a way to make the link in the object updatable over time. So, artists will be able to change what a card points do to inform their users about the latest and greatest thing. LINDSEY: Very cool. Jordyn, what's next on the programming agenda for Chris and Mike? JORDYN: It's really sort of we're in this, like, iterative cycle. So, we're talking to folks. We're working on the website. The conversations we're having with people are informing how we're framing this first experiment with the mixtape, how we're marketing it, who we're marketing it to. I think next up is probably a Google Ad experiment to really see if we can piggyback on some stuff or at least figure out a new consumer product. It's so tough, right? It's also not a thing people are searching for. So, we have to come up with some experiments for how we get people to that website [laughs]. So, you know, Google Ads funnels is just something you kind of have to do because it's very interesting to figure out what people are responding to, what people are searching for. But we're going to have a bunch of other experiments as well and non-experiments. Outbound experiments: can we go to people? Can we get listed in a gift-buying guide for the holidays? Or, like, we don't know. There's a bunch of experiments we need to do around that, which is really just this iteration. We won't stop talking to users, but, you know, everything we're hearing from them will inform where we go and how we talk to the folks in those places where we end up. And really, it's just about starting...once this is up and, you know, there's, like, an orderable thing, there's, like, a whole data cycle where we start to learn from the stuff we're testing; we actually have some real data for it, and we can start to tweak, iterate and change our strategy. But the bigger thing, also, is this bigger platform. So, the next thing really, the big next thing, is to sort of start to scope and create an architecture idea. What's it going to take to build the actual backend thing? And it's the thing that thoughtbot really [laughs] excels at, which is software. So, you know, that's the big next kind of project. Once the mixtape experiment is sort of out and in flight and we're getting data, we really need to turn our attention to the technical backend. LINDSEY: Exciting. Another comment/question from Jeff, who maybe needs a user interview. "Love the crate more than the actual albums. Maybe offer collections of artists." MIKE: Yeah, that's the plan. CHRIS: Yeah, definitely. It's a good idea. Yeah, it's, I mean, and labels get to, especially, like, small indie labels get really excited about doing, like, crates worth of collections of different artists or, like, you know, digging through their back catalog, their subscription services. There's a lot of different angles for sure about that idea. LINDSEY: [inaudible 31:55] Chris and Mike, going into this next section of the programming, for anyone watching right now, or watching the recording, or listening to the recording, any action items from them? You know, are you looking for any user interviews or have any survey or any destinations you'd like to send people yet? CHRIS: Not quite yet, but soon, I would say. Well -- MIKE: I mean, [inaudible 32:19] plug the website, I mean, you know, I think we've got, like, an email to sign up from there, right? The URL is getthegoodz.com and I [crosstalk 32:27] LINDSEY: Goodz with a Z. MIKE: Goodz with a Z. CHRIS: With Z. MIKE: So yeah, if you want to go there, you can sign up. I think there's an email signup on there to learn more. LINDSEY: Perfect. All right. getthegoodz.com email sign up. To stay up to date on Goodz and the incubator, you can follow along on the thoughtbot blog. You know, as always, send us any questions you might have, and we're happy to get to those. But otherwise, thanks for listening. And thank you all — Jordyn, Chris, and Mike. Thanks so much for joining today and sharing and being open about your stories so far. MIKE: Thank you. CHRIS: Yeah, thank you, Lindsey. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions. Special Guests: Chris Cerrito and Mike Rosenthal.

Finding that secret sauce can lead to success, but it's not always easy to find. In this episode of the Class E Podcast, we talked with Chris Sexton, founder of the barbecue catering company, Sexton's Smoke-N-Grill. From learning countless lessons in the Greenville Starts program to dealing with personal health concerns, Sexton discusses the future of his company, how he has become more appreciative of his skills, and the importance of keeping priorities straight as an entrepreneur. Guest: Chris Sexton Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sextonsmokingrill Host: Mary Sturgill Producer: Isabella Martinez '24   TRANSCRIPT:  MARY: Hi there, everyone. Welcome to this episode of the Class E Podcast. You know, this is the podcast that is brought to you through a partnership between the Hill Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship and the Communication Studies Department here at Furman University.  Today's episode is part of the everyday entrepreneur series in which we talk to entrepreneurs who have graduated from our GVL Starts program. And the reason that we're doing that is we want you to hear their stories and be inspired by them wherever they are in the process of their venture. So today we have a very special guest, Chris Sexton, who is the owner of Sexton Smoke-N-Grill, and a new venture that he's calling Mr. Sauce It Up. Chris, welcome to the show.  CHRIS: Thank you for having me. Thank you for having me.  MARY: Chris, I'm so happy that you were able to join us today because one - I'm gonna look right into the camera for the YouTube people - Chris' food is amazing. Now when I was in, you know, I was a broadcaster for 20 years, and when I was in Texas, the broadcasters and you know different people in the community, they call us celebrities or whatever, but we had to judge barbecue competitions. So I've judged many a barbecue competition in my life. And Chris' is by far the best of any that I have done and it all boils down to the sauce, which I imagine is where the Mr. Sauce It Up came from.  CHRIS: That is exactly where Mr. Sauce came from. I've created a new sauce using fruit, alcohol, and just a wide imagination to come up with different sauces. We've got about 10 to 15 sauces that we do.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: All incorporating fruits and alcohol like I said. Like you can take Hennessy bourbon… MARY: Don't give your whole secret away.  CHRIS: No, everything's not coming, but we've got great stuff coming.  MARY: We don't want people to copy it. And you will want to once you taste this, you'll want to try to redo this at home. Tell us about how you got started with this. Because you're in finance.  CHRIS: I'm in finance. So to be honest with you, from working in finance, I've always had a passion for cooking. I started cooking when I was like 14 years old working at a little restaurant in Greer with legendary Peggy Davis. She owns Peggy's Diner in Greer. Started working with her, handing out trays… and I kind of fell in love with that whole environment of cooking, creating. Did that all the way through high school… worked at McDonald's. But the sauce and the cooking came from truly talking on the phone with a guy from Mississippi on the phone about a car deal.  MARY: Oh, wow. CHRIS:  And he asked me what I was doing for Thanksgiving. I told him I was going to try fried turkey. He said you need to smoke it.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And that day, I smoked a duck, a turkey and a…a duck, a turkey, and a Boston butt.  MARY: Wow.  CHRIS: And they all came out great.  MARY: Yeah. On your first time. CHRIS: On my first time, it came out great. Not perfect, but great. MARY: Right.   CHRIS: But it was addictive. It was like it was something that…it's what I needed at that point in time to slow me down and give me some perspective. MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And from there it's just kind of bloomed and grown from there.  MARY: Yeah. What inspired you? Was it just the conversation with him or have you always… I mean, you've kind of always been a little a foodie. CHRIS: A foodie.  MARY: I mean, I consider you a foodie.  CHRIS: So what really inspired me is the process.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: I fell in love with it. And I'm a person that loves serving people. So getting to feed people, seeing smiles on their face, people honestly patting your back saying this is the best barbecue I've ever had.  MARY: And there are some smiles when they eat your stuff.  CHRIS: And it's encouraging. So the sauce idea actually came… I made a dish, not gonna say what dish it is, and my mom tried it and when she got done, she says “man, this would be good on some chicken wings.” MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And so me being who I am, it took me like three years… I sat there and thought about it and one day while I was at work, all my great ideas come on the clock… So I was sitting there one day and I'm like bingo. I figured out how to do it, I tried it, and I kind of took it off from there.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And that's… the biggest thing about my barbecue is it's different. MARY: Yeah. It totally is.  CHRIS: And I refuse to do what everybody else does. And my goal with my business is to create a new space in a traditional market.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: When you go to restaurants and you go places… that's the other thing that inspired me…I'm tired of eating vinegar based, tomato based, mustard based barbecue sauces. You know, I want something different and so that's what we've done. MARY: So you have…how many sauces did you say now?   CHRIS: Got around 10 or 15 sauces. MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: The newest…the newest sauce that I'm working on would be a Carolina white sauce. Carolina is known for that fruit flavor for peaches and things of that nature.  MARY: Right.  CHRIS: So imagine taking your traditional yum yum sauce mixed in with a little bit of fruit.  MARY: Oh yeah.  CHRIS: And we're working on that and actually combining the smoked brisket and pulled pork with fried rice with that yum yum sauce.  MARY: Oh my gosh. My mouth is watering.   CHRIS: So, yeah. Look for us on Tik Tok soon. MARY: Yeah, there you go. When we were in the… we were in Greenville Starts cohort together, and the first time I tasted Chris's sauce, I was like, “Chris, you need to call this the best damn sauce ever.”  CHRIS: That is actually the slogan. “The best damn sauce you've ever had.”  MARY: Yeah. Yeah. I love it. CHRIS: I tell people… I'm trying to be humble, but when you have something that's different, you have to let people know.  MARY: Exactly.  CHRIS: And this is when you taste it, it just… it kind of shocks you because you're not… you're thinking barbecue sauce.  MARY: Totally.  CHRIS: But it kind of just catches you… you're like what is this?  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And it just kind of sucks you in.  MARY:  Well, and I think you just said it correct. You're taking a space that is so kind of entrenched in kind of the flavors that are there. And you're creating something new with the idea of barbecue. And I love that. Can you talk us through the process of creating this business because I guess you started with the smoking first and then the sauces and then where are you… how, you know…do you have a website? Do you have a restaurant? How are you coming together?   CHRIS: What we're doing now is… So this is how I initially started out. I was at my desk at Ford one day having a conversation with someone that asked me about catering.  MARY:Yeah.  CHRIS: So I hopped online, in between calls, looking at what I had to do to get started so I went online, I got my EIN…and kind of got in touch with state and got everything going. MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: That was in 2016. So for the last three years off and on, I've done a lot of catering. A lot of on site. My biggest thing is on site grilling. MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: I put on quite a show when I grill.  MARY: I mean you can tell with his personality. You're the entertainment and the food.  CHRIS: So yeah, if you're looking for an entertainer and a grill master, I'm your guy. So we… that's my big thing is I travel, I take my grill, I like to set up shop.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And I also work with… I've been working… I had been working before I took my current job with the church during the Wednesday night Bible studies. I'm big on… like I said my dad is a Baptist preacher.  MARY: Right. CHRIS: So we grew up in the country and all I know is fellowship and eating. I've probably eaten in every county in the state.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: Every, every type of food you can have, but those experiences is what inspired me. But long story short, the business idea and the model came from just three years of having to stop and go because working back and forth, and now learning how to balance time, family, and everything. The Mr. Sauce It Up will give me the opportunity to kind of work and service people and enjoy it and also make my first big shine through Mr. Sauce It Up.  MARY: Yeah. So I want to talk a little bit about… because entrepreneurial, you know, ventures are, it's a journey, right? And I know we all have setbacks, and I know that you've had some setbacks, including a health setback for a while that kind of made everything go on pause. So how are you doing now? And let's talk about the setbacks and how you overcame them.  CHRIS: Oh, wow. So it's crazy the night that we had our finale. Our, you know, our big pitch.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: I found out I had a nodule on my thyroid that they had to go in and remove. They thought it was small, but it ended up being like the size of a baseball. MARY: Wow. CHRIS: So it sat on my chest and it kind of impacted me. Dealing with things like that… it impacts…your thyroid is your gas and keeps you going. MARY: Yeah, yeah.  CHRIS: So for like the last three years, I've ran on nothing but adrenaline and you didn't know it. So it's taken me a little… little bit of time to adjust to being normal and not having that excess energy and just you know being actually knowing what it feels like to be tired and having to take a nap. MARY: Right. CHRIS: So for the last six, you know, part of that I ran on you know pretty much adrenaline because the thyroid and I were back balanced. Kind of and it… but it gave me an opportunity to really sit back and refocus and re-  kind of gave me a bigger hunger for what I want to do. I've looked at food trucks, and things like that, but a crazy and a funny fact about me is I've had 22 wrecks in my lifetime.  MARY: 22 wrecks? CHRIS: 22 automobile accidents.  MARY: Oh my goodness, Chris. CHRIS: So me driving a food truck probably nobody around here wants.  MARY: They don't mix.  CHRIS: That's not a good mix so I'm in the process of trying to find a building either…. I would prefer Greenville, but the Spartanburg area is also something I'm open to… to certainly barbecue out of. But until then, I'm gonna let myself and also cakes and sweet potato pies…  MARY: Yeah. Oh my god. Sweet potato pies.  CHRIS: …kind of feed my business and my picture while I kind of work my nine to five and do your day in and day out thing.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: The struggle. You know, being an entrepreneur… it takes a… you got to have a little bit of crazy in you to be an entrepreneur. But the biggest thing you have to have to be an entrepreneur is being resilient.  MARY: Yes. CHRIS: You never know what obstacles are gonna come your way. I never expected and never thought I was sick MARY: Right. You had no idea.  CHRIS: I had no idea. You know, and even through it, you got to, you know, one of the mottos I live off of is fake it till you make it.  MARY: Right.  CHRIS: You got to go into every day, no matter what's going on, with a smile on your face, press through. And you kind of put it behind you and live in that moment because you never know life can be taken from you at any given moment. So you got to enjoy it no matter what's going on. And that's what's kind of helped me evolve and get to the point that I'm at now. And for me, I've learned you know, when things are going… when things are going at their best is when things…your biggest hurdles are going to come. MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: For me, I spent all last year partnering with people and creating a lot of partnerships I kind of had to give up. So to kind of reinvent myself and roll back out and rebrand as Mr. Sauce It Up, it's going to be really exciting and I think it's the right way and path to go. The biggest thing I can tell other entrepreneurs is don't be stubborn.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: For a whole course, through Greenville Starts, everybody told me, “it's the sauce, it's the sauce, it's the sauce.”  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: And I love cooking. I love grilling.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And a couple of weeks ago… I'd say a couple of months ago, it finally dawned on me “Hey, you've got a product that nobody else can do.” MARY: Right. CHRIS: This is your…this is your headline and this is your angle. I'll still grill and barbecue and do barbecue and whatnot. But…I have a gift that I gotta give the world.   MARY: Right. That's your foot in the door -  think the barbecue, but the sauce is so scalable. I mean it gives me goosebumps just thinking about where you could go and seeing this on grocery store shelves. I mean it really does. CHRIS: That's my ultimate goal. My ultimate goal is to… MARY: I mean I literally just got goosebumps.  CHRIS: We've got here in Greenville…we've got we've got the Duke's manufacturing. I want to have something similar to that here just pumping out sauce so hopefully when you're getting you know your Chick fil A… go to McDonald's get a sauce packet, and you'll see my pretty face on it. MARY: I love it. I love it. And you said some really good things about there in that comment about being resilient and not being stubborn. And I think being willing to go with the flow because I know you were in talks about a space right when you got sick. And so every… I mean literally everything went on hold.  CHRIS: So with the space…this is another thing that when in the restaurant business, it's a risky business… MARY: It is.  CHRIS: For me, the biggest thing is finding people that want to invest and that will roll the dice on a restaurant. MARY: And that's true for all restaurant owners.  CHRIS: That's been the biggest challenge, but the buildings I looked at have been highly competitive.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: I looked at a property in Duncan… was looking at property in Duncan and somebody came in at the last minute and outbid me by like 30 grand.  MARY: Right. Wow.  CHRIS: And being in finance and being the underwriter you… the risk… I'm very careful if that's the risk I take and I evaluate it making sure I'm making solid decisions.  MARY: And you understand that risk.  CHRIS: Yeah, because being in business for yourself, is a risk alone. MARY: Absolutely. CHRIS: You don't want your business upside down and trying to make back money that you may not be able to get back. That's not a wise move so we kind of backed off a bit. And it's been a blessing because like I said had I got into it then, gotten sick, we would have been in a worse situation. So thankfully, we got into a position where we're able to press pause and my true belief is that when my opportunity and my time is there, it's gonna happen but until then we're just gonna keep doing what we have to do.  MARY: One hundred percent. One hundred percent. So what's been the most rewarding thing about starting this venture for you? CHRIS: Networking and meeting new people.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And to be honest with you, the other thing people don't know about me is I'm kind of shy.  MARY: I don't believe that for a minute. Because the first night we were in Greenville Starts together, I mean, we clicked, obviously but…but yeah, no. But you, probably like me, I have to overcome it when I'm with people. Once I get there, I'm fine.  CHRIS: So I guess you can say my shyness comes out different. When I get nervous and get shy, it's like lights on, like camera on, game on, let's go. So you never really know it. So I embrace it. And being able to… this has taught me how to fight through that and how it really… I guess having a good time meeting new people and the biggest thing I think I'd say is just learn. Being an entrepreneur has taught me so much and it has stretched my limits. And so when I was younger, I was a hothead. MARY: I believe that.  CHRIS: Something happened… something happened and I'm, you know, fired up. MARY:  Right. CHRIS: So for instance, a couple of weeks ago, my first time back out and I go to leave and my grill catches a flat tire.  MARY: Oh, no. Yeah.  CHRIS: And the old me would have been saying Sunday School words and throwing stuff and all upset. We just pressed pause and regrouped and it has made me grow and develop patience. And understand that some things you cannot control. If you can't control it, you just move on.  MARY: I would think that this entrepreneurial process that you're on, and that health scare, that major health scare, probably both had something to do with that kind of, okay, it does no good to get upset about this stuff, just deal with it one thing at a time. CHRIS: Well there's another factor in there also. I've got a grandson now.  MARY: Oh yes, that's true. Happy Grandfather.  CHRIS: So, being a grand dad, it kind of…I would say the moment I took my daughter to the hospital.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: Got the call. I had to take her to the hospital. That's when life changed.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: We just kind of… I don't know it's something about having a grandchild that you can give back to them.  MARY: Right.  CHRIS: It kind of changes you. At the same time, it just shows your new appreciation for life. So all of that within the three month period, it really has slowed me down… made me appreciate life even more. But at the same time, it's made me a fighter. It's really made me a fighter and made me...  MARY: Yeah, because you want to be around for him. CHRIS: Yeah, to be honest with you, this whole get up, I've thought about for the last four years.  MARY: Yeah, this is what it's gonna look like. CHRIS: Yeah. And going through that experience gave me the courage to kind of step out of the shell and put it out there and move forward because what's the worst thing that can happen? Somebody will laugh at you? MARY: Right. Exactly.  CHRIS: You know at the end of the day, this is who I am.  MARY: And who cares? If they're laughing at you, they're looking at you?  CHRIS: They're looking at you. They're going to remember.  MARY: Right.  CHRIS: This is who I am. A little country guy from South Carolina just trying to sell some good barbecue and sauce.  MARY: Yeah, I love it. Chris, I love it. So we were, like I said we were in the Greenville cohort, Greenville starts cohort together, and for those of you may not know that's like an eight week program where the participants could expose everything from, you know, fundraising, capital to legal issues and things that of course, you're not an expert in everything, right? And so we learned so much to marketing. I mean, you name it, we touched on it in that class. What were some of the takeaways from that that you are implementing now? Almost a year later.   CHRIS: Want to hear a good story? MARY: Yeah always.  CHRIS: It kind of goes with the question you asked me previously about my experience.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: Do you remember the night that we wrote the breakup letter?  MARY: Yes. We had to write a breakup letter to our business. And you know, you're the second person to bring this up in these conversations, but his breakup letter was amazing. But go ahead.  CHRIS: I lived my breakup letter this year. And that night, the night that we had read that letter out loud and share that experience…  MARY: Yeah.   CHRIS: I lived it this year. And going through it and living it and seeing your dreams kind of, let's just say be taken away.  MARY: Yeah, yeah.  CHRIS: It makes you appreciate your gifts and it makes you appreciate what you did. So, without Greenville Starts, I probably wouldn't have pushed through this year. I probably would have gave up and just gone back to working the nine to five and just you know enjoy life but my experience with Greenville Starts and having to, you know, go through a made breakup with something that you love and then having to go through it actually, it kind of gave you…I can go back and I can remember some of the speeches that the speakers gave. I will say it gave me motivation and courage and more than anything else it taught me that I'm not a know it all. I've worked in the banking industry for years as a banker and on the other side of the fence, telling people no to loans and being actually on the opposite end of it - trying to be approved, trying to get all your documents together gives you a whole new appreciation for what people on the other side go through. We've been on both sides. I have an appreciation for both now. But I will say that Greenville Starts… it gave me the courage to bounce back and gave me that fight and it prepared me for the hurdles that were ahead. So if anybody in Greenville County has a business idea and they feel like they can make it, but their confidence is an issue, I would definitely recommend Greenville Starts. We have the all-American, the GOAT, the great, the best hair, Brian Davis. He just…has a way of inspiring…inspiring you. Like just…any of our cohorts, I think about you guys and where you're at and I see your successes and it motivates you. You see other people being successful and that pushes you on.  MARY: One hundred percent. Which is the whole reason we do this podcast is to share your all's stories with the public so that we can encourage other people to go ahead and follow their dreams and create their ventures, you know, and I mean, you talk about Greenville Starts being an inspiration, you're an inspiration to, I know our entire cohort.  CHRIS: I appreciate it. I appreciate it. I think, you know, God puts you in a certain place at a certain time. And I think I feel like that was a perfect time because like going into it, I'll be honest with you toward the end of class I kind of felt like something was off. It drained me. It drained me. It put me… I don't like talking about this aspect of it, but it impacted my mental health.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: It gave me some anxiety and put me in a depressive state and it you know, that's not me. MARY: Right. CHRIS: One hundred miles per hour, 100 days a week.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: So at the end of the class, it was like okay, what we got going on? And you guys really pushed us through. It's like a family. It's not just like a class. It's not just like a group of people. It feels like family and a cheerleader group.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: I've coached football, played football. I love sports and I love that team aspect. And that's what it felt like. Each week it wasn't a competition against each other. It was a way that we can push each other…push each other to make each other better. It's been a year and a half now. And when you can go back and recall specific conversations and specifics in a needed time, that's when you know it had an impact on you. That's what Greenville Starts said to me.  MARY: Yeah. CHRIS: It put a lot of information in this encyclopedia up here.  MARY: Yeah. I love that. I love that. What advice do you have to other entrepreneurs that you… either from Greenville Starts or just your personal experience?  CHRIS: I'm going to steal one from Ted Lasso.  MARY: Okay.  CHRIS: The great Ted Lasso. You got to believe. And what he also says…that's number one is believe.You got to believe in yourself. You got to believe in the process and you got to trust, you know, that the good Lord put you in a position he gave you whatever gifts that you have for a reason. And you have to follow the plan in your process. When things get hard, you got to go harder.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: And when things get easy, you got to kind of scratch your head and say, why is that so easy and know that something's coming. MARY: Right. Be prepared.  CHRIS: Be prepared because something's around the corner. The other thing is, I'm a Florida State fan. And the reason I'm a Florida State fan is because of…He talked about a lot about what you do when people aren't watching.  MARY: Yes.  CHRIS: And as an entrepreneur… it's what you're doing behind the scenes and when people aren't watching is what's going to make you successful. You know, the… you know, I cook a brisket 26 hours for it to be gone in 30 minutes.  MARY: Right.  CHRIS: So it's what I do behind the scenes and the effort and what people don't see is what makes you a great entrepreneur and a great… and great at what you do. And the last is something I learned from a guy named Tom Leopard back in 2012. Your priorities. As an entrepreneur, you have to have your priorities in order. It's got to be your faith, your family, and your fortune. If those three get out of whack at any point in time, it's time to step back, reevaluate, and bring them back in line and then things will start flowing so greatly. So always remember your faith, your family, and then you're fortune and as long as those three are aligned, you can always be successful and bounce back.  MARY: I love that. The three F's.  CHRIS: The three F's.  MARY: I love it. So you brought some… before we let you go, you brought some goodies for us. So, boy, I wish people…I wish we had smellivision because that cake smells so good. Oh my gosh. So Chris, what do we have here? This is one of the cakes that you do.  CHRIS: This is my spin on a…You lived in Kentucky?  MARY: I did not live in Kentucky.  CHRIS: I don't know why I thought you lived in Kentucky. So, this is my take on a Kentucky butter cake.  MARY: Okay.  CHRIS: So I call it a Carolina butter cake.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: It's a pound cake with some secret flavors.  MARY: Okay.  CHRIS: As all things as Mr. Sauce It Up does, we also do cake glazes.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: So this has a pineapple. No, I'm sorry…a peach mango rum glaze to it.  MARY: Yeah. Oh my goodness. This is going to be so good.  CHRIS: Mixed in butter. Something I came up with. I am the king of taking a recipe and turning it into my own. MARY: Right.  CHRIS: So, that's what I do the best. I don't… You know, if I go out to eat I'm probably going to take two… two combos, two meals and turn it into one.  MARY: And put them together.  CHRIS: So this is kind of what I've done with this and created my own flavor, but I feel pretty confident, I'm willing to bet you a $1 to your paycheck that you've never had a flavor like this.  MARY: All right, let's see it.  CHRIS: Let's see. Let me pull out my Dexter knife.  MARY: He's going to pull out his Dexter knife. Oh yeah, that's a Dexter knife. All right. All right. All right, let's cut into this sucker. So remind me again what the glaze is?  CHRIS: This is a peach mango with a hint of rum.  MARY: Okay.  CHRIS: And some other stuff that I can't really share with you at the time. I'll share with you at the time.  MARY: Right let's go. Cheers.  CHRIS: Cheers.  MARY: Oh my gosh.  CHRIS: Mmm. Mama where you at? Come on over here, get smacked.  MARY: That is so good. Did you say mama come on over here, get smacked?  CHRIS: Come on over. Come on over.  MARY: Oh yeah. So, we're going to have to change that phrase, well or add to it…the best damn sauce…the best damn glaze…because this is good stuff.  CHRIS: Thank you so much. Thank you so much.  MARY: Oh my goodness. Alright. So again, we'll have the links to how you get in touch with Chris wherever we're posting this podcast, both on YouTube and all of our podcast channels. Just look under the copy, the body copy. And you'll see that there because you… if you are having an event, you want to hire Chris to cater that event. Again, it's the entertainment and food. You can't beat that. CHRIS: Let me tell you.  MARY: Yeah.  CHRIS: I didn't mean to interrupt, but this cake is good.  MARY: It does taste good.  CHRIS: It tastes good. I'm a pound cake foodie and I think I've found something here.  MARY: I think you have too.  CHRIS: Not to brag, but yeah.  MARY: I think…I can't put it down. I got to finish eating so I can say the rest of the show so I can close the show out. Oh my gosh. So good. Alright. How do people get in touch with you if they want to get some sauce or they want you to cater an event?  CHRIS: Cater an event. You can find me on Facebook - Chris Sexton or Sexton's Smoke-N- Grill. Also on Instagram, it's Chris Sexton or Sexton's Smoke-N-Grill. Email me at sextonssmokengrill@gmail.com. www.sextonssmokengrill.com. And that's just Sexton's, Smoke, the letter “n”, grill.com. Or you can call me 864-680-4629. We got the sauces.  MARY: Alright, Chris, thank you so much.  CHRIS: Thank you. Anytime. Anytime.  MARY: So remember, if someone you know is an entrepreneur or has an idea, Greenville Starts is a great place for them to get started or if they're somewhere in the process along the way and they just need that little extra “umph” to learn things that they don't necessarily know, then that's a great place. So, in order to get into the next cohort, all you have to do is Google Greenville Starts and Furman and it should be the very first link that pops up and get yourself on that list.  The other thing I wanted to remind everybody of is that we have the Paladin Pitch competition, which if you are a Furman student, you can win $10,000 for your venture. That's coming up in April, but you have to participate in some pitch competitions before that. So, contact the Hill Institute, get your pitch to them and start working and then from all those pitches throughout the year, they'll choose the finalists to pitch in April. So be thinking about that, be brainstorming. If you want to do something, now is the time to do it. So, that does it for this episode of the Class E Podcast. I'm your host Mary Sturgilll. Remember this podcast is brought to you through a partnership between the Hill Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship and the Communication Studies Department here at Furman University. It is produced by student producers, Kayla Patterson and Eliza Polich, a true example of the Furman Advantage. And remember, you can get this podcast two ways now - you can listen to it wherever you listen to your podcast, we also have a YouTube channel where you can watch it and you can see this beautiful cake that we just ate and see us eating it. And we also.. follow us on Tik Tok if you're on Tik Tok because we just started a brand new Tik Tok channel and you'll see a lot of the outtakes and a lot of cool stuff on behind the scenes stuff on that Tik Tok channel. Until next time everybody, dream big.    

Corey and Chris discuss the house cleaning of the Penguins front office, and what has stood out to them the most in the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Plus, is the Pirates hype truly for real? After all that, they predict the 1st round of the NFL Draft, and throw in the Steelers pick at 32. Who goes #1? Who do the Steelers take? What kind of trades go down? Which QB does Chris NOT have going in the 1st round? Only one way to find out, so go hit play!**NOTE: recording wrapped up at 3:17 this afternoon. Any trades that happen from now until the start of the draft are not discussed.**

Big brother Tom Farley talks about the ‘Farley Magnetism' and shares stories about Dana Carvey & David Spade's 5hr tribute podcast, Chris NOT auditioning for Saturday Night Live, his ‘ogre with a heart' being the basis for Mike Myers' Shrek character [which was the 3RD recording of that part!], why he did NOT end up being The Cable Guy [Jim Carrey did], confirms there is an ACTUAL Matt Foley [although NOT a motivational speaker but rather a Catholic priest in Chicago], the parallels with other affected brothers Jim Belushi & Mopreme Shakur, the Second City Chicago tutelage of Del Close, constantly flying back and forth from NYC [doing SNL] to Toronto [filming Tommy Boy] but enjoying the steak/shaved beef/Canadian ballet, and shares lessons learned about addiction and mental health. TORONTO LEGENDS is hosted by Andrew Applebaum. All episodes available at https://www.podpage.com/toronto-legends/episodes/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

About ChrisChris is the Co-founder and Chief Product Officer at incident.io, where they're building incident management products that people actually want to use. A software engineer by trade, Chris is no stranger to gnarly incidents, having participated (and caused!) them at everything from early stage startups through to enormous IT organizations.Links Referenced: incident.io: https://incident.io Practical Guide to Incident Management: https://incident.io/guide/ TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: DoorDash had a problem. As their cloud-native environment scaled and developers delivered new features, their monitoring system kept breaking down. In an organization where data is used to make better decisions about technology and about the business, losing observability means the entire company loses their competitive edge. With Chronosphere, DoorDash is no longer losing visibility into their applications suite. The key? Chronosphere is an open-source compatible, scalable, and reliable observability solution that gives the observability lead at DoorDash business, confidence, and peace of mind. Read the full success story at snark.cloud/chronosphere. That's snark.cloud slash C-H-R-O-N-O-S-P-H-E-R-E.Corey: Let's face it, on-call firefighting at 2am is stressful! So there's good news and there's bad news. The bad news is that you probably can't prevent incidents from happening, but the good news is that incident.io makes incidents less stressful and a lot more valuable. incident.io is a Slack-native incident management platform that allows you to automate incident processes, focus on fixing the issues and learn from incident insights to improve site reliability and fix your vulnerabilities. Try incident.io, recover faster and sleep more.Corey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. Today's promoted guest is Chris Evans, who's the CPO and co-founder of incident.io. Chris, first, thank you very much for joining me. And I'm going to start with an easy question—well, easy question, hard answer, I think—what is an incident.io exactly?Chris: Incident.io is a software platform that helps entire organizations to respond to recover from and learn from incidents.Corey: When you say incident, that means an awful lot of things. And depending on where you are in the ecosystem in the world, that means different things to different people. For example, oh, incident. Like, “Are you talking about the noodle incident because we had an agreement that we would never speak about that thing again,” style, versus folks who are steeped in DevOps or SRE culture, which is, of course, a fancy way to say those who are sad all the time, usually about computers. What is an incident in the context of what you folks do?Chris: That, I think, is the killer question. I think if you look at organizations in the past, I think incidents were those things that happened once a quarter, maybe once a year, and they were the thing that brought the entirety of your site down because your big central database that was in a data center sort of disappeared. The way that modern companies run means that the definition has to be very, very different. So, most places now rely on distributed systems and there is no, sort of, binary sense of up or down these days. And essentially, in the general case, like, most companies are continually in a sort of state of things being broken all of the time.And so, for us, when we look at what an incident is, it is essentially anything that takes you away from your planned work with a sense of urgency. And that's the sort of the pithy definition that we use there. Generally, that can mean anything—it means different things to different folks, and, like, when we talk to folks, we encourage them to think carefully about what that threshold is, but generally, for us at incident.io, that means basically a single error that is worthwhile investigating that you would stop doing your backlog work for is an incident. And also an entire app being down, that is an incident.So, there's quite a wide range there. But essentially, by sort of having more incidents and lowering that threshold, you suddenly have a heap of benefits, which I can go very deep into and talk for hours about.Corey: It's a deceptively complex question. When I talk to folks about backups, one of the biggest problems in the world of backup and building a DR plan, it's not building the DR plan—though that's no picnic either—it's okay. In the time of cloud, all your planning figures out, okay. Suddenly the site is down, how do we fix it? There are different levels of down and that means different things to different people where, especially the way we build apps today, it's not is the service or site up or down, but with distributed systems, it's how down is it?And oh, we're seeing elevated error rates in us-tire-fire-1 region of AWS. At what point do we begin executing on our disaster plan? Because the worst answer, in some respects is, every time you think you see a problem, you start failing over to other regions and other providers and the rest, and three minutes in, you've irrevocably made the cutover and it's going to take 15 minutes to come back up. And oh, yeah, then your primary site comes back up because whoever unplugged something, plugged it back in and now you've made the wrong choice. Figuring out all the things around the incident, it's not what it once was.When you were running your own blog on a single web server and it's broken, it's pretty easy to say, “Is it up or is it down?” As you scale out, it seems like that gets more and more diffuse. But it feels to me that it's also less of a question of how the technology has scaled, but also how the culture and the people have scaled. When you're the only engineer somewhere, you pretty much have no choice but to have the entire state of your stack shoved into your head. When that becomes 15 or 20 different teams of people, in some cases, it feels like it's almost less than a technology problem than it is a problem of how you communicate and how you get people involved. And the issues in front of the people who are empowered and insightful in a certain area that needs fixing.Chris: A hundred percent. This is, like, a really, really key point, which is that organizations themselves are very complex. And so, you've got this combination of systems getting more and more complicated, more and more sort of things going wrong and perpetually breaking but you've got very, very complicated information structures and communication throughout the whole organization to keep things up and running. The very best orgs are the ones where they can engage the entire, sort of, every corner of the organization when things do go wrong. And lived and breathed this firsthand when various different previous companies, but most recently at Monzo—which is a bank here in the UK—when an incident happened there, like, one of our two physical data center locations went down, the bank wasn't offline. Everything was resilient to that, but that required an immediate response.And that meant that engineers were deployed to go and fix things. But it also meant the customer support folks might be required to get involved because we might be slightly slower processing payments. And it means that risk and compliance folks might need to get involved because they need to be reporting things to regulators. And the list goes on. There's, like, this need for a bunch of different people who almost certainly have never worked together or rarely worked together to come together, land in this sort of like empty space of this incident room or virtual incident room, and figure out how they're going to coordinate their response and get things back on track in the sort of most streamlined way and as quick as possible.Corey: Yeah, when your bank is suddenly offline, that seems like a really inopportune time to be introduced to the database team. It's, “Oh, we have one of those. Wonderful. I feel like you folks are going to come in handy later today.” You want to have those pathways of communication open well in advance of these issues.Chris: A hundred percent. And I think the thing that makes incidents unique is that fact. And I think the solution to that is this sort of consistent, level playing field that you can put everybody on. So, if everybody understands that the way that incidents are dealt with is consistent, we declare it like this, and under these conditions, these things happen. And, you know, if I flag this kind of level of impact, we have to pull in someone else to come and help make a decision.At the core of it, there's this weird kind of duality to incidents where they are both kind of semi-formulaic and that you can basically encode a lot of the processes that happen, but equally, they are incredibly chaotic and require a lot of human impact to be resilient and figure these things out because stuff that you have never seen happen before is happening and failing in ways that you never predicted. And so, this is where incident.io plays into this is that we try to take the first half of that off of your hands, which is, we will help you run your process so that all of the brain capacity you have, it goes on to the bit that humans are uniquely placed to be able to do, which is responding to these very, very chaotic, sort of, surprise events that have happened.Corey: I feel as well—because I played around in this space a bit before I used to run ops teams—and, more or less I really should have had a t-shirt then that said, “I am the root cause,” because yeah, I basically did a lot of self-inflicted outages in various environments because it turns out, I'm not always the best with computers. Imagine that. There are a number of different companies that play in the space that look at some part of the incident lifecycle. And from the outside, first, they all look alike because it's, “Oh, so you're incident.io. I assume you're PagerDuty. You're the thing that calls me at two in the morning to make sure I wake up.”Conversely, for folks who haven't worked deeply in that space, as well, of setting things on fire, what you do sounds like it's highly susceptible to the Hacker News problem. Where, “Wait, so what you do is effectively just getting people to coordinate and talk during an incident? Well, that doesn't sound hard. I could do that in a weekend.” And no, no, you can't.If this were easy, you would not have been in business as long as you have, have the team the size that you do, the customers that you do. But it's one of those things that until you've been in a very specific set of a problem, it doesn't sound like it's a real problem that needs solving.Chris: Yeah, I think that's true. And I think that the Hacker News point is a particularly pertinent one and that someone else, sort of, in an adjacent area launched on Hacker News recently, and the amount of feedback they got around, you know, “You're a Slack bot. How is this a company?” Was kind of staggering. And I think generally where that comes from is—well, first of all that bias that engineers have, which is just everything you look at as an engineer is like, “Yeah, I can build that in a weekend.” I think there's often infinite complexity under the hood that just gets kind of brushed over. But yeah, I think at the core of it, you probably could build a Slack bot in a weekend that creates a channel for you in Slack and allows you to post somewhere that some—Corey: Oh, good. More channels in Slack. Just when everyone wants.Chris: Well, there you go. I mean, that's a particular pertinent one because, like, our tool does do that. And one of the things—so I built at Monzo, a version of incident.io that we used at the company there, and that was something that I built evenings and weekends. And among the many, many things I never got around to building, archiving and cleaning up channels was one of the ones that was always on that list.And so, Monzo did have this problem of littered channels everywhere, I think that sort of like, part of the problem here is, like, it is easy to look at a product like ours and sort of assume it is this sort of friendly Slack bot that helps you orchestrate some very basic commands. And I think when you actually dig into the problems that organizations above a certain size have, they're not solved by Slack bots. They're solved by platforms that help you to encode your processes that otherwise have to live on a Google Doc somewhere which is five pages long and when it's 2 a.m. and everything's on fire, I guarantee you not a single person reads that Google Doc, so your process is as good as not in place at all. That's the beauty of a tool like ours. We have a powerful engine that helps you basically to encode that and take some load off of you.Corey: To be clear, I'm also not coming at this from a position of judging other people. I just look right now at the Slack workspace that we have The Duckbill Group, and we have something like a ten-to-one channel-to-human ratio. And the proliferation of channels is a very real thing. And the problem that I've seen across the board with other things that try to address incident management has always been fanciful at best about what really happens when something breaks. Like, you talk about, oh, here's what happens. Step one: you will pull up the Google Doc, or you will pull up the wiki or the rest, or in some aspirational places, ah, something seems weird, I will go open a ticket in Jira.Meanwhile, here in reality, anyone who's ever worked in these environments knows that step one, “Oh shit, oh shit, oh shit, oh shit, oh shit. What are we going to do?” And all the practices and procedures that often exist, especially in orgs that aren't very practiced at these sorts of things, tend to fly out the window and people are going to do what they're going to do. So, any tool or any platform that winds up addressing that has to accept the reality of meeting people where they are not trying to educate people into different patterns of behavior as such. One of the things I like about your approach is, yeah, it's going to be a lot of conversation in Slack that is a given we can pretend otherwise, but here in reality, that is how work gets communicated, particularly in extremis. And I really appreciate the fact that you are not trying to, like, fight what feels almost like a law of nature at this point.Chris: Yeah, I think there's a few things in that. The first point around the document approach or the clearly defined steps of how an incident works. In my experience, those things have always gone wrong because—Corey: The data center is down, so we're going to the wiki to follow our incident management procedure, which is in the data center just lost power.Chris: Yeah.Corey: There's a dependency problem there, too. [laugh].Chris: Yeah, a hundred percent. [laugh]. A hundred percent. And I think part of the problem that I see there is that very, very often, you've got this situation where the people designing the process are not the people following the process. And so, there's this classic, I've heard it through John Allspaw, but it's a bunch of other folks who talk about the difference between people, you know, at the sharp end or the blunt end of the work.And I think the problem that people are facing the past is you have these people who sit in the, sort of, metaphorical upstairs of the office and think that they make a company safe by defining a process on paper. And they ship the piece of paper and go, “That is a good job for me done. I'm going to leave and know that I've made the bank—the other whatever your organization does—much, much safer.” And I think this is where things fall down because—Corey: I want to ambush some of those people in their performance reviews with, “Cool. Just for fun, all the documentation here, we're going to pull up the analytics to see how often that stuff gets viewed. Oh, nobody ever sees it. Hmm.”Chris: It's frustrating. It's frustrating because that never ever happens, clearly. But the point you made around, like, meeting people where you are, I think that is a huge one, which is incidents are founded on great communication. Like, as I said earlier, this is, like, a form of team with someone you've never ever worked with before and the last thing you want to do is be, like, “Hey, Corey, I've never met you before, but let's jump out onto this other platform somewhere that I've never been or haven't been for weeks and we'll try and figure stuff out over there.” It's like, no, you're going to be communicating—Corey: We use Slack internally, but we have a WhatsApp chat that we wind up using for incident stuff, so go ahead and log into WhatsApp, which you haven't done in 18 months, and join the chat. Yeah, in the dawn of time, in the mists of antiquity, you vaguely remember hearing something about that your first week and then never again. This stuff has to be practiced and it's important to get it right. How do you approach the inherent and often unfortunate reality that incident response and management inherently becomes very different depending upon the specifics of your company or your culture or something like that? In other words, how cookie-cutter is what you have built versus adaptable to different environments it finds itself operating in?Chris: Man, the amount of time we spent as a founding team in the early days deliberating over how opinionated we should be versus how flexible we should be was staggering. The way we like to describe it as we are quite opinionated about how we think incidents should be run, however we let you imprint your own process into that, so putting some color onto that. We expect incidents to have a lead. That is something you cannot get away from. However, you can call the lead whatever makes sense for you at your organization. So, some folks call them an incident commander or a manager or whatever else.Corey: There's overwhelming militarization of these things. Like, oh, yes, we're going to wind up taking a bunch of terms from the military here. It's like, you realize that your entire giant screaming fire is that the lights on the screen are in the wrong pattern. You're trying to make them in the right pattern. No one dies here in most cases, so it feels a little grandiose for some of those terms being tossed around in some cases, but I get it. You've got to make something that is unpleasant and tedious in many respects, a little bit more gripping. I don't envy people. Messaging is hard.Chris: Yeah, it is. And I think if you're overly virtuoustic and inflexible, you're sort of fighting an uphill battle here, right? So, folks are going to want to call things what they want to call things. And you've got people who want to import [ITIL 00:15:04] definitions for severity ease into the platform because that's what they're familiar with. That's fine.What we are opinionated about is that you have some severity levels because absent academic criticism of severity levels, they are a useful mechanism to very coarsely and very quickly assess how bad something is and to take some actions off of it. So yeah, we basically have various points in the product where you can customize and put your own sort of flavor on it, but generally, we have a relatively opinionated end-to-end expectation of how you will run that process.Corey: The thing that I find that annoys me—in some cases—the most is how heavyweight the process is, and it's clearly built by people in an ivory tower somewhere where there's effectively a two-day long postmortem analysis of the incident, and so on and so forth. And okay, great. Your entire site has been blown off the internet, yeah, that probably makes sense. But as soon as you start broadening that to things like okay, an increase in 500 errors on this service for 30 minutes, “Great. Well, we're going to have a two-day postmortem on that.” It's, “Yeah, sure would be nice if we could go two full days without having another incident of that caliber.” So, in other words, whose foot—are we going to hire a new team whose full-time job it is, is to just go ahead and triage and learn from all these incidents? Seems to me like that's sort of throwing wood behind the wrong arrows.Chris: Yeah, I think it's very reductive to suggest that learning only happens in a postmortem process. So, I wrote a blog, actually, not so long ago that is about running postmortems and when it makes sense to do it. And as part of that, I had a sort of a statement that was [laugh] that we haven't run a single postmortem when I wrote this blog at incident.io. Which is probably shocking to many people because we're an incident company, and we talk about this stuff, but we were also a company of five people and when something went wrong, the learning was happening and these things were sort of—we were carving out the time, whether it was called a postmortem, or not to learn and figure out these things. Extrapolating that to bigger companies, there is little value in following processes for the sake of following processes. And so, you could have—Corey: Someone in compliance just wound up spitting their coffee over their desktop as soon as you said that. But I hear you.Chris: Yeah. And it's those same folks who are the ones who care about the document being written, not the process and the learning happening. And I think that's deeply frustrating to me as—Corey: All the plans, of course, assume that people will prioritize the company over their own family for certain kinds of disasters. I love that, too. It's divorced from reality; that's ridiculous, on some level. Speaking of ridiculous things, as you continue to grow and scale, I imagine you integrate with things beyond just Slack. You grab other data sources and over in the fullness of time.For example, I imagine one of your most popular requests from some of your larger customers is to integrate with their HR system in order to figure out who's the last engineer who left, therefore everything immediately their fault because lord knows the best practice is to pillory whoever was the last left because then they're not there to defend themselves anymore and no one's going to get dinged for that irresponsible jackass's decisions, even if they never touched the system at all. I'm being slightly hyperbolic, but only slightly.Chris: Yeah. I think [laugh] that's an interesting point. I am definitely going to raise that feature request for a prefilled root cause category, which is, you know, the value is just that last person who left the organization. That it's a wonderful scapegoat situation there. I like it.To the point around what we do integrate with, I think the thing is actually with incidents that's quite interesting is there is a lot of tooling that exists in this space that does little pockets of useful, valuable things in the shape of incidents. So, you have PagerDuty is this system that does a great job of making people's phone making noise, but that happens, and then you're dropped into this sort of empty void of nothingness and you've got to go and figure out what to do. And then you've got things like Jira where clearly you want to be able to track actions that are coming out of things going wrong in some cases, and that's a great tool for that. And various other things in the middle there. And yeah, our value proposition, if you want to call it that, is to bring those things together in a way that is massively ergonomic during an incident.So, when you're in the middle of an incident, it is really handy to be able to go, “Oh, I have shipped this horrible fix to this thing. It works, but I must remember to undo that.” And we put that at your fingertips in an incident channel from Slack, that you can just log that action, lose that cognitive load that would otherwise be there, move on with fixing the thing. And you have this sort of—I think it's, like, that multiplied by 1000 in incidents that is just what makes it feel delightful. And I cringe a little bit saying that because it's an incident at the end of the day, but genuinely, it feels magical when some things happen that are just like, “Oh, my gosh, you've automatically hooked into my GitHub thing and someone else merged that PR and you've posted that back into the channel for me so I know that that happens. That would otherwise have been a thing where I jump out of the incident to go and figure out what was happening.”Corey: This episode is sponsored in part by our friend EnterpriseDB. EnterpriseDB has been powering enterprise applications with PostgreSQL for 15 years. And now EnterpriseDB has you covered wherever you deploy PostgreSQL on-premises, private cloud, and they just announced a fully-managed service on AWS and Azure called BigAnimal, all one word. Don't leave managing your database to your cloud vendor because they're too busy launching another half-dozen managed databases to focus on any one of them that they didn't build themselves. Instead, work with the experts over at EnterpriseDB. They can save you time and money, they can even help you migrate legacy applications—including Oracle—to the cloud. To learn more, try BigAnimal for free. Go to biganimal.com/snark, and tell them Corey sent you.Corey: The problem with the cloud, too, is the first thing that, when there starts to be an incident happening is the number one decision—almost the number one decision point is this my shitty code, something we have just pushed in our stuff, or is it the underlying provider itself? Which is why the AWS status page being slow to update is so maddening. Because those are two completely different paths to go down and you are having to pursue both of them equally at the same time until one can be ruled out. And that is why time to identify at least what side of the universe it's on is so important. That has always been a bit of a tricky challenge.I want to talk a bit about circular dependencies. You target a certain persona of customer, but I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that one explicit company that you are not going to want to do business with in your current iteration is Slack itself because a tool to manage—okay, so our service is down, so we're going to go to Slack to fix it doesn't work when the service is Slack itself. So, that becomes a significant challenge. As you look at this across the board, are you seeing customers having problems where you have circular dependency issues with this? Easy example: Slack is built on top of AWS.When there's an underlying degradation of, huh, suddenly us-east-1 is not doing what it's supposed to be doing, now, Slack is degraded as well, as well as the customer site, it seems like at that point, you're sort of in a bit of tricky positioning as a customer. Counterpoint, when neither Slack nor your site are working, figuring out what caused that issue doesn't seem like it's the biggest stretch of the imagination at that point.Chris: I've spent a lot of my career working in infrastructure, platform-type teams, and I think you can end up tying yourself in knots if you try and over-optimize for, like, avoiding these dependencies. I think it's one of those, sort of, turtles all the way down situations. So yes, Slack are unlikely to become a customer because they are clearly going to want to use our product when they are down.Corey: They reach out, “We'd like to be your customer.” Your response is, “Please don't be.” None of us are going to be happy with this outcome.Chris: Yeah, I mean, the interesting thing that is that we're friends with some folks at Slack, and they believe it or not, they do use Slack to navigate their incidents. They have an internal tool that they have written. And I think this sort of speaks to the point we made earlier, which is that incidents and things failing or not these sort of big binary events. And so—Corey: All of Slack is down is not the only kind of incident that a company like Slack can experience.Chris: I'd go as far as that it's most commonly not that. It's most commonly that you're navigating incidents where it is a degradation, or some edge case, or something else that's happened. And so, like, the pragmatic solution here is not to avoid the circular dependencies, in my view; it's to accept that they exist and make sure you have sensible escape hatches so that when something does go wrong—so a good example, we use incident.io at incident.io to manage incidents that we're having with incident.io. And 99% of the time, that is absolutely fine because we are having some error in some corner of the product or a particular customer is doing something that is a bit curious.And I could count literally on one hand the number of times that we have not been able to use our products to fix our product. And in those cases, we have a fallback which is jump into—Corey: I assume you put a little thought into what happened. “Well, what if our product is down?” “Oh well, I guess we'll never be able to fix it or communicate about it.” It seems like that's the sort of thing that, given what you do, you might have put more than ten seconds of thought into.Chris: We've put a fair amount of thought into it. But at the end of the day, [laugh] it's like if stuff is down, like, what do you need to do? You need to communicate with people. So, jump on a Google Chat, jump on a Slack huddle, whatever else it is we have various different, like, fallbacks in different order. And at the core of it, I think this is the thing is, like, you cannot be prepared for every single thing going wrong, and so what you can be prepared for is to be unprepared and just accept that humans are incredibly good at being resilient, and therefore, all manner of things are going to happen that you've never seen before and I guarantee you will figure them out and fix them, basically.But yeah, I say this; if my SOC 2 auditor is listening, we also do have a very well-defined, like, backup plan in our SOC 2 [laugh] in our policies and processes that is the thing that we will follow that. But yeah.Corey: The fact that you're saying the magic words of SOC 2, yes, exactly. Being in a responsible adult and living up to some baseline compliance obligations is really the sign of a company that's put a little thought into these things. So, as I pull up incident.io—the website, not the company to be clear—and look through what you've written and how you talk about what you're doing, you've avoided what I would almost certainly have not because your tagline front and center on your landing page is, “Manage incidents at scale without leaving Slack.” If someone were to reach out and say, well, we're down all the time, but we're using Microsoft Teams, so I don't know that we can use you, like, the immediate instinctive response that I would have for that to the point where I would put it in the copy is, “Okay, this piece of advice is free. I would posit that you're down all the time because you're the kind of company to use Microsoft Teams.” But that doesn't tend to win a whole lot of friends in various places. In a slightly less sarcastic bent, do you see people reaching out with, “Well, we want to use you because we love what you're doing, but we don't use Slack.”Chris: Yeah. We do. A lot of folks actually. And we will support Teams one day, I think. There is nothing especially unique about the product that means that we are tied to Slack.It is a great way to distribute our product and it sort of aligns with the companies that think in the way that we do in the general case but, like, at the core of what we're building, it's a platform that augments a communication platform to make it much easier to deal with a high-stress, high-pressure situation. And so, in the future, we will support ways for you to connect Microsoft Teams or if Zoom sought out getting rich app experiences, talk on a Zoom and be able to do various things like logging actions and communicating with other systems and things like that. But yeah, for the time being very, very deliberate focus mechanism for us. We're a small company with, like, 30 people now, and so yeah, focusing on that sort of very slim vertical is working well for us.Corey: And it certainly seems to be working to your benefit. Every person I've talked to who is encountered you folks has nothing but good things to say. We have a bunch of folks in common listed on the wall of logos, the social proof eye chart thing of here's people who are using us. And these are serious companies. I mean, your last job before starting incident.io was at Monzo, as you mentioned.You know what you're doing in a regulated, serious sense. I would be, quite honestly, extraordinarily skeptical if your background were significantly different from this because, “Well, yeah, we worked at Twitter for Pets in our three-person SRE team, we can tell you exactly how to go ahead and handle your incidents.” Yeah, there's a certain level of operational maturity that I kind of just based upon the name of the company there; don't think that Twitter for Pets is going to nail. Monzo is a bank. Guess you know what you're talking about, given that you have not, basically, been shut down by an army of regulators. It really does breed an awful lot of confidence.But what's interesting to me is the number of people that we talk to in common are not themselves banks. Some are and they do very serious things, but others are not these highly regulated, command-and-control, top-down companies. You are nimble enough that you can get embedded at those startup-y of startup companies once they hit a certain point of scale and wind up helping them arrive at a better outcome. It's interesting in that you don't normally see a whole lot of tools that wind up being able to speak to both sides of that very broad spectrum—and most things in between—very effectively. But you've somehow managed to thread that needle. Good work.Chris: Thank you. Yeah. What else can I say other than thank you? I think, like, it's a deliberate product positioning that we've gone down to try and be able to support those different use cases. So, I think, at the core of it, we have always tried to maintain the incident.io should be installable and usable in your very first incident without you having to have a very steep learning curve, but there is depth behind it that allows you to support a much more sophisticated incident setup.So, like, I mean, you mentioned Monzo. Like, I just feel incredibly fortunate to have worked at that company. I joined back in 2017 when they were, I don't know, like, 150,000 customers and it was just getting its banking license. And I was there for four years and was able to then see it scale up to 6 million customers and all of the challenges and pain that goes along with that both from building infrastructure on the technical side of things, but from an organizational side of things. And was, like, front-row seat to being able to work with some incredibly smart people and sort of see all these various different pain points.And honestly, it feels a little bit like being in sort of a cheat mode where we get to this import a lot of that knowledge and pain that we felt at Monzo into the product. And that happens to resonate with a bunch of folks. So yeah, I feel like things are sort of coming out quite well at the moment for folks.Corey: The one thing I will say before we wind up calling this an episode is just how grateful I am that I don't have to think about things like this anymore. There's a reason that the problem that I chose to work on of expensive AWS bills being very much a business-hours only style of problem. We're a services company. We don't have production infrastructure that is externally facing. “Oh, no, one of our data analysis tools isn't working internally.”That's an interesting curiosity, but it's not an emergency in the same way that, “Oh, we're an ad network and people are looking at ads right now because we're broken,” is. So, I am grateful that I don't have to think about these things anymore. And also a little wistful because there's so much that you do it would have made dealing with expensive and dangerous outages back in my production years a lot nicer.Chris: Yep. I think that's what a lot of folks are telling us essentially. There's this curious thing with, like, this product didn't exist however many years ago and I think it's sort of been quite emergent in a lot of companies that, you know, as sort of things have moved on, that something needs to exist in this little pocket of space, dealing with incidents in modern companies. So, I'm very pleased that what we're able to build here is sort of working and filling that for folks.Corey: Yeah. I really want to thank you for taking so much time to go through the ethos of what you do, why you do it, and how you do it. If people want to learn more, where's the best place for them to go? Ideally, not during an incident.Chris: Not during an incident, obviously. Handily, the website is the company name. So, incident.io is a great place to go and find out more. We've literally—literally just today, actually—launched our Practical Guide to Incident Management, which is, like, a really full piece of content which, hopefully, will be useful to a bunch of different folks.Corey: Excellent. We will, of course, put a link to that in the [show notes 00:29:52]. I really want to thank you for being so generous with your time. Really appreciate it.Chris: Thanks so much. It's been an absolute pleasure.Corey: Chris Evans, Chief Product Officer and co-founder of incident.io. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this episode, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice along with an angry comment telling me why your latest incident is all the intern's fault.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.

Chris switched from Trello over to Linear for product management and talks about prioritizing backlogs. Steph shares and discusses a tweet from Curtis Einsmann that super resonated with the work she's doing right now: "In software engineering, rabbit holes are inevitable. You will research libraries and not use them. You'll write code just to delete it. This isn't a waste; sometimes, you need to go down a few wrong paths to get to the right one." This episode is brought to you by BuildPulse (https://buildpulse.io/bikeshed). Start your 14-day free trial of BuildPulse today. Linear (https://linear.app/) Curtis Einsmann Tweet (https://twitter.com/curtiseinsmann/status/1521451508943843329) Louie Bacaj Tweet (https://twitter.com/LBacaj/status/1478241322637033474?s=20) Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: AD: Flaky tests take the joy out of programming. You push up some code, wait for the tests to run, and the build fails because of a test that has nothing to do with your change. So you click rebuild and you wait. Again. And you hope you're lucky enough to get a passing build this time. Flaky tests slow everyone down, break your flow and make things downright miserable. In a perfect world, tests would only break if there's a legitimate problem that would impact production. They'd fail immediately and consistently, not intermittently. But the world's not perfect, and flaky tests will happen, and you don't have time to fix them all today. So how do you know where to start? BuildPulse automatically detects and tracks your team's flaky tests. Better still, it pinpoints the ones that are disrupting your team the most. With this list of top offenders, you'll know exactly where to focus your effort for maximum impact on making your builds more stable. In fact, the team at Codecademy was able to identify their flakiest tests with BuildPulse in just a few days. By focusing on those tests first, they reduced their flaky builds by more than 68% in less than a month! And you can do the same because BuildPulse integrates with the tools you're already using. It supports all the major CI systems, including CircleCI, GitHub Actions, Jenkins, and others. And it analyzes test results for all popular test frameworks and programming languages, like RSpec, Jest, Go, pytest, PHPUnit, and more. So stop letting flaky tests slow you down. Start your 14-day free trial of BuildPulse today. To learn more, visit buildpulse.io/bikeshed. That's buildpulse.io/bikeshed. CHRIS: Good morning, and welcome to Tech Talk with Steph and Chris. Today at the top of the hour, it's tech traffic hits. STEPH: Ooh, tech traffic. [laughs] I like that statement. CHRIS: Yeah. The Git lanes are clogged up with...I don't know. I got nothing. STEPH: [laughs] Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What's new in my world? Actually, I have a specific new thing that I can share, which is, as of the past week, I would say, switched from Trello over to Linear for product management. It's been great. It was a super straightforward transfer. They actually had an importer. We lost some of the comment threads on the Trello cards. But that was easy enough to like each Linear ticket has a link back to Trello. So it's easy enough to keep the continuity. But yeah, we're in a whole new world, a system actually built for maintaining a product backlog, and, man, it shows. Trello was a bunch of lists and cards and stuff that you could link between, which was cool. But Linear is just much more purpose-built and already very, very nice. And we're very happy with the switch. STEPH: I feel like you came in real casual with that news, but that is big news, that you did a switch. [laughter] CHRIS: How are you going to bury the lead like that? You switched project management...[laughter] I actually didn't think it was...I'm excited about it but low-key excited, which is weird because I do like productivity and task management software. So you would think I would be really excited about this. But I've also tried enough of them historically to know that that's never going to be the thing that actually makes or breaks your team's productivity. It can make things worse, but it can't make you great. That's the thing that I believe. And so it's a wonderful piece of software. I'm very excited about it but -- STEPH: Ooh, I like that. It can make you worse, but it doesn't make you great. That's so true, yeah, where it causes pain. Well, and it does make sense. You've been complaining a bit about the whole login with Trello and how that's been frustrating. But I haven't even heard of Linear. That's just...that's, I mean, you're just doing what you do where you bring that new-new. I haven't heard of Linear before. CHRIS: I try to live on the cutting edge. Actually, I deeply try to not live on the cutting edge at this point in my life. That early adopter wave, no, no, no, that's not for me anymore. But I've known a few folks who've moved to Linear. And everyone that I've spoken to who has moved to it has been like, "Yeah, it's been great." I've not heard anything negative. And I've heard or experienced negative things about every other product management tool out there. And so, it seemed like an easy thing. And it was a low-cost enough switch in terms of opportunity costs or the like, it took the effort of someone on our team moving those cards over and setting up the new system and training, but it was relatively straightforward. And yeah, we're super happy with it. And it feels different now. I feel like I can see the work in a different way which is interesting. I think we had brought in a Chrome extension for Trello. I think it's like Hello Epics or something like that that allows...it abuses the card linking functionality in Trello and repurchases that feature as an epic management thing. But it's quarter-baked is how I would describe it, or it's clearly built on top of existing things that were not intended to be used exactly in that way. So it does a great job. Hello Epics does a great job of trying to make something like parent-child list management stuff happen in Trello. But it's always going feel like an afterthought, a secondary feature, something that's bolted on. Whereas in Linear, it's like, no, no, we absolutely have the idea of projects, of course, and you can see burndown charts and things. And the thing that I do want to be careful about is not leaning too much into management. Linear has the idea of cycles or sprints, as many other folks think of them, or iterations or whatever you want to call them. But we've largely not been working in that mode. We've just continued to work through the next up list; that's it. The next up list should be prioritized and well defined at the top and roughly in priority order. So just pick up the next card and work on it. And we just do that every single day. And now we're in a piece of software that has the idea of cycles, and I'm like, oh, this is vaguely interesting. Do we want to do that? Oh, but if you're going to do that, you probably do some estimation, right? And I was like, oh no, now we're into a place that's...okay, I have feelings. I got to decide how to approach that. And so, I am intrigued. And I wonder if we could just say like ten carts that's how many come into a cycle, and that's it. And we use the loosest heuristics possible to define how we structure a cycle so that we don't fall into the trap of, oh, what's our roadmap going to look like six months from now? JK, what's anything going to look like six months from now? That's not a knowable fact. STEPH: I was just thinking where you said that you're moving into sprints or cycles, and then there's that push, well, now you got to estimate. And I just thought, do you? Do you have to estimate? [laughs] CHRIS: We need a burndown chart through 2024, and it must be meticulously accurate down to the hour. STEPH: I think meticulously wrong is how that goes. [laughs] CHRIS: Which is the best kind of wrong. If you're going to be wrong, be meticulous about it. STEPH: Be thorough about it. [laughs] Yeah, the team that I'm on right now, we have our bi-weekly planning, and we go through the board, and we pull stuff in. But there's never a discussion about estimation. And I hadn't really appreciated that until just now. How we don't think about how long is this going to take? We just talked about, well, what's in-flight? And how much work do people still have going on? And then here's the list of things we can pull in. But there's always a list that you can go back to. Like, it's very...we pull in the minimum and knowing that if we run out of work, there's another place to go where there's stuff that's organized. And I just love that cadence, that idea of like, let's not try to make guesses about the future; let's just have it lined up and ready for us to go when we're ready to pull it in. Although I know, that's also coming from a very developer's perspective, and there are product managers who are trying to communicate as to when features are going to get out into the world. So I get that there's a balance, but I still have strong feelings and hesitations around estimating work. CHRIS: Well, I feel like there is a balance there. And so many things in history are like, well, this is an overcorrection against that, and that's an overcorrection against this. And the idea that we can estimate our work that far out into the future that's just obviously false to me based on every project I've ever worked on that has tried to do it. And it has always failed without question. But critically, there is the necessity to sync up work and like, oh, marketing needs to plan the launch of this feature, and it's a critical one. What's it going to look like? When's it going to be ready? You know, we're trying to go for an event, it's not just know...we developers never estimate anything past the immediate moment where like, that's not acceptable. We got to find a middle ground here. But where that middle ground is, is interesting. And so, just operating in the sort of we do work as it comes up is the easiest thing because no one's lying about anything at that point. But sometimes you got to make some guesses and make some estimations. And then it gets into the murky area of I believe with 75% confidence that in three weeks, we will have this feature ready. But to be clear, I said with 75% confidence that means one-quarter of the time; we will not be there at that date. What does that mean? What does that failure mode look like? Let's talk about that. And can you have honest, open, transparent, useful conversations there? That's the space that it becomes more subtle if you need to do that. STEPH: You're reminding me of a conversation that I had with someone where they shared with me some very aggressive team goals. And it was a very friendly conversation. And they're like, "How do you feel about aggressive goals?" And I was like, "Well, it depends. How do you feel about aggressive failure?" Because then once I know where you stand there, then we can talk about aggressive goals. Now, if we're being aggressive, but then we fail to achieve that, and it's one of those, okay, we didn't meet the goal that we'd expected, but everything is fine, and it's not a big deal, then I am okay. Sure, let's shoot for the stars. But if it's one of those, we are communicating these goals to the outside world, and it's going to become incredibly important that we meet these goals, and if we don't, then things are going to go on fire, people are going to be in trouble, and it's just going to be awful, then let's not set aggressive goals. Let's not box ourselves into a space where we are setting ourselves up to fail or feel pain in a meaningful way. I agree that estimations are important, especially in terms of you need to collaborate with other departments, and then also just to provide some sense of where the product is headed and when things may be released. I think estimations then just become problematic when they do become definite, and they're based on so many unknowns, and then when I don't know is not an answer. So if someone asked, "What's your estimate for this?" And the very honest real answer is I don't know, like, we haven't done this type of work before, or these are all the unknowns, and then someone's like, "Well, let's just put an estimation of like two weeks on it," and they just sort of try to force-fit it into being what they want, then that's where it starts to just feel incredibly problematic. CHRIS: Yeah, estimation is a very murky area that we could spend entire episodes talking about, and in fact, I think we have a handful of times. So with that, Linear has been great. We're going to see just how much or how little estimation we actually want to do. But it's been a very nice addition to the toolset. And I'll let you know as we deepen our usage of it what the experience is like, but that's the main thing that's new in my world. What's new in your world? STEPH: Well, before we bounce over to my world, you said something that has intrigued me that has also made me start reflecting on some of the ways that I like to work. And you'd mentioned that you have this prioritized backlog that people are pulling tickets from. And I don't know exactly if there's a planning session or how that looks, but I have recognized that when I am working with a team, and we don't have any planning session, if everybody is just pulling from this backlog, that's being prioritized by someone on the team, that I find that a bit overwhelming. Because the types of work being done can vary so drastically that I find I'm less able to help my colleagues or my teammates because I don't have the context for what they're working on. It surprises me. I'm like, oh, I didn't even know we're working on that feature, or I don't have the context for what's the problem that we're trying to solve here. And it makes it just a lot harder to review and then have conversations with them. And I get overwhelmed in that environment. And I've recognized that about myself based on previous projects that were more similar to that versus if I'm on a project where the team does get together every so often, even if it's high level to be like, hey, here's the theme of the tickets that we're working on, or here's just some of the stuff, then I feel much more prepared for the work that is coming in and to be able to context switch and review. And yeah, so I've kind of learned that about myself. I'm curious, are you similar, or how does that work for you? CHRIS: I'm definitely similar. And I think probably the team is closer to what you're describing. So we do have a planning session every week, just a quick 30-minute scan through the backlog, look at the things that are coming up and also the larger themes. Previously, Epics and Trello now projects and Linear. But talking about what are the bigger pieces of work that we're moving on, and then what are the individual tickets associated with that that we'll be expecting to work on in the next week? And just making sure that everyone has broad clarity around what that feature set is. Also, we're a very small team at this point. Still, we're four people total, but one of the developers is on a break for a couple of weeks this summer. And so there are really only three of us that are driving on the code. And so, with three of us working on the projects, we try very intentionally to have significant overlap between the various...like, we don't want any one person to own any portion of things at this point. And so we're doing a good amount of pairing to cross-pollinate and make sure everyone's...not everyone's aware of everything, but at least one other person is sufficiently aware of everything between the three of us. And I think that's been working well. I don't think we have any major gaps, save for the way that we're doing our mobile architecture that's largely managed by one of the developers on the team and a contractor that we're working with to help do a lot of the implementation. That's a known we chose to silo that thing. We've accepted the cost of that for now. And architecturally, the rest of us are aware of it, but we're not like in the Swift code writing anything because I don't know how to write Swift at this point. I'd love to learn it. I hear good things about the language. [12:26] So yeah, I think conceptually very similar to what you're describing of still want to have people be able to review. Like, I don't want to put up a PR and people be like, I don't know, that looks like code, I guess. I'm not sure what it does. Like, I want it to be very...I want us all to be roughly on the same page, and thus far, we are. As the team grows, that will become trickier to maintain because there are just inherently probably more things that are moving, more different feature areas and surface area that we're tackling in any given week, or there are different ways to approach that. I know you've talked about having a limited number of themes for a given cycle, so that's an idea that can pop up. But that's something that we'll figure out as we get further. I think I'm happy with where we're at right now, so yeah, that's the story there. STEPH: Okay, cool. Yeah, all of that resonates with me, and thinking about it a little more deeply in this moment, I'm realizing I think something you said helped me put this together where when I'm reviewing someone's change, I'm not necessarily just looking to see does your code work? I'm going to trust you that your code works. I may have thoughts about design and other things, but I really want to understand more what's the change to the product that we're making? What's the goal that we're looking to achieve? How are we measuring this? And so if I don't have that context, that's what contributes to that feeling of like, hard context switching of not just context switching, but now I have to level myself up to then understand the problem that's being solved by this. Versus had I known some of the themes going into that particular cycle or sprint, I would have felt far more prepared for that review session versus having to then dig through all the data and/or tickets or talk to someone. Well, switching back to what's going on in my world, I have a particular tweet that I want to share, and it's one that Joël Quenneville brought to my attention. And it just resonates so much with all the type of work that I'm doing right now. So I'm going to read the tweet, and then we'll link to it in the show notes as well. But it's from Curtis Einsmann, and Curtis wrote: "In software engineering, rabbit holes are inevitable. You will research libraries and not use them. You'll write code just to delete it. This isn't a waste; sometimes, you need to go down a few wrong paths to get to the right one." And that describes all the work that I'm doing right now. It's a lot of exploratory, a lot of data-driven work, and finding ways that we can reduce the time that it takes to run RSpec on CI. And it also ties in nicely to one of the things that I think we talked about last week, where we discovered that a number of files have a high runtime variance. And I've really dug into the data there to understand, okay, is it always specific files that have these high runtime variants? Are there any obvious contributions to what's causing this? Are we making real network calls that then could sometimes take a long time to return? And the result is there's nothing obvious. They're giant files. The number of SQL commands that are being run for each file varies drastically. They're all high, but it's still very different. There's no single fact about these files that has really been like, yes, this is what's causing these files to have such a runtime variance. And so while I've been in the data, I'm documenting it, and I'm making a list and putting it all together in a ticket so at least it's there to look at later. But I'm going to move on. It's one of those I would love to know what's causing this. I would love to address it because it would put us in an ideal state for how we're distributing tests, which would have a significant impact on our runtime. But it also feels a little bit like chasing my tail because I'm worried, like with some of the other experiments that we've done in the past where we've addressed tentpoles, that as soon as you address the issue for one or two files, then other files start having the same problem. And you're just going to continue to chase and chase, and I don't want to be in that. So upfront, this was one of those; hey, let's look at the data. If there's something obvious, let's address it; if not, move on. So I'm at that point today where I'm wrapping up all of that data, and then I'm going to move on, move on to the next thing. CHRIS: There's deep truth in that tweet that you shared at the start of this segment. The idea like if we knew the work that we had to do at the front, yeah, we would just do that, but often, we don't. And so, being able to not treat it as a failure when something doesn't work out is, I think, so critical. I think to expand on the idea just a tiny bit, the idea of the scientific method, failure is totally an option and is part of science. I remember watching MythBusters, and Adam Savage is just kind of like, "Failure is always an option," and highlighting that as part of it. Like, it's an outcome. You've learned something. You have a new data point. You can take that and then carry it forward with you. But it's rough in the moment. And so, I do think that this is a worthwhile thing to meditate on. And it's something that I've had to revisit a handful of times in my career of just like, man, I feel like I've just been spinning my tires all week. I'm like, we know what we want to get done, but just each approach I take isn't working for one reason or another. And then, finally, you get to the end. And then you've got this paragraph-long summary of all the things that didn't work in your PR and one-line change sort of thing. And those are painful, but they're part of the game. Like, that is unavoidable. I have not found a way to just know how to do the work upfront always. I would love that. I would sign up for whatever seminar was selling that. I wouldn't. I would know that that seminar is a lie, actually. But broadly, I'm intrigued by the idea if someone were selling that, I'd be like, well, I mean, pitch me on it. Tell me why I should believe you; I don't, just to be clear. But yeah. STEPH: This project has really helped me embrace always setting a goal or a question upfront about what I'm wanting to achieve or what I'm looking to answer because a number of times while Joël and I have been spelunking through data...And then so originally, with the saga, we started out with why doesn't our math match reality? We understand that if these tests are distributed perfectly across the CPUs, then that should cut the runtime in half. But yet, we weren't seeing that even though we had addressed the tentpoles. So we dug into understanding why. And the answer is because they're not perfectly distributed, and it's because of the runtime variance. And that was a critical moment to look back and say, "Did we achieve the goal?" Yes, we identified the problem. But once you see a problem, it's just so easy to dig in and keep going. It's like, well, now I want to know what's causing these files to have a runtime variance. But it's one of those we achieved our goal. We acknowledged upfront that we wanted to at least understand why. Let's make a second decision, do we keep going? And I'm at that point where, frankly, I probably dug in a little more than I should because I'm stubborn. But I'm recognizing that now's the time to back away and then go back and move on to the next high-priority item, which is converting for funsies; I'll share. The next thing is converting Test::Unit test over to RSpec because we have, I think, around 25 tests that are written in Test::Unit. And we want to move them over to RSpec because that particular just step in the build process takes a good three to four minutes. And part of that is just booting up Rails and then running the tests very fast. And we're underutilizing the machine that's running them because it's only 25 tests, but there are 86 CPUs to run it. So we'd really like to combine those 25 tests with the rest of the RSpec suite and drop that step. So then that should add minimal time to the overall build but then should take us down at least a couple of minutes. And then also makes it easier to manage and help folks so that way, there's one consistent testing framework that's in use versus having to manage some of these older tests. CHRIS: It's funny; I think it was just two episodes back where we talked about why RSpec, and I think both of us were just like, well yeah. But I mean, if there are tests and another, like, it's fine, you just leave them with the exception that if there's like 2% of our tests are in Test::Unit, and everything else is in RSpec, yeah, maybe that that conversion efforts seem totally worth it. But again, I think as you're describing that, what I'm hearing is just like the scientific method, just being somewhat structured in the approach to what's the hypothesis? And what's the procedure we're going to use to determine if that hypothesis is true or false? And then what do we do? And then what are the results? And then you just do that on loop. But being not just sort of exploring. Sometimes you have to be on exploratory mode. But I definitely find that that tiny bit of rigor of just like, wait, okay, before I actually do anything, what do I think is going on here? What's my guess? And then, okay, if that guess were true, what would I be able to observe in the world? Okay, here we go. And just that tiny bit of structure is so...it sometimes feels highly formal to go into that mode and be like, no, no, no, let me take a step back. Let me write down my thoughts. I'm going to have a little checklist and do the thing. But I've never regretted doing it. I will say that. I have deeply regretted not doing it. I feel like I should make a list of things that fit that structure. I've never regretted committing in Git ever. That's been great. I've always been able to unwind it, but I've never been able to not unwind it or the opposite. I've regretted not committing. I have not regretted committing. I have regretted not writing out my hypothesis or approach. I have not regretted doing it. And so, yeah, this feels like it falls firmly in that category of like, it's worth just a tiny bit of structure. There's a reason it is the scientific method. STEPH: Yeah, I agree. I've not regretted documenting upfront what it is I look to achieve and how I think I'm going to answer the question. That has been immensely helpful. Because then I also forget, like, two weeks ago, I'll be like, wasn't there a question around why this was happening, and I need to understand? And all of that was so context-heavy that as soon as I'm out of the thick of it, I completely forget it. So if I care about it deeply or if I want to be able to revisit it, then I need to document it for myself. It's given me a lot of empathy for people who do more scientific research around, oh my gosh, like, you have to document everything you do and then still be able to prove it five years from now or however long. I'm just throwing out numbers. And it needs to be organized enough that someone, if they do question your research that, then you have it there. My research documents would not withstand scrutiny at this point because they are still just more personal notes. But yes, it's given me a lot of empathy and respect for people who do run very serious research, experiments, and trials, and then have to be able to prove it to the world. Pivoting just a bit, there's a particular topic that resonated with both you and I; in fact, it's a particular tweet. And, Louie, I do apologize if I mispronounce your last name, but Louie Bacaj. And we'll include a link in the show notes to the tweet, but Louis shared, "I managed multiple engineering teams before quitting tech. Now that I quit, I can speak freely. Here are 12 things your manager may not be telling you, but I know for a fact will help you." So there are a number of interesting discussions and comments that are in this thread. The one thing in particular that really caught my attention is number 10, and it's "Advocate for junior developers." So they said that their friend reminded them that just because you don't have 10-plus years of experience does not mean that they won't be good. Without junior engineers on the team, no one will grow. Help others grow; you'll grow too. And that's the part that I love so much is that without junior engineers on the team, no one will grow because that was very thought-provoking for me. It's something that I find that I agree with deeply, but I hadn't really considered why I agree with that so much. So I'm excited to dive into that topic with you. And then, as a second topic to go along with that is, can juniors start with a remote team? I think that's one of the other questions when you and I were chatting about this. And I'm intrigued to hear your thoughts. CHRIS: A bunch of stuff there. Starting with the tweet, I love elements of this. Some of it feels like it's intentionally somewhat provocative. So like, without junior engineers on the team, no one will grow. That feels maybe a little bit past the bar because I think we can technically grow, and we can build things and whatnot. But I think what feels deeply true to me is truly help others grow; you'll grow too. The act of mentoring, of guiding, of training, of helping someone on their journey will inherently help you grow and, I think, change the way that you think about the work. I think the beginner mind, the earlier in the career folks coming into a codebase, they will see things fundamentally differently in a really useful way. It's possible that along your career, you've just internalized things. You've been like, yeah, no, that was weird. But then I smashed my head against it for a while, and now I understand this thing. And it just makes sense to me. But it's like, that thing actually doesn't make sense. You have warped your mind to match the thing, not, quote, unquote, "come to understand it." This is sounding too judgmental to people who've been in the industry for a while, but I found this of myself. Or I can just take for granted things that took a long time to adapt my head to, and if anything, maybe I should have pushed back a little more. And so, I find that junior engineers can be a really fantastic lens for the complexity of a project. Like, the world is truly a complex place, and that's just true. But our job as software engineers is to tame that complexity and manage it. And so, I love the mindset that can come or the conversations that can come out of that. And it's much like test-driven development is a pressure on the complexity of your code, having junior engineers join the team and needing to explain how all of the different features work, and what the overall architecture is, and the message passing under this and that, it's a really useful conversation to have. And so that "Help others grow; you'll grow too" feels deeply, deeply true to me. STEPH: Yeah, I couldn't agree more in regards to how juniors really help our team and especially, as you mentioned, with complexity and ¬having those conversations. Some of the other things that have come to mind for me as well around the importance of having junior developers on your team...and maybe it's not specifically they're junior developers but that you just have a variety of experience on your team. It's going to help you lean into a culture of learning because you have people that are at different stages of their career. And so you want an environment where people can learn together, that they can fail together, and they can be public about it. And having people that are at different stages of their career will lead, well, at least ideally, it'll lead to more pair programming. It's going to lead to more productive code reviews because then people can ask more questions around why did you choose this, or why are you doing that? Versus if everybody is at the same level, then they may just intuitively have reasons that they think someone did something. But it takes someone that's a bit new to say, "Hey, why did you choose this?" or to bring up some other ideas or ways that they could pursue it. They may bring in new ideas for, like, why has the team always done something this way? Let's think about new ways that we could do this. Or maybe this is really unfriendly, the way that we're doing this, not just for junior people but for people that are new to the team. And then there's typically less knowledge siloing because then you're going to want to pair the newer folks with the more experienced folks. So that way, you don't have this more senior developer who's then off in a corner working by themselves. And it's going to improve your communication skills. There's just...I realized I'm just rambling because I feel like there are so many benefits that go along with having a variety of people on your team, especially in terms of experience. And that just leads to such a better learning environment and, ultimately, better software and better products. And yet, I find that so many companies won't embrace people that are newer to software. They always want the senior developers. They want the 10x-er or whatever those are. They want the people that have many, many years of experience. And there's so much value that comes from mentoring the next group of developers. And it's incredibly frustrating to me that one, companies often aren't open to it. But honestly, more than that, as long as you're upfront and honest about like, hey, this is the team that we need right now to build what we're looking to build, I can get past that; I can understand that. But please don't then mislead people and say that you're a junior-friendly team, and then not be prepared. I feel like some teams will go so far as to say, "Yes, we are junior-friendly," and they may even tweak their interview process to where it is a bit more junior-friendly. But then, by the time that person joins the team, they're really not prepared. They don't have an onboarding plan. They don't have a mentorship plan. And then they fail that person because that person has worked hard to get there. And they've worked hard to bring that person onto the team, but then they don't have a plan from there. And I've seen it too many times. And it just frustrates me so much because it puts that junior person in such a vulnerable state where they really have to be an incredible self-advocate to then overcome those hurdles from a lack of preparation on that company's part. Okay, I think that's my event. I'm sure I could vent about this a lot more, but I will cut it off there. That's the heart of it. CHRIS: I do think, like, with anything else, it's something that we have to be intentional about. And so what you're saying of like, yeah, we're a junior-friendly company, but then you're just hiring folks, trying to find folks that may work at a slightly lower pay grade, and that's what that means to you. So like, no, no, that's not what this is. This needs to be something different. We need to have a structure and an organization that can support folks at different points in their career. But it's interesting to me to think about the sort of why of it. And the earlier part of this conversation, we talked about some of the benefits that can come organizationally from it, and I do sincerely believe in that. But I also believe that it is fundamentally one of the best ways to find really talented people early on in their career and be in a position to hire them where maybe later on in their career, that just wouldn't happen naturally. And I've seen this play out in a number of organizations. I went to Northeastern University for my college, and Northeastern is famous for the co-op program. Northeastern sounds really fancy. Now I learned that they have like a 7% acceptance rate for college applications right now, which is wildly low. When I went to Northeastern, it was not so fancy. So just in case anyone's hearing that and they're like, "Oh, Northeastern, wow." I'm not that fancy. [laughs] But they did have the co-op then, and they still have it now. And the co-op really is a differentiating thing. You do three six-month rotations. And it is this fundamental differentiator in terms of when you're graduating. Particularly, I was in mechanical engineering. I came out, and I actually knew what that meant in the world. And I'd used Outlook, and I knew what a water cooler was and how to talk near one because that's a critical thing to learn in the world. And really transformative experience for me. But also, a thing that I observed was many of my friends ended up working at companies that they had co-opted for. I'm one of those people. I would say more than 50% of my friends ended up with a position at a company that they had done a co-op rotation with. And it really worked out fantastically. That organization and the individual got to try things out, experience. And then, I ended up staying at that company for a number of years, and it was a wonderful experience. But I don't know that I would have ended up there otherwise. That's not necessarily the way that would have played out. And similarly like, thoughtbot has the apprenticeship. And I have seen so many wonderful developers start at that very early point in their career. And there was this wonderful structure around them joining the thoughtbot team, intentional, structured, supported. And then those folks went on to be some of the most talented developers that I've ever worked with at a wonderfully talented organization. And so the story of like, you should do this, organizations. This is a thing that you should invest in for yourself, not just for the individual, like, for both. Everybody wins in this case, in my mind. I will say, though, in terms of transparency, I currently manage a team of three developers. And we hired very intentionally for senior folks this early on in where we're at. And that was an intentional choice because I do believe that if you're going to be hiring more junior developers, that needs to be something that you do very intentionally, that you have a support structure in place, that you're able to invest the time in where they're at and make sure we have sort of... I think a larger team makes more sense to bring juniors into broadly. That's the thing that I'm saying out loud that I'm like, I should push on that a little bit. Is that true? Do I really believe that? But I think so, my actions obviously point to it. But it is an interesting trade-off space of how do you think about that? My hope is that as we grow as an organization, that we would then very intentionally start hiring folks in a more junior, mid-level to junior and be very intentional about how we support them, bring them into the organization, et cetera. I do believe it is a win-win situation for everyone when done with intention and with focus. STEPH: That's such an interesting bit that you just said because I very much appreciate when companies recognize do we have the bandwidth to support someone that's more junior? Because at thoughtbot, we go through periods where we don't have our apprenticeship that's open because we recognize we're not in a place that we can support someone. And we don't want to bring someone in unless we can help them be successful. I very much admire that and appreciate that about companies when they can perform that self-assessment. I am so intrigued. You'd mentioned being a smaller team. So you more intentionally hire senior developers. And I think that also makes sense because then you need to build up who's going to be in that mentorship pool? Because then people could leave, people could take vacations, and so then you need to have that support system in place. But yeah, I don't know what that then perfect balance is. It's like, okay, so then as soon as you have like five people available to mentor or interested in mentorship, it's like, then do you start bringing in the conversation of like, let's bring in someone that we can help build up and help them be successful and join our team? And I don't know what that magical number is. I do think it's important for teams to reflect to say, "Can we take on someone that's junior?" All the benefits of having someone that's junior. And then just being very honest and then having a plan for once that junior person does arrive. What does their career path look like while they've joined that team, and who's going to be that person that's going to help them level up? So not only make that choice upfront of yes, we are bringing someone on but let's also think about like the first six months of their work here at the company and what that's going to look like. It feels like an important step that a lot of companies fail to do. And I think that's why there are so many articles that then are like, hey, if you're a junior dev, here's all the things that you should do to be the best junior dev. That's fabulous. And we're constantly shoring up junior devs to be like, hey, here's all the things that you need to be great at. But we don't have as many conversations around; hey, here's all the things that your manager or the rest of your team should be great at to then support you equally as you are also doing your best to meet them. Like, they need to meet you halfway. And I'm not completely unsympathetic to the plight; I understand. It's often where I've seen with teams the more senior developers that have very strong mentorship communication skills are then also the teammates that get pulled into all the meetings and all the different projects, so then they are less available to be that mentor. And then that's how this often fails. So I don't think anybody is going into this intentionally, but yet, it's what happens for when someone is new and joining a team, and it hasn't been determined the next six months what that person's onboarding and career path looks like. Circling back just a bit, there's the question around, can juniors start with a remote team? I can go first. And I'm going to say unequivocally yes. There's no reason a junior can't start with a remote team. Because all the things that I feel strongly about come down to how is your team going to plan for this person? And how are they going to support this person? And all the benefits that you get from being in an office with a team, I think those do exist. And frankly, for someone like myself, it can be easier to establish a bond with someone that you get to see each day, get to see in person. You can walk up to their desk and can say, "Hey, I've got a question for you." But I think all those benefits just need to be transferred into a remote-friendly way. So I think it does ratchet up how intentional you have to be with your team and then onboarding a junior developer. But I absolutely think it's doable, and we should do it. CHRIS: You went with unequivocally yes as your answer. I'm going to go with a qualified maybe as my answer. I want this to be true, and I think it can be true. But I think it takes all the more intentionality than even what we've been describing. To shift the question around a little bit, what does remote work mean? It doesn't just mean we're doing the work, but we're separate. I think remote work inherently is at its best when we also are largely async first. And so that means more structured writing. The nature of the conversation tends to be more well-formed in each interaction. So it's like I read a big document, and then I pass it over to you. And at your leisure, you respond to it with a bunch of notes, and then it comes back to me. And I think that mode of interaction, while absolutely wonderful and something that I love, I think it fits really well when you're a little bit further on in your career when you understand things a little bit better. And I think the dance of conversation is more useful earlier on and so forth. And so, for someone who's newer to a team, I think having the ability to ask a quick question over and over is really useful to someone who's early on in their career. And remote, again, I think it's at its best when it's async. And those two are sort of at odds. And so it's that mild tension that gives me pause of like, something that I think that makes remote work great I do think is at least a hurdle that you would have to get over in supporting someone who's a little bit newer. Because I want to be deeply present for someone who's newer to their journey so that they can ask a lot of questions so that I am available to be interrupted regularly. I loved at thoughtbot sitting next to someone and being their mentor and being like, yeah, anytime you want, just tap on my desk. If I got my headphones on, that doesn't mean I'm ignoring you; it means I just need to make the sounds go away for a minute because that's the only way my brain will work. But feel free to just tap on my desk or whatever and grab my attention for a moment. And I'm available for that. That's an intentional choice. That's breaking up my continuity of the day, but we're choosing that for a reason. I think that's just a little harder to do in a remote context and all the more so if we're saying, hey, we're going to try this async thing where we write structured documents, and we communicate in these larger, more well-formed, communicates back and forth. But I do believe it can be done. I think it should be done. I just think it's all the harder for all of those reasons. STEPH: I agree that definitely makes it harder. But I'm going to push a little bit and say that when you mentioned being deeply present, I think we can be deeply present with someone and be remote. We can reduce the async requirements. So if you are someone that is more senior or more accustomed to the team, you can fall back to more of those async ways to communicate. But if someone is new, and needs more mentorship, then let's just set up time where we're going to literally hang out for a couple of hours each day or whatever pairing environment works best for them because pairing can also be exhausting. But hey, we're going to have a check-in each day; maybe we close out each day and touchpoint. And feel free to still message me and interrupt me. Like, you're going to just heighten your availability, even though it is remote. And be aware, like, hey, this person could message me at more times, and I'm okay with that. I have opted into this form of communication. So I think we just take that mindset of, hey, there's this person next to me, and I'm their mentor to like, hey, they're not next to me, but I'm still their mentor, and I'm still here for them. So I agree that it's harder. I think it falls on us and the team and the mentors to change ourselves versus saying to juniors, "Hey, sorry, it's remote. That's not going to work for you." It totally works for them. It's us, the mentors, that need to figure out how to make it work. I will say being on that mentor side that then not being able to see someone so if they are next to me, I can pick up on body language and facial expressions, and I can tell when somebody's stuck. And I can see that they're frustrated, or I can see that now's a good time for me to just be like, "Hey, how's it going? What are you working on? Or do you need help with something?" And I don't have that insight when I'm away. So there are real challenges like that that I don't know how to address. I have gone the obnoxious route [laughs] where I just message people, and I'm like, "Hey, how's it going? How's it going? How's it going?" And I try not to do that too much. But I haven't found a better way to manage that other than to constantly check in because I do have less feedback from that person that I'm working with unless they are just incredibly open about sharing when they're stuck. But typically, when you're newer to a team or newer to a career, you're going to be less willing to share when you're stuck. But yeah, there are some real challenges, but I still think it's something for us to figure out. Because otherwise, if we cut off access for remote teams to junior folks, I mean, that's where we're headed. There are so many companies and jobs that are headed remote that not being junior friendly and being remote in my mind is just not an option. It's something that we need to figure out. And it's hard, but we need to figure it out. CHRIS: Yeah, 100% on we need to figure that out and that that's on us as the people managing and structuring and bringing folks into teams. I think my stance would be like, let's just be clear that this is hard. It takes effort to make sure that we've provided a structure in which someone newer to a team can be successful. It takes all the more effort to do so in a remote context, I think. And it's that recognition that I think is critical. Because if we go into this with the wrong mindset, it's like, oh yeah, it's great. We got this new person on the team. And yeah, they should be ready to go in like two weeks, right? It's like, no, no, this is a different thing. We need to be very clear about it. This is going to require that we have someone who is able to work with them and support them in this. And that means that that person's output will likely be a little bit reduced for the period of time that we're talking about. But we're playing a long game here. Let's make sure we're clear on that. This is intentional. And let's be clear, the world of hiring and software right now it's not like super easy. There aren't way more software developers than there are jobs; at least, that's been my experience. So this is something absolutely worth investing in for just core business reasons and also good for people. So hey, it's a win-win. Let's do it. Let's figure it out. But also, let's be clear that it's going to be a little tricky along the way. So, you know, let's be intentional about that. But yeah, obviously do it, got to do it. STEPH: Wait, so I feel like we might have circled back to unequivocally yes. [laughs] Have we gotten there, or are you still on the fence? CHRIS: I was unequivocally yes from the beginning, but I couched it in, but...yeah, I said other things. You're right. I have now come around; let's say to unequivocally yes. STEPH: [laughs] Cool. I don't want to feel like I'm forcing you to agree with me. [laughs] But I mean, we just so rarely disagree. So we've either got to identify this as something that we disagree on, which would be one of those rare occasions like beer and Pop-Tarts. CHRIS: A watershed moment. Beer and Pop-Tarts. STEPH: Yeah, those are the only two so far. [laughter] CHRIS: Not together also. I just want to go on record beer and Pop-Tarts; I don't think would be...anyway. STEPH: Ooh, I don't know. It could work. It could work. CHRIS: Well, there's another thing we disagree on. STEPH: I would not turn it down. If I was eating a Pop-Tart, and you're like, "Hey, you want a beer?" I'd be like, "Sure," vice versa. I'm drinking a beer. "Hey, you want a Pop-Tart?" "Totally." CHRIS: Okay. Well yeah, if I'm making bad decisions, I'm obviously going to chain them together, but that doesn't mean that they're a good decision. It's just a chain of bad decisions. STEPH: I feel like one true thing I know about you is that when you make a decision, you're going to lean into it. So like, this is why you are all about if you're going to have a Pop-Tart, you're going to have the highest sugary junk content Pop-Tart possible. So it makes sense to me. CHRIS: It's the Mountain Dew theorem, yeah. STEPH: I didn't know this had a theorem. The Mountain Dew theorem? CHRIS: No, that's just my name. Well, yeah, if I'm going to drink soda, I'm going to drink Mountain Dew, the nonsense nuclear option of soda. So yeah, I guess you're describing me, although as you say it back to me, I suddenly feel very, like, oh God, is this who I am as a person? [laughs] And I'm not going to say you're wrong. I'm just going to spend a little while thinking about some stuff. STEPH: I mean, you embrace it. I think that's lovely. You know what you want. It's like, all right, let's do this. Let's go all in. CHRIS: Thank you for finding a wonderfully positive way to frame it here at the end. But I think on that note, should we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeeee!!!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

We've got a tricycle anniversary!

Chris is back from vacation and gives hiring and onboarding updates. Steph has an update about the CI slowdown and scaling CI. They tackle a listener question regarding having some fear around potential merge conflicts. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Deckset (https://www.deckset.com/) parallel_tests (https://github.com/grosser/parallel_tests) paralleltests - important line that may alter the `groupby` strategy (https://github.com/grosser/parallel_tests/blob/9bc92338e2668ca4c2df81ba79a38759fcee2300/lib/parallel_tests/cli.rb#L305) KnapsackPro (https://knapsackpro.com/) rspec-queue (https://github.com/conversation/rspec-queue) Vim Conflicted Overview (https://github.com/christoomey/vim-conflicted#overview) Mastering Git Course on Upcase (https://thoughtbot.com/upcase/mastering-git) Git Object Model (https://thoughtbot.com/upcase/videos/git-object-model) Git Object Model Operations (https://thoughtbot.com/upcase/videos/git-object-model-operations) The Opportunity Will Find You (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/the-opportunity-will-find-you) This episode is brought to you by Studio 3T (https://studio3t.com/free). Try Studio 3T's full suite of features for 30 days, no payment details needed. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: Golden roads are golden. STEPH: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. Oh, I also have a new intro that I want to try out. This is thanks to Irmela from Twitter, where it's good morning and hooray; today is Bike Shed day. They technically said Tuesday, but we don't record on Tuesdays. So today is Bike Shed day, so happy Bike Shed day. And hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What is new in my world? Yeah, I loved when I saw that tweet come out. It really warmed my heart. So Tuesday, in theory, is Bike Shed day, but for you and I, Friday is Bike Shed day. It's confusing breaking the fourth wall, as I so often do. But yeah, what's new in my world? I'm back from vacation, which is the thing that I did. For listeners, well, I have been absent the previous week related to vacation and all those sorts of things. But I did what we're going to describe as a not smart thing. It wasn't intentional. The world just kind of conspired in this way. But I had two separate vacation islands that existed in my mind, and then they both kind of congealed, but as they did that, they moved towards each other, but they didn't connect. And so what I ended up with was two weeks back to back where I was out on Thursday and Friday of one week, and then I was back for Monday and Tuesday. And then I was out for Wednesday, Thursday, Friday of the following week. Protip: that's a terrible idea. It's just not enough time to sort of catch up. The whole of it was like the ramp-up to vacation and then the noise of vacation, then getting back and being like, oh, there are so many emails. Let me try and catch up on them. But also, on the very positive side, we had a new hire join the team, and so most of my focus on the days that I was in the office was around getting that new person comfortable on the team, onboarding, spending as much time as possible with them. And so, all total, it was an adventure. And again, I would strongly recommend against this. The world just kind of conspired, and suddenly these three different forces in my life came together. And this was just the shape of things. But yeah, I went on vacation, and it was great. The vacation part was great. STEPH: I will take your advice. So next time I have like two segments of PTO, I'm just going to stitch them together and just go ahead and take that whole intermittent time off. CHRIS: That probably would have been better. Again, someone new joining the team, it was very important to me to get some time with them early on, and so I opted not to do that. But yeah, the attempt to catch up in between was a completely lost effort, I would say. But I think I'm mostly caught up now, having been back in the office for about a week, so yeah. But let's see, what else has been up in my world? It's actually been a while since you and I have chatted based on the various timing and schedules and the nonsense vacation schedule that I had that you so kindly accommodated across a couple of weeks. Let's see, hiring and onboarding; the hiring went really well. We talked about that a bunch of weeks back. But now we're in the onboarding phase. And so next week will be the first week that all four of us on the engineering team are in the office together for the full week. I'm super excited to experience that. We've had different portions of it, with me being on vacation and other folks being on vacation. But now, for the first time, we're really going to feel what it's like as this team. And we're going to have our first retro as a group and all those sorts of things, so I'm very excited to do that. And thus far, all of the interactions that we've had have been really wonderful as a team. And so now it'll be the first time we're just bringing all of those various pieces together. STEPH: I just have to clarify; you said all of y'all in the office together. Do you still mean remotely? CHRIS: Oh, yes, yes, I just mean not on vacation, all present and accounted for on the internet. Remote is another interesting facet of what we're doing here and trying to figure out how to navigate that, particularly where there are some folks that are closer and can potentially get together in the city, that sort of thing, and then folks that are truly remote and making sure that we're...I'm very much of the opinion if we have anyone that's remote, we are remote team, and we must embrace async communication and really lean into that. And I think the benefits of async communication as its own consideration are so worth it. And it's one of those things that's hard to do. It requires careful, intentional thought. It requires more purposeful communication. But I think there are a lot of good things that fall out of that. It's similar to TDD in that way in my mind, like, it's not easy. It's actually quite difficult. But all the effort that I put into trying to learn how to do that has made me a better developer, I think, on all the various fronts. And I think similarly, async communication I believe in as a tool to force just better communication. And so I'm a big believer in it, and I've found a ton of benefit in remote that I'm also a big believer in that now. I, like everyone else, was forced into it as the world was, but I've really come to enjoy it a lot. And so yeah, so, no, not physically in the office, to answer your very short question with a long rambling aside. STEPH: [laughs] I like that comparison. I hadn't thought about it in that way but comparing that thoughtfulness and helpfulness of async communication and then also to TDD, where it's not easy, but the payoff is so worth it, the upfront cost of it. That is something that at thoughtbot, we've had conversations around where there are folks that really value...they want to be around people. They get energy from people, and so they want that option to be able to rent a WeWork space and maybe get together with a colleague once or twice a week, and that was supported by thoughtbot. But we also wanted to express well, if you are together, do treat everything still as a remote work environment. So let's say if you and your colleagues are on a project, but then there's a third person on that project that's remote, you still need to act like everything's remote to make sure that everyone else is still getting to participate and hear everything and be part of the conversation. So just keeping that in mind that yes, we want to support you doing your best work, and if that's around people, that's wonderful. But we are still remote-first, and communication needs to be in that fashion. Well, that's super exciting that you'll have all of the team together. That sounds like it will be wonderful to hear about and then also retros and meetings, and yeah, it sounds like you've got a fun week ahead. CHRIS: Indeed. I'm super excited to see what sort of new things come out of the new voices on the team and practices that each of the individuals have experienced at other companies that we can now fold together. The work that we've done so far has been very much inspired by thoughtbot ideas, and approaches, and workflows, and processes because that's what I brought to the table. But I'm super excited to bring in more voices and see what of that 100% stays on versus does anything change? Do we get entirely new things? So yeah, very excited about all of that. But to revisit a topic that we've talked about in the past, this week is catching up from vacation, so there's a certain amount that will constrain my work. But this was definitely another week of I did not do much coding. I'm trying to think if I did any coding this week. It's possible that the answer is no. The fact that I don't even know the answer to that is an interesting one. I still have in my mind the desire to get back to it, and I think I will. But there's so much other stuff to do. Recently, this week, there's been a lot of vendor selection and contract negotiation, which is an interesting facet of the work, but just trying to figure out, oh, we need platforms to do X, Y, and Z. And it turns out they're wildly costly and have long sales cycles. And how do you go through that, and how do you make sure that we're getting the right thing? And so that's been a big part of my work. Hiring and onboarding, again, has been a big part of it. There's also some amount of communicating back to the broader team - what are we doing? What is the product organization or the engineering team delivering? And so I'm okay at presentations, I think. I'm comfortable with giving presentations. The thing that I struggle with is finding the optimization point in preparation. I will, of my own accord, over-prepare. And that may sound a little bit like, oh, what's my greatest weakness? That I care too much. But I mean it sincerely as like, I would love to find that right amount of like, it's like an hour of preparation for a 15-minute presentation to the team. That's the right ratio. And I just hit that on the head, and it's great. But whenever I know that I need to give a larger presentation, it will distract me. And it's work that can expand to fill whatever time you give it, and so trying to thread that needle is a tricky one for me. STEPH: Yeah, I'm with you. Presentations, for me, they're one of those things that it's very stressful, anxiety-inducing; all the prep feels distracting from some of the other work that I want to do. Or maybe I'm excited about the presentation, and that is the work that I want to do. But it's not until it's done that then I'm like, oh, that was fun. That went well. This was great. It's not until after that then I feel good about it. So the lead-up to it is very stressful. And so if you can optimize that to say, well, I know exactly what this group needs, where I can cut corners, where I have to go into details, that sounds incredibly valuable. I'm curious, so this is probably a bad idea, but it's the only way I really know how to find those boundaries is you got to experiment and tweak a little bit and let yourself fail a little bit or just be very explicit with folks about this is what the presentation is, if you expected something else, let me know. Or here's what I've got, have someone to bounce ideas off of. But there's such a nicety if you can find that I'm going to try failing just a little bit and get some feedback. Or maybe it's not failing at all, but you are testing that boundary to find out did this work, or should I put more effort into this? I'm curious, do you have thoughts on that? How you're going to find that right optimization level? CHRIS: Not as specific to truly honing in on whatever the correct number is. The thing that I've been doing is I...this will sound complicated, but I wait until the last minute but a specific version of the last minute. So at most, I start working on it an hour and a half before the meeting. And these are, again, not particularly large presentations, and it's a recurring sort of thing. So it's sort of engineering talking about the work that we've done recently and trying to find the right level of detail and whatnot, so giving myself a smaller time window. I think that's enough time to tell the story and to find a meaningful way to tell the story and grab the screenshots and all of that, but it's constrained so that I don't over-optimize, over-edit, overthink. I'm using Deckset, which is a presentation tool that starts from a Markdown file. So it's just a Markdown file that I'm editing. That's great; that works really well. I do not twiddle with fonts. There's one theme that I use. It is white background with black text. That's it. And I think I've given myself deep permission to be the CTO that has a white background with black text and no transitions. I don't even go into presentation mode for it. I'm literally showing the UI of Deckset, and then just hitting the arrow to move between them. But the Chrome and the drop-down menu at the top is still visible because I want to see people's faces as I'm presenting. And I haven't figured out how to do that correctly on my computer. So I'm just presenting the window of Deckset. And I'm like, I have given myself permission to do all of those things, and that has been super helpful, actually. So that's a version of me negotiating what this means. Where I do invest the effort is trying to enumerate all of the things and then understand what is the story that I'm telling around the things and how do I get the message right for the collective audience? So, for a developer team, I would say much more nuanced technical things, for marketing folks, it would be at this end of the spectrum. I do lean on the old idea of, like, let us talk about it in the mindset of the user, so it's very much user-centric, but then some of the things that we're doing are important but invisible to the users. They're part of how we broadly build the platform that we need to, but they're completely invisible to users. And so, how do I then tell that story still with ideally a user-centric point of view? So that's where I do invest the time, and I give myself complete freedom to just grab screenshots, put black text on a white background, and then talk over it. STEPH: I love it. Because you made this comparison earlier, so now I'm thinking of a comparison of like TDD-driven presentations where it's like, what's the end goal? What's the assertion? What's the outcome that I want? And then backfilling from there. Or, in your case, you're talking about what's the story that I need to tell? What's the takeaway that I want people to have? So then you start there, and then you figure out what's the supplemental information that you need to provide to then get there. And the fact that you don't twiddle with fonts and all that stuff, I think you're already really on your way [chuckles] in terms of finding that right optimization of I need to present a clear and helpful message but not sink too much time into this CHRIS: Black text on a white background is very clear. So... STEPH: [laughs] If there are any designers listening to this, they might just be cringing to this conversation right now. [laughs] CHRIS: I actually wonder about what the...I know that dark mode is a thing that lots of folks care about. I'm thinking about the accessibility affordance of it now. I'm actually thinking through it now that I said it somewhat flippantly. I actually don't know what I'm talking about, but it was easy, and it wasn't a choice that I allowed myself to think about. So there we are. Mid-roll Ad Hi, friends, and now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is an application performance monitoring tool that's designed to help developers find and fix performance issues quickly. With an intuitive user interface, Scout will tie bottlenecks to source code so you can quickly pinpoint and resolve performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, and memory bloat. Scout also recently implemented external service monitoring, adding even more granularity when it comes to HTTP requests and API calls. So give Scout a try today with a free 14-day trial and experience first-hand why developers worldwide call Scout their best friend. And as an added bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. To learn more, visit scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: In my personal world, so Tim and I are moving. We're on the move. We are transitioning from South Carolina to North Carolina. So I think I may have shared a bit of this news, but Tim has acquired his first software developer job, which is just phenomenal. It is in North Carolina. He does need to be there in person for it. So we are currently selling our South Carolina house and then moving. It's not too far. It's like three and a half hours away to where we're moving in North Carolina because we're already pretty far in North and South Carolina. So yeah, there's always another box that needs to be packed. And there's always just something else that you forget, another thing that you want to take to Goodwill or try to give to a neighbor. It's a good way to purge. I will definitely say that every time you move, it's a good time to get rid of things. CHRIS: That is a very cup half-full point of view on it, but yeah, it feels true. STEPH: [laughs] It's true. I'm a very cup half-full person. For more technical news, for more client stuff that I've been working on, so I think the last time we chatted, I was sharing that we had this mysterious CI slowdown where we were going from CI builds taking around 25 minutes to spiking to 35, sometimes 45 minutes, and I have an update there. So we found out some really great things, and we have gotten it back down to probably more about 23 minutes is where the CI is running currently. As for the actual who done it, like what caused this specific slowdown, we got to a point where we were like, we're doing so much investigative work to understand exactly what caused this that it felt less helpful because at the end of the day, we really just wanted to address the issue. And so solving the mystery of exactly what caused this started to feel less and less meaningful because we're like, well, we want to improve this anyways. So even if we found that one line or something that happened that caused this, we want a bigger solution to this type of problem because then this could happen again like, someone else maybe adds one line or something happens, and things get thrown off balance, and then suddenly, we have a slowdown, and that just takes too long to investigate. So I don't have a concrete who done it answer for the slowdown. But we've learned a couple of things; one of the things that we learned is we're using parallel_tests to then split our tests across all of the CPUs that are then running the RSpec test. And we realized that we weren't actually splitting tests based on runtime data. So there are a couple of ways that paralleltests will let you divvy up your test, and two of those ways one is file size. So you can split the files based on the size of the file, or you can use info from the runtime log. So then paralleltests can be a little bit more intelligent about like, well, I know how long these files take, so I'm going to split it based on that versus just the size of the file. And we realized that we were defaulting and using the file size instead of the runtime even though we all thought we were using runtime. And the reason for this took a bit of source code diving because looking at the README for paralleltests; it looked like as long as we're passing in a file to the runtime log path, then paralleltests is going to use that runtime data. But then there's some sneaky-sneaky in there that I'll actually link to in the show notes in case anybody's interested. But if you are setting a particular flag and don't pass in another flag, then paralleltests is going to be like, cool, I'm going to portion out your test based on file size instead of the runtime. So we fixed that, or we updated that, and that has had a significant improvement for the test being split out more evenly. So we didn't have a CPU that was taking 25 minutes while the next CPU was only taking like 17 minutes. And paralleltests also provides some really helpful data that because we have that runtime log file, we could tell how long each CPU is running and how they're getting split. So the past couple of weeks, it's heavy measure, measure, measure, take all the data, create lots of graphs, understand what's happening, and then look for ways to then fix it. So figuring out how these files or how the tests were being distributed across, we had a number of graphs that were just showing us what's actually happening. So then we could track the improvement, so that was really nice. It was the measure twice and change something once [laughs], and then we got to see the benefit from it. For scaling the CI, so we are looking on adding more machines to then process tests. That has been really interesting because we're at the point where we are adding more machines, but if we add more machines, we're not going to speed up how quickly our CI processes everything. Because we are splitting tests based on file size and not by examples, we're always going to have this effect of a tentpole. So if we have a file that takes 10 minutes, that's the fastest we're ever going to get. So Joël and I are in discussions right now of where we still really want to understand what's the fastest we can achieve just by adding another machine or two versus are we at the point that, okay, scaling horizontally and adding more machines has been helpful, but we have reached the breaking point where we actually need to divvy out the tests at a smaller scale and have a queue approach? So then that way, we can really harness the power of then we don't have one file that takes 10 minutes, and we don't have to care either. So if somebody adds a test to a file and suddenly a file goes from 12 minutes to like...well, hopefully, they added more than one test. [laughs] But let's say it goes from 10 minutes to 15 minutes; we don't want to have to manage that and understand that there's a tentpole. We just want to be able to divvy out all the examples and then have a queue approach. That's probably going to be MVP two of this, but we're still waiting that out. But it's just been really interesting to realize that scaling horizontally really only takes you so far. Like, we've added one machine, maybe one more, so then we'll have three total. And then it's like, okay, that's great, but now we need to actually address this other bigger problem. CHRIS: I know we've talked about this in previous episodes, but I'm super interested to hear as you progress into the queue approach because that's something that's been top of mind for me for a while. I don't know if we've talked about it before specifically, but Knapsack Pro is the one thing that I'm available as a service that does this. Do you have other tools that you're looking at for that, or is this still in the exploratory phase? STEPH: Knapsack is still a top contender. There's also RSpec Queue; that's another one that we have in mind. Unfortunately, I really wish paralleltests let us do this, but paralleltests just doesn't quite offer that feature. And someone in the team, I think, even reached out to the maintainer of paralleltests, and they were like, "Yep, you're totally right. We're actually more focused in making sure that this works for everybody versus has specific features." And they gave a really nice thoughtful response, which we appreciated, so at least we could confirm that paralleltests won't do exactly the thing that we need. So yeah, RSpec Queue, Knapsack, I think those are the top two that I'm familiar with. CHRIS: Gotcha. I don't know if I've seen RSpec Queue before. I'm intrigued. So actually, an interesting thing happened. While I was away on vacation, one of the folks who just joined the team as one of their first steps joining the team, noticed that our CircleCI config wasn't actually taking advantage of the parallelism that we had configured; that's on me. I turned on parallelism and then never did anything with it, which is a complete waste. And so I was super happy to come back and saw that CI, which had been creeping up to six or seven minutes, had suddenly dropped back down to two to three minutes sort of thing. I was like, this is amazing. But now I'm at the point where our RSpec suite is spreading across the different, I think, it's like four different cores that we have available, but it's not doing it as efficiently as we would like. So I'm like, oh, okay, can we dial it up to 11? But I'm intrigued; I've only looked very much in passing at RSpec Queue literally now that you've mentioned it. But Knapsack Pro exists as a different service. And so, as far as I understand, the agent that's running is going to communicate and say, "Give me another test. Give me another test." But there needs to be some external process running and managing that queue. Does RSpec Queue do that? Somebody owns the queue, right? Who owns it? Do you understand how that works? STEPH: So I was definitely familiar with this. If you'd asked me a couple of weeks ago, when I was diving heavily into the queue work before then, we transitioned more into focusing on then adding new machines; I was very up to speed on this. So I may get a couple of things wrong, but my understanding is that RSpec Queue, you're going to manage your own queue. So you bring in the gem and then use something like Redis, so then you are in charge of that. And with Knapsack, then you are using their service to manage that queue. And then they have found ways to optimize around what if you can't reach their API or something; their service is down? And making sure that that doesn't impact your CI so then you can't still run your test just because you can't reach their queue somewhere. So that's my current understanding, RSpec Queue you own it, Knapsack they're going to own it. CHRIS: Gotcha. That makes sense. That about maps to what I was expecting, and so I wonder if I could use RSpec Queue. Now I'm going to have to go research that. But it's always nice to have new things to look at on this to go at ludicrous speed. That's what I'm going for. I want to get to ludicrous speed for our CI. STEPH: I like that name. I haven't heard of that speed. I feel like I have. I feel like you've dropped that before, [laughs] like you've used that. CHRIS: I don't know; quite possibly, I have. It's a Spaceball's reference. It's a throwback to days of old. STEPH: Well, then we may be investigating RSpec Queue together. Because yeah, Joël's and I goal for this week has been very much to figure out what's our boundaries with TeamCity? What are our boundaries with horizontal scaling? And I think we're both getting to that conclusion of like, okay, this has been good, it's helpful, but we really need to look into the queue stuff if we really want to see significant progress. Also, some of the stuff we're doing because we're pushing on it, we are manually splitting files. So if there's a file that has created this tentpole that's taking 10 minutes, but we know ideally most of the other files only take six minutes, then we are splitting that file, so then we have two spec files that are associated with the same class. And then using that as a way to say, okay, what would this look like? Let's say if this were better balanced. And that's also been pushing us in the direction of like, okay, this is fun, this is informative, but it's not sustainable. We don't want to have to keep worrying about splitting these files and doing this manually and pushing us towards that queue-based approach. MIDROLL AD: And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Studio 3T. When you're developing applications, it can often be a chore to work with your underlying data. Studio 3T equips you with a complete set of tools to work with MongoDB data. From building queries with drag and drop, to creating complex aggregation pipelines; Studio 3T makes it easy. And now, there's Studio 3T Free, a free edition of Studio 3T which delivers an essential core of tools. This means you can get started, for free, with Studio 3T Free and when you're ready, you can upgrade and enjoy even more features through Studio 3T Pro and Studio 3T Ultimate. The different editions unlock more tools and additional integrations with Mongo DB, SQL, Oracle and Sybase. You can start today by downloading Studio 3T Free, which also includes a 30 day free trial of all the features of Studio 3T Ultimate, so you can try out some of the enterprise features as well. No credit card required. To start your trial head to studio3t dot com forward slash free. That's studio dot com forward slash free. But shifting gears just a bit, we have a listener question. So this person wrote in, "I have listened and loved your podcast for many years dreaming of getting a job with people half as thoughtful and intentional as you, and finally it happened. I have my first junior dev job, and my co-workers and bosses are all super awesome. Up until now, I've been flying solo. And in my new job, I've been finding it very unsettling to resolve merge conflicts. As careful as I am to comb through the conflict and contact the other developer if needed, I feel like I am covering my eyes and crossing my fingers whenever I select the resolve conflict button. Is there some type of process or checklist I could rely on? Is it normal to have such a high fear factor with a merge conflict? Any advice or maybe just a bit of been there felt that way...?" All right. So one, that's fabulous, congratulations on the new job. That's very exciting. I think I've voiced this many times, getting your first junior dev job is so hard, and so I'm so excited when it works out for people, and they get there. And then, for the merge conflict, I have thoughts. Chris, do you want to start? Shall I start? How are you feeling? CHRIS: Why don't you start? Well, actually, I'm going to add some pre-commentary, and then I think you should lead into our actual answer. But first, I just want to say a deep thank you to this listener for sending in the question. Again, we really love getting these questions. And also, thank you for the very kind words. To be clear, listener, if you're going to send in a question, you don't have to say very kind words, but they are really wonderful to hear and especially to hear if we had any part in helping this person feel more comfortable getting into that first dev role and having an idea of what maybe a good version of that could look like. Additionally, I really love the shape of this question because it gets into the people stuff and the tech stuff, so I'm super excited about this question. Actually, both Steph you and I responded very quickly to this one. And so it really did catch our attention because I think it crosses that boundary in an interesting way that I think is sort of The Bike Shed space in the world. But to that end, you did reply first in our email chain. So I think you should start, and then I'll follow on after that. STEPH: I should also check with you. Wait, so you don't have a filter on your email that's like kind words only to The Bike Shed, and then you filter out anything that's negative? CHRIS: I have a sentiment analysis, and if it's even neutral, it gets sent straight to the trash, only purely positive. No, constructive feedback is welcome too. We would love to hear that. Well, love is a strong word. We would accept it into our inboxes and then deal with it, but yeah. STEPH: [laughs] It will be tolerated. Must require at least three hearts in all emails; just kidding. [laughs] CHRIS: Are you kidding? I'm counting them now, and I see a lot of hearts in our emails. [laughter] STEPH: Merge conflicts. So is it normal to have such a high fear factor with a merge conflict? I'm going to say absolutely. Resolving a merge conflict can be really tricky and confusing. And I think; frankly, it's something that comes with just time and practice where then you start to feel more confident. As you're resolving these, you're going to feel more comfortable with understanding what's in the branch and the code changes that you're pulling in versus something that you need to keep on your side. So I think over time, that fear will subside. But I do think it's totally normal for that to be a very scary thing that then takes practice to become accustomed to it. As for if there is some type of process or checklist, I don't know of a particular checklist, but I do have a couple of ideas. So one of the things that I do is I will often push my code to whatever management system I'm using. So if I'm using GitHub, then I'm going to push up my branch because then, at least that way, someone has a copy of my work. So if I do something and I completely botch it locally, I know I can always reset to whatever it is that I pushed up to GitHub, so then that way, I have more freedom to make mistakes and then reset from there. So that is one idea is just put it somewhere that you know is safe, so that way you now have this comfortable sandbox to then make mistakes. The other one is run the test. So hopefully, the application that you're working with has tests that you can trust; if not, that could be another conversation. But if they do have tests, then you can run those, and then hopefully, that would let you know that if you have left something in, like maybe you left a syntax error, or maybe you removed some code that you shouldn't have because you weren't sure, then those tests are going to fail, and they'll let you know that something went wrong. And you can run those while you're still in the middle of that merge conflict as long as you've addressed like...well, no, if you haven't addressed syntax errors, that's still a time that you can run it, and it's going to let you know that you haven't caught all of the issues yet. So you don't have to wait till you're done to then go ahead and run that. A couple of other ideas, practice. So go ahead and create your own merge conflicts on purpose. So this is something that I think is really helpful because it will teach you, one, what causes a merge conflict? Because now you have to figure out how to create one, and then it will help you become comfortable because you're in a completely safe place where you have made up the issue, and now you're having to resolve that, so it'll help you become more confident in reading that merge conflict message. And then last but certainly not least, grab a buddy so if you are just feeling super nervous. Anytime I'm doing something that I just feel a little nervous about, then I just ask someone like, "Hey, would you look over my shoulder? Would you pair with me while I do this?" And I have found that's incredibly helpful because it eases some of my fear. I've got someone else that is also looking through this with me. But I also find it really helpful because then it encourages that person to be like, hey, if they're ever in a spot that they need to pair, I want them to know that they can also reach out to me and have that same buddy system. I guess that's my checklist. That's the one I would create. How about you, Chris? What do you think? CHRIS: Well, first, I just want to say that basically everything you said I 100% agree with, and purposely I think was great that you actually replied to the email first and that you're saying those things first because I think everything that you said is true and is foundational. And it's sort of the approach that I would definitely recommend taking as well. My answer, then adding on to that, has to do with how I've approached learning about this space in my own career. To name it, to answer the core question, is it reasonable to be scared of this? Yes, Git is confusing. Git is deeply confusing. I absolutely love Git. I have spent a lot of time trying to understand it, and in understanding it, I've come to love it. But it's only through deep effort that I've gotten to that place. And actually, the interface, the way that we work with Git on a day-to-day basis, particularly the command line is rough. I'm going to say, what does Git checkout do? Well, it does just about everything, it turns out. That command just does all of the stuff, and that's too much. It's, frankly, the UI for Git, specifically the command-line user interface; the commands that we run to manipulate the Git history are not super intuitive. But it turns out if you pop open the hood, the object model underneath the core way that Git stores your code is actually very simple. I find it's very easy to understand, but I, unfortunately, have found that I can't understand it without dropping down to that level. And so, in my own adventures, I kind of went deep on this topic a couple of years ago, and I created a Vim plugin because obviously, that's the best way to encapsulate your knowledge about Git, and so I created a plugin called Vim Conflicted. I don't necessarily recommend the plugin. It's fine if you want to use it. I don't do a great job of maintaining my plugins at this point, to be honest. But there was a weekend where I was trying to understand the world of Git and merge conflicts in particular, and it was really sort of fighting me. And as I started to understand it better, there's a little diagram that I drew on the README that I think is probably the most interesting artifact from it. But it's this idea that there are actually four files, four versions of a given file involved in any merge conflict. And that realization shifted my thinking a good amount. And then as I started to think about that, I was like, oh, okay, and then I want to see this version of it, and this version of it, and this combination, and the diff between these two, and that was super helpful for me. More generally, I also made a course on Upcase about Git as I tried to understand it better. And there are two particular videos from the middle of the course named the Git Object Model and Object Model Operations. And again, those two videos deal with popping the hood on Git, looking inside it, and what actually is happening to your code as you perform different Git operations. One of the wonderful things about Git is it is immutable. So you're never going to destroy your Git history if you've committed. So one of the rules that I have is just always be committing, never worry about committing. If you've committed, you can always get back to that version. You would have to try very hard to destroy committed code in Git. It's the things that you do when you haven't yet committed the code that are dangerous. So commit the code, like you said, Steph, push that up to GitHub, so you have a backup of it. You will have a backup locally as well, and that's a thing that you can come to be more comfortable with. But then, from there, there's actually a lot of room to experiment and play around because there's a ton of safety in the way that Git stores the code. You do have to know how to get at it, and that's the unfortunate and tricky part. But I think, again, to sort of summarize, yes, this is confusing. Your feelings are absolutely valid and totally grounded, but it is also knowable, is what I would say. And so, hopefully, there are a couple of breadcrumbs that we've laid there in how you might go about learning about it. But yeah, find a buddy, watch a video or two, and give it a try. This is definitely a thing that you can get there but totally reasonable that your first approximation is this is confusing because it sure is. STEPH: I often forget that Git has that local copy of my code, so I'm so glad you mentioned that. And then yeah, I saw when you linked to Vim Conflicted. The diagrams are great. I had not seen these before. So yeah, I highly recommend folks take a look at those because I found those very valuable. CHRIS: In that case, it's a white background, but I allowed myself to use some colors in the little images to help differentiate the different pieces. And it's an animated diagram, so it's really a high bar for me. [laughs] STEPH: So now the question is, did you go too far? Have you over-optimized? [laughs] CHRIS: I'm going to be honest; it was a weird weekend. STEPH: [laughs] Well, I don't think you've over-optimized. I do think it's wonderful. And I think this is definitely a reference that I'll keep in mind for folks whenever they're learning about merge conflicts or just want to get more knowledgeable about them. I think these diagrams are fabulous. CHRIS: Well, thanks. Yeah, I hope...they frankly were a labor of love, and the course is three and a half hours of me rambling about Git, so hopefully, it's useful to folks. If anything, it was super useful to me because my understanding of Git was deeply crystallized in making that course. But I do hope that it's useful to other folks. And particularly those two videos that I highlighted, I think are the ones that have been most impactful for me in terms of how I think about working with Git and getting comfortable with it. STEPH: Do you still receive emails every now and then from people, or maybe they are tweets from people that are like, "Hey, I watched one of your videos and found it really helpful." I feel like I still see that every now and then where people are just commenting on like, they watched some of the content that you created for Upcase a while back, and I think that's really cool. I'm curious if you still see that. CHRIS: I do, yeah, from time to time. It is absolutely wonderful whenever I hear that. Again, listener, do not feel the need to send me anything, but it is nice when I get them. STEPH: It does seem like I'm fishing for compliments now. [laughs] CHRIS: It does seem like that. So I want to be clear that's not what's going on here. But it is nice because I do actually forget that they're out there. But a lot of the stuff that I produced for Upcase, in particular, I tried to do more timeless stuff, so like the Vim content was really about how Vim works in a deep way. And the tmux course and the Upcase course...or the tmux course, the Git course. I look back at them, and a couple of little syntactic things have changed. But I'm still like, yeah, I agree with me from six years ago or whatever it was. Oh, that's a weird number to say, and I think is honest. It's fine. I'll just be over here. [laughs] STEPH: [laughs] That's helpful to hear, though, because that's always one of my fears in creating content. It's like, I don't know, it's okay if it's more opinionated and I change my mind and disagree with my past self. But it's more like, yeah, keeping up with is this still accurate? Is this still reflective of the times? And then having to keep that stuff updated. Anywho, that's a whole big thing, content creation. CHRIS: Content creation, but there's a parallel to it that many folks will not be creating content, and I think that's a very fine and good way to go about progressing on the internet. But there's a parallel to it in learning that I think is useful. I, at this point, will typically lean in if there is something in the SQL layer that is fighting me. I have never found effort spent trying to better understand the structured query language to be wasted time. Similarly, Git is one of those tools that is just so core to the workflow that it felt very worth it to me to spend a little bit of extra time to get to a deeper level of comfort with it, and I have not regretted one minute of that. Vim and tmux are pretty similar because they're such core tools for me. But React, I would not call myself a deep expert of React. I follow some of the changes that are happening but not as deeply, and I'm not as worried about it. And if I'm like, I don't know how to do this thing, should I spend two hours learning about it or not? With frameworks and tools that have not been part of my toolset for as long, I will spend less time on them. And I think that the courses that I produced on Upcase mirror that. They're the things that I'm like; I feel very true about these things versus other stuff. Maybe it was in a weekly iteration episode or something like that. But that very much mirrors how I think about learning as well. What are the things that I'm going to continually invest in versus what are the things that I'll sort of keep an eye on from a distance but not necessarily invest as much time in? STEPH: There's a particular article that you're making me think of as we're talking about content creation and, as you mentioned, finding the things that you always find value in investing in. There's a wonderful blog post that was recently posted on the thoughtbot blog by Matheus Richard, and it's called The Opportunity Will Find You. And it made me think a lot about what you're talking about, find the things that you're excited about, find the things that you think are a good investment and just go ahead and lean into it. And it's okay if maybe that's not the thing that you're using currently at your work, but if it's something that gets you excited, then go ahead and pursue that. So in this article, for example, Matheus uses the example of learning Rust, and that's something that he's very excited about and wants to learn more about. And then there's another one where he started looking into crafting interpreters. And then that has actually led to then some fruitful work around creating custom RuboCops because then he had more knowledge around how the code is being interpreted so then he could write custom RuboCops. So yeah, plus-one to finding the things that give you energy and joy and leaning into that and investing in it. And if you share it with the world, that's fabulous, and if you don't, then keep it for yourself and enjoy it, whatever makes you happy. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeeeee!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Chris is helping with efforts to introduce security, practices, and policies at Sagewell. Right now, they are refining the usage of 1Password to standardize passwords and secure information. He also shares (what he believes) is a terrible idea around fixing inconsistencies around symbols and strings. Steph shares an update around factories. Also, at Sagewell, Chris is helping to build mobile apps, one for iOS and one for Android, and is considering pursuing having them be all native. Good idea? Terrible idea? Chris and Steph riff on that a bit. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Services down? New Relic (https://newrelic.com/bikeshed) offers full stack visibility with 16 different monitoring products in a single platform. GitHub - alassek/activerecord-pg_enum (https://github.com/alassek/activerecord-pg_enum): Integrate PostgreSQL's enumerated types with the Rails enum feature Feature #7792: Make symbols and strings the same thing (https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7792) - Ruby master - Ruby Issue Tracking System RailsConf 2016 - Turbolinks 5: I Can't Believe It's Not Native! by Sam Stephenson (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWEts0rlezA) GitHub - hotwired/turbo-ios (https://github.com/hotwired/turbo-ios): iOS framework for making Turbo native apps Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: Weird stuff happens when we sing, Steph. STEPH: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: Hello, Steph. What is new in my world? We are continuing with some of the efforts that we're doing to introduce security, and practices, and policies, and all those fun sorts of things at the organization. One of the things that this is pushing on is we are further refining our usage of 1Password at the company as a way to standardize passwords and secure information and how we store that, how we move it around, as well as integrating SSL, and all those other fun fancier things. But I'm personally historically a LastPass user, and now I'm getting to experience 1Password. So now I'm a child of two worlds, and it's terrible, and I hate it. I hate every moment of this existence. So what I need to do is move over to 1Password, but now I'm in that space where I'm like, I can see the flaws of both systems. This is terrible. I don't like it. 1Password does seem to be great; I will say that. There's one really interesting thing about 1Password. I'm interested...you're a 1Password user, right? STEPH: I'm not; I use LastPass. I'm also a child of two worlds because we use 1Password for thoughtbot stuff, but then I use LastPass for my stuff. CHRIS: Gotcha. Okay, so you survive in the middle space. I'm slowly trying to move everything over because I think 1Password has a little bit more of what I'm going for. And I would like, frankly, to be in one cohesive, consistent space, although having two different accounts seems interesting. I definitely can handle it. But knowing which I'm in and how to save a password to one versus the other, it's a whole thing. The one thing that I find really interesting though is 1Password has a feature where it will do two-factor, two-factor authentication. It will do that for you. Specifically, it's doing, as far as I can tell, the TOTP. I don't know what that acronym stands for, but it's the fancy type of two-factor, so not SMS, not text message-based, and not others like WebAuthn is a thing that I've heard of, which I don't know if that is distinct from YubiKey or hardware keys. So there's a bunch I'm trying to learn about this space a little bit more. I'm very interested in the hardware keys because those seem cool. WebAuthn seems like a new standard. That sounds cool. Don't know anything about it, though. So mostly, I know about SMS, and I do not like that one. I do not want to use text messages because, as far as I understand it, they're not super secure. So that's not the space I want to be in. But the TOTP, the Google Authenticator, or Authy, or that space of password or two-factor code generation tools those seem good. And 1Password has a feature where they're like, hey, yeah, sure, we'll have your password and your two-factor. And so they grab the QR code, which is typically the QR code is a way, as far as I understand it, to share the seed. And then, that seed is used by an algorithm to generate the current code value for a given point in time. So it takes like, given that seed and the current timestamp, we will generate you the relevant code, which can then be verified on the far side. But that seed only exists for one moment in time, et cetera, et cetera. But I've always thought of it as this separate thing. The idea of having that all in one system is interesting and kind of scary to me. But as I think about it, I'm like, if 1Password or LastPass, in either case, gets compromised, we're all done. Like, this is over. We should throw in our cards, give away the internet. This whole experiment has failed is my sense. But it was very interesting because I had not seen this. I've always had these as separate systems. So for me, I have had LastPass, and I have Authy on my phone for the two-factor. But it's frankly very clunky, and I don't like it. And the 1Password thing is fantastic where I say like, yeah, 1Password, fill in my password and username, and then also fill in my two-factor because you have it. This is great. But, and this is where I hesitate, and I don't know, I will say this: I trust that 1Password has thought about this deeply way more than I can and have come to a place of deep confidence that this is a fine and okay thing to do. But I'm still intrigued. What's going on here? STEPH: That was a lot. I have so many thoughts. [laughs] CHRIS: Sorry, that was a lot of words, a lot of ideas, a lot of space there. It's just where I'm at. STEPH: People couldn't hear me, but I was laughing when you were talking about LastPass or if these accounts get hacked in. And I'm imagining someone who uses the combination of their cat's name and their birthday as their password and then like, aha, I win. [laughs] It's like, no, we just all lose. [laughs] But that amused me. Going back, you talked about having it all in one place. And that actually doesn't surprise me that we're different in this area. Because you also like all of your email...you like one source of everything, which makes so much sense, but I'm different. And with these accounts, I like that I have the distinction between all of thoughtbot is in 1Password while all of mine is in LastPass because it's just a very clear delineation between those two accounts. And I'm sure both of these platforms have figured out a really good way to then separate those two. But I just remembered there was someone at thoughtbot that accidentally...because they have everything in 1Password, they accidentally shared their personal vault with a client. And so they were just typing in Slack. They're like, "Oh, shit, oh shit, like, how do I undo this?" And we're all just watching like, "We don't know. But please let us know how it turns out." [laughs] It turned out fine. I think they actually realized they hadn't fully shared it but based on the UI they thought that they had. So it all turned out okay. So that just lives with me. I'm a little scared of that now now that I know that story. So watch out, friends. CHRIS: Oh, wow. Well, now, yeah, I'm also now scared of that. I wasn't, but now I am. STEPH: And I forgot the other thoughts now. Those were my two main thoughts based on the journey that you've shared. CHRIS: Particular to the thing you were sharing there, yes, now I will have nightmares about it. But also, it feels manageable because they're both entirely different accounts, and then also within that, there are different vaults. So as I'm building up the password infrastructure at Sagewell, there's going to be different...like, the dev team will probably have one vault and then a shared vault for the dev team. And then other teams within the organization will have that. And so it feels like there are at least structures within the tool to manage that. But mostly, my consideration is around the two-factor thing. And like, is this reasonable to do? And again, I'm sure 1Password has thought way harder than I have about it. And I trust that they're like, yeah, this seems fine that they're not just like, I don't know, it doesn't seem bad. They're like, no, no, definitively for information-theoretic reasons, this is fine. But it was surprising. STEPH: That was it. The other comment that you made about two-factor auth that resonated with me because there was a point not that long ago where we have one of those, either New Relic or I forget which account it was, but it was with the systems. We really only needed one person to have access, but every now and then, someone else may need to access that account. And so we wanted to be able to store it in 1Password or LastPass somewhere like that. But then the two-factor auth was a problem because then you had to coordinate with that other person to say, "Hey, I just need to check something. Would you let me in?" And because we could then leverage that feature, then we could just store all of it. And then that person could just go to 1Password or LastPass and then have access to all of it, and that was really nice. That was a very nice solution to I want to say it was a small problem but yet also very important for team happiness. So that was really nice. CHRIS: The amount of times that I've been like, "I just tried to sign in to the shared account, and it says that it sent a two-factor request to somebody's phone, but it didn't tell me whose phone. And I'm not sure if we know who that person is or if that person's still around," that version of the story feels true. And so, the idea of being able to centralize two-factor seems great. It almost feels too good to be true, is perhaps where I'm at. I am putting on my tinfoil hat, and I'm saying, yeah, but oh man, security, though. And again, I will 100% defer to 1Password on this. They've thought about it. But it's mostly I want to get to the place where I understand the thought process that they went through to decide that this is perfectly fine because they definitely did that work. I'm certain of that. I just want to read a white paper or something, and I haven't found it yet. [laughs] I'm like, let me get to that deep place of trust because that's what I want to be at with security tooling and those sorts of things. STEPH: Yeah, I haven't looked for something like that, but that sounds...I'm kind of surprised that doesn't exist. CHRIS: Oh, it quite possibly exists. I haven't done much of a search, frankly, at all. Mostly, I'm in the space of like, huh, that's weird and then moving on with my day. Because there's not a lot of free time to go search for the white papers on the internet. But yeah, so moving from 1Password or LastPass or 1Password, or maybe I'll just end up with both for a while. I really hope I don't end up in that space, although you're describing it as a positive, so maybe I will. STEPH: I have found it helpful for me. When you find that white paper, because you are more likely the type of person to read that white paper than I am the type of person to read it, then I would love a summary. That would be much appreciated. CHRIS: I'm so intrigued by the persona that you're describing of me of; like, you're the kind of person who would read a white paper. I'm like, well, I don't know if that feels true or if it's definitely true or definitely not true. But if I do happen to find it, and especially if I happen to read it, [laughs], I will share it with you and perhaps with the listeners as well. Let's see, one other small thing. I have a bad idea. I don't want to share the bad idea with you. I want to more share it with the audience, and then I want the audience to tell me exactly how bad of an idea it is. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Because I'm sure it's a bad idea. I'm just not sure how bad. STEPH: I love that there's not even a scale of goodness here. It's just nope, this is terrible, but I don't know how terrible it is. [laughs] CHRIS: What's fun is in the later parts of this episode, we're going to go into a segment of good idea, bad idea, sorry, good idea, terrible idea because I like that framing. No, this one is firmly bad idea, but how bad is the question. So we're working on the app, and we keep running into inconsistencies around symbols and strings. As any Rubyist who has worked in the language for any amount of time, especially in a Rails app, you have experienced this unpleasantness. There are strings; there are symbols. They're often used somewhat interchangeably, and yet they're different. You'll hit bugs. You'll hit edge cases. You'll hit nils that you didn't expect to be there because you tried to fetch a symbol. It, in fact, was a string, et cetera. So, what if we just applied HashWithIndifferentAccess everywhere, just deep in the internals of the app or in the Ruby runtime? What if we were to just turn this on? My sense is this would be terrible for performance reasons. My understanding is that's why symbols exist is because they are a more performant mechanism. Strings are complicated within the object model of Ruby because they're mutable. These are things that I understand very loosely, as you can tell by the tone of voice that I'm using. But symbols and strings they're separate. They're separate for reasons, performance I believe to be the main reason. But what if we were to just say, well, what if it could be like easy, though? That's what I want. Like, this is the promise of Ruby is that I want to express my code in a way that feels like the words I would use to describe to another human. That's the way I always think of Ruby is it's as close to the words I would use to describe the sort of business logic as possible. And yet these symbols versus strings thing it's just annoying, frankly. And again, I think very good reasons for it, I'm sure. But what if we were to just do the silly thing and turn on HashWithIndifferentAccess for everything? I don't even know that that's fundamentally possible. I don't know that there's the relevant hook or the way to do that. But I would love that because we're using it somewhat regularly throughout our app right now, where we're getting data from one API. And in our test suite, it's one way, and in our code, it's the other way. And granted, that speaks to us being inconsistent in our usage. But overall, I would just love for this to not be a thing. And so, how bad of an idea would it be? How much of a performance hit? That's my guess as to what it would be. Maybe there's actual fundamental correctness that would go wrong here. But my sense is by collapsing the space together; we would actually get more correct. I don't know. Anyway, how bad do you think of an idea this is? STEPH: I was thinking through some of the bugs that you're running into. And I think you provided some nice insight around that around it's the fact that you're fetching data from API. So it's typically you're parsing. That's how you're getting the string and symbol differences is because when you're parsing JSON and then you have a mixed case of maybe you have a symbol, maybe you have a string, or maybe you're parsing it differently. Are there other places in the application where that's a concern? CHRIS: I want to say one other place that we're running into it specifically is we're using a lot of enums, particularly ActiveRecord::PGEnum backed enums. So these are Postgres enums at the database level. And then, within our Rails models, we define them as enums. And the enum is typically defined within the model as a mapping of symbol to string. It could be symbol to symbol. I'm not even sure. I think this might be in terms of our implementation. But you say like, it's an enum. The key is foobar with an underscore, and it's a symbol, and then the value is foobar, but it's a string. And maybe both the key and the value could be symbols; maybe that's a thing, maybe this is our fault. But certain times, when you're interacting with the value, it's a symbol. Certain times I find it to be a string. I feel like that's true. I don't think I'm making that up. [laughs] It's possible I'm making it up. But that's another place where I feel that inconsistency or other values within the system that like as they go through certain type coercion layers, they'll start as a symbol, and then they get saved to the database, and then they get reflected back, and they come back as a string. And it's like, well, that's unfortunate. It was a symbol a minute ago, and now it's a string. And so our tests suddenly break in this way, or our code is inconsistent. And it's enough of a nuisance that I had the bad idea the other day. And so, I wanted to bring the bad idea to this space. STEPH: I think you're right. I think the main reasoning for not having everything just be strings is for looking for that performance benefit. And so then using that HashWithIndifferentAccess then you'd have to loop over everything and then convert it. So I imagine, like you said, there would be a performance hit there. I don't know how bad of an idea it would be. But when you said this, it brought up a memory because I remember someone proposing or the Ruby community talking about the fact, like, what if we didn't have strings? What if everything was just a symbol? Or can we just have one over the other? And there is a ruby-lang issue; it is 7792. And we shall also put it in the show notes and send it to you. [chuckles] And this person is proposing make symbols and strings the same thing. And then some people call out specifically the idea of using HashWithIndifferentAccess and saying, yes, that works wonderfully, but then you are going to have a performance hit for it. So it sounds exactly like everything you're saying. I don't know the outcome. I mean, clearly, the outcome is we're not there. But it seems like a really good place to see the reasoning or different approaches that maybe people have tried in this space. CHRIS: Ooh, I love that. I definitely want to read that and see what sort of deeper thinking folks have done on this. Because again, this feels like another one where definitely folks have thought about this, folks who know more about it and have chosen the current path that we're on for reasons. But I would be really intrigued if I could be like, yeah, I would just like it to be easy to start, and then have the performance optimization be something that I could opt into. Again, that's probably not tractable within the language. Like, oh, we have a hot code path here that we want to actually have immutable symbols only. And that's the sort of thing if we've done this HashWithIndifferentAccess everywhere, you can't back out of it. And so, therefore, you're stuck in a performance low point. That feels like a bad case. And so maybe that's the reason is like, you will shoot yourself in the foot with this definitely. But yeah, I'm intrigued. So I will definitely read what you're sharing here. And we'll include it in the show notes, of course. I'm probably not going to do this, just saying that out loud because it seems like a bad idea. I just want to know how bad of an idea. STEPH: I do love it, for when I'm building a class that's working specifically closely with an API, I do reach for HashWithIndifferentAccess frequently. Because like you said, I just don't want to worry about it. I want to set it up top. It's one of the rare times that I actually will use something in an initializer where I'm like, hey, pass in the data. I'm just going to run it through this method. And then all the data from here on forward you can access it in either way. So the class doesn't have to care; a tester doesn't have to care. So I do feel your pain, or I at least will always reach for it whenever I'm building a class specifically around interactions with JSON. CHRIS: So for a segment that I framed as how terrible of an idea this is, you're like, hmm, I don't know how terrible. That seems to be your take, which is interesting. STEPH: Good point. Let me assess for a moment. I'm going to go just from skimming this issue, although I think partially this issue is talking about the fact that if you merge symbols and strings, it's like, hey, friend, you're going to break a ton of stuff and break a bunch of libraries, and these two things do serve a purpose. So this may not be exactly what you're looking for, but it has some interesting conversation on there. But embedding it deep down in the app so that just happens naturally sounds like it's just a performance concern. So yeah, it comes down to what is the question? How big is the performance? So I feel like I can't say it's a terrible idea until I actually know what the performance hit is. CHRIS: So a plausible question. That's where we're going to put this in the category of. [laughter] STEPH: Plausibly terrible, but still worth researching. CHRIS: Not obviously not terrible. But anyway, these are some of the ideas at the top of my head right now. That's a rough summary of my week. Mid-roll Ad Hey, friends, let's take a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, New Relic. All right, so you've probably experienced this before where you're just starting to fall asleep, and it's a calm, code-free peaceful sleep, and then you're jolted awake by an emergency page. It's your night on call, and something is wrong. But I have some good news because you have New Relic, which means you can quickly run down the incident checklist and find that problem. So let's see, our real user monitoring metrics look good. And that's where New Relic measures the speed and performance of your end-users as they navigate the site. But it looks like there's an error in application performance monitoring. If we click on the error, we can find the deployment marker where it all began, roll back the change, and, ooh, problem is solved. We can go back to bed, back to sleep, and back to happy. That's the power of combining 16 different monitoring products into one platform. You can pinpoint issues down to the line of code so you know exactly why the problem happened and can resolve it quickly. That's why more than 14,000 other companies, including GitHub and Epic Games, use New Relic to improve their software. So you know that next late-night call is just waiting to happen, so get New Relic before it does. And you can get access to the whole New Relic platform and 100 gigabytes of data free forever. No credit card required. Sign up at newrelic.com/bikeshed. That's newrelic N-E-W-R-E-L-I-C .com/bikeshed, newrelic.com/bikeshed. STEPH: I have an update that I can share around factories because the last time we were chatting, I was sharing that strategy that we're pursuing where we're trying to minimize factories and then speed up the CI time by reducing the work that those factories are doing. So Joël Quenneville has done some phenomenal work and this past week, specifically improving factories. And he found one particular factory that he was digging into. So some stats before the change. The factory was taking around two seconds, which I know on paper doesn't sound so bad, but it gets more interesting. So total database time is around 1,000 milliseconds. And 833 total database queries were being made, which includes reads, creates, and updates. So then after, Joël was diving into this looking mainly to reduce the number of database queries because that's such a big number. So after the change, which took a lot of research on Joël's part, the factory is now taking around one second, so half of that time. The total database time is around 666 milliseconds. And the total database queries went from 833 down to 647, so a nice improvement there. But the real wonderful outcome of the story is not just those stats, but okay, so how did we impact CI? So we spent time working on this factory. And we have reduced, and we can see some of that in the stats. But how does that apply to the bigger picture? And so Joël took the time of the last 20 successful builds, and based on those builds, we average 27 minutes and 37 seconds for each build. With the factory change that he made, that same test suite was now averaging 21 minutes and 33 seconds. So shaved off six minutes from the build time, which is about a 22% decrease in the build time which is just fabulous. So that was a really nice win from all the work that had been invested in improving that one factory. CHRIS: That's a heck of a haircut there so glad to see that the efforts are paying off. STEPH: Yeah, it was a really nice win to see that we had researched which factories we should pursue, and then we were methodical about that. And then Joël worked hard to improve this factory and saw such a large payoff. It's one of those areas where the team has already invested a lot of effort and hours into improving the test suite. And it's challenging when you have so many areas that you'd like to improve and 100-plus engineers also contributing to that same codebase. So how do you improve and keep up with it all at once? They had spent about a year, so I think they were recognizing that yes, there are still a lot of areas to improve but also felt like small efforts wouldn't move the needle. So it was a nice data point to remind ourselves that we can still reduce the CI build time in a significant way. We just need to be very strategic about where we invest our time in those improvements. There is also an interesting conversation that Joël and I were having because we have a daily sync with each other each day. We've now been embedded with a team with a client, which is wonderful, but before then, we were also chatting with each other. And we like to chat about code, so we've had lots of fun conversations around code. And one, in particular, this week, came up about how people view code differently. And there's even a tweet that Joël shared that I can link to in the show notes. And there's one view that code is a liability, and if a line can't justify its existence, then it should be deleted. And then there's another view that code is an asset. If a line isn't causing any immediate issues, then why not keep it? And part of the reason that came up was while I was going through and reading pull requests, there was a particular change where someone was memoizing an expensive call, which was great, something that we wanted to do. But then they were also memoizing a very fast operation in two other places where it was just like parsing some params something that, you know, superfast and only getting called in maybe two places. And it was one of those that just caught my attention to be like, hey, I love that you memoized this other call, but this one, I don't think we need the additional overhead or complexity of adding memoization. And I found myself when I was writing that suggestion for the author that I was already looking for more than just to say, like, hey, this is more than we need. Because I've realized that often I take that stance of code is a liability. So if we don't need it, let's just get rid of it. But I've definitely run into other people where they're like, well, it's not hurting anything, so why can't I just leave it? And getting that kind of pushback on suggestions about removing code. So it was a fun opportunity to think through okay, well, why is this memoization not just unnecessary, but how could it actually cause us problems? And what's the cost of keeping it in, not just the cost of removing it but also the cost of keeping it in? And that was fun to talk about. CHRIS: I'm so glad you're bringing this particular conversation up because if we're being honest, I saw Joël tweeted about this. I saw it. I sent an email to myself linking to the tweet with the subject of the email being ahhhh, just A-H-H-H-H, which I believe was me being like, oh my God, we got to talk about this. I apparently didn't want to write all of those words, so I just wrote ahhhh. But as a handful of asides, one, if you're not following Joël Quenneville on Twitter, @joelquen, that is a mistake, because Joël is one of the clearest, most concise, and effective thinkers about code that I've ever seen. The writing that Joël produces is absolutely fantastic. And having worked with Joël for forever, I still will look at his Twitter feed and be like, well, this is fantastic. You're saying amazing things that I have not heard you say. So, again, strongest recommendation I can make; please follow Joël on Twitter and also via the Giant Robots blog and all of those other places. But in particular, I saw this one come through, and I was like, oh, man, we have to talk about this. So I actually have it up in my email app right now behind the scenes. [laughs] I was like, oh, I want to mention this to you, Steph. So I'm very excited that you're bringing it up in this moment. It is such an interesting thing. It's such an interesting case of like; I deeply believe both of these truths, and yet they do seem to be in contradiction. And so what do we do with that? More generally, I feel like that's true of a lot of stuff in life, like, the ability to hold two competing ideas in your head and be able to know where one applies and where one doesn't. That is a critical thing to get to in life and to figure out how to do, and that's some of the hard work of thinking. But in particular, this one, the idea that code is a liability. You have a line of code...I'm going to read it precisely as Joël wrote it, "Code is a liability. If a line can't justify its existence, it should be deleted. Code is an asset. If a line isn't causing any immediate issues, why not keep it?" And I think for me, if I were to try and interpret this, because I do believe both of those sides, I would apply one during code review. When code is coming into the application or when I'm writing code, do I need this? Do we need this? Is this necessary? Because it really should be necessary to come into the app. But then once something has made it in, especially the longer something's been in there, I think code sort of ages and matures. And so, the longer it's been part of the app and not causing an issue, the more I am liable to just leave it at rest. Just say, sure, or not at rest but as part of the runtime production code. But these are two competing ideas, but I think they apply at different times in the conversation. And so I'm definitely on memoization. In particular, memoization is a form of caching. Caching I have run into a handful of caching bugs in my life, let me tell you. I'll probably run into a few more. So if we can avoid caching, let's do that. So that's a particular question around that thing. But again, that idea of like the point in time to have that conversation is during code review or initial authoring or when it's about to come into the app. But if we've had some memoization in the app for forever and you're like, do we need this memoization? I don't know, but don't remove it because maybe it's very important at this point. Maybe it's one of the cornerstones holding up our application. So that's a bunch of thoughts about that. But also super glad that you brought this up because I was very excited about this particular tweet. STEPH: Yeah, there's someone that said something very similar to what you just said around they agree with number one for all new code. And they agree with number two, where code is an asset for refactoring. And I thought, yep, that's a great way to look at it. And I hadn't really thought about that specific perspective. And so it was one of those moments. Because I do like when people will push back on something that I so firmly believe on, not that this person did. I was, frankly, having a conversation with myself based on previous conversations with other pull requests authors that I've had that it's not related to this particular pull request. But in general, when people do push back on something that I do have such a firm belief in...and early eager optimization around memoization is something that I'm just like, I don't want to do it, especially for something that's so cheap and in such a fast execution and something that we're only calling twice. There's no benefit to it at that point. But then when someone says, "Well, but it's not hurting anything," then I appreciate that question because then it's more of not just pushback, but it's sort of well, tell me more. What is the pain that I'm introducing by keeping this in? And then that can be a really nice conversation to have with someone around; like you just said, I've seen caching bugs, and this could be a caching bug, and they are painful to then triage. And so we've introduced this optimization, but it's actually just going to cause us debugging pain later. And we really didn't even get the reward from it in the first place. So I really like those conversations when I feel like there's a little bit of a challenge of where I'm like, oh, I hold this as a deep truth, and somebody doesn't, and I would like to have that conversation with them. There are also some other fun conversations; one was around introducing a query object, which, as you know, we're both really big fans of. And then there was another great question because not everybody who works on this team is really familiar with Ruby and RSpec. They work in Scala, but then sometimes they hop over to the Ruby side. And so then they hop into the Ruby channels, and they're asking questions. And one of them was around the idea of introducing an RSpec Matcher. And they're like, "Am I doing this right? Is this how you would extract something to then improve your test? " And so that was a really fun conversation around like, yes, you did it right. This is exactly how you write a Matcher. But let's talk about use cases because extracting something to an RSpec Matcher to me means it meets the most generalized sense of usefulness that you want the whole team to use this and that you're willing to put in the extra overhead to then introduce this essentially like new RSpec DSL for the rest of the team to use and then maintain that. So it is the most aggressive step that I take when I'm trying to introduce a helpful tool. So then I shared my progression for when I'm extracting something for a test. And first, I will start with just a local method to that test because then it's scoped to just that test. And from there, then I will think about extracting to a shared helper. So maybe it's a module that can get included. But then its scope can still be confined to a couple of tests, but then we've also increased some of its observability. So then other developers will notice it and be able to share with it. And then from there, if I'm like, oh, this is super generic, it is testing time, and it's something that everybody is going to benefit from, then I reach for something like an RSpec Matcher or introducing a custom RSpec Matcher. So lots of fun testing conversations this week. CHRIS: That was a wonderful hierarchy. I like that a lot. I feel like that would make a good blog post. STEPH: There are some things that I realize that I just think of inherently about that I realize that would be fun to share. I'm much better at podcasting than I am at blog posting. [laughs] CHRIS: There's this friend I know, Joël Quenneville, very good at the blogging. He could probably help talk you through writing this up as a quick blog post. But you just described this heuristic hierarchy that you have. And you could probably provide quick examples of each, and I think encapsulate that knowledge. I, too, default to podcasting because it's easy for me to just say stuff here, and then it's there it is. But what you just said also mirrors exactly what I would think of as sort of the hierarchy and the reasons you're like, I'm not sure I'd go all the way to an RSpec Matcher. That hesitation is meaningful and comes from experience that you've had. And again, that seems sort of a trade-off of like, well, why not? Is it hurting anyone? What's the cost here? You know that cost. You have that in your head. And so now if you can capture...I don't want to put work on your plate. But I think that would be a great blog post. I would be happy to read that blog post and share it with other folks. STEPH: Cool, cool. Cool. So I totally hear you. So here's my hierarchy. Typically, I start with a podcast, and then I share it there. And then maybe it'll go to a tweet. And then once I'm like, okay, this is super generic, it can help everybody, then we've reached blog post status. CHRIS: I love how tweet is higher in the hierarchy than a podcast for you. That somehow the throw away let me just have 140 characters or 280, or whatever we're at these days, that somehow that's next in your hierarchy. But I agree; I share that place in the world. STEPH: Yeah, just writing is hard. Here I get to show up, and I say things. And then we have wonderful Mandy, who is then editing all of our words, so there's a safety net here. If it's just me and a keyboard, who knows what's going to happen? CHRIS: Then you'll probably think about the switches that you're using on the keyboard. And do you need a new keyboard? Should it be silent? What do we do? STEPH: I was thinking more how many exclamation marks do you use? That's always a question. CHRIS: Not too many, not too few. It's a difficult question. STEPH: [laughs] Mid-roll Ad Hi, friends, and now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is an application performance monitoring tool that's designed to help developers find and fix performance issues quickly. With an intuitive user interface, Scout will tie bottlenecks to source code, so you can quickly pinpoint and resolve performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, and memory bloat. Scout also recently implemented external service monitoring, adding even more granularity when it comes to HTTP requests and API calls. So give Scout a try today with a free 14-day trial and experience first-hand why developers worldwide call Scout their best friend. And as an added bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. To learn more, visit scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: Pivoting just a bit, [laughs] what else is going on in your world? CHRIS: What else is going on in my world? So we are building out a whole platform over here at Sagewell, and one of the things that we need to build is a mobile app or, frankly, two mobile apps, one for iOS and one for Android. And I'll be honest; I resisted this for a while. I am a big, big believer in the web as a platform like deeply in my heart of hearts. That's the place that I want to spend my time. That's the thing that I believe in. And there are absolutely cases where truly native mobile apps shine, completely outshine what we can do on the web platform sometimes for reasons that are, I think, not great, limitations of the available mobile web platforms, et cetera, reasons that I'll slam my fist on the table or whatever it is. But there are plenty of really great mobile experiences, offline, et cetera, that we just can't...offline is not even a great example. See, I can't even find a great example. There are definitely things, though, where truly native mobile apps are 100% superior. But again, I'm such a big fan of the web platform that that's what I wanted to do. I wanted to hold on to this dream of, like, what if we just make a really great web app and it's just great? And then consistently, our backend is one singular thing. Our frontend is kind of one singular thing. And yeah, we got to deal with responsive design. But that's to me a much more tractable problem than fracturing our entire application architecture across a bunch of different platforms and having all of the logic of our domain splintered and especially depending on how you implement it. That's sort of a big question. I've talked a ton about Inertia.js on this podcast, and that's because I believe it's a really great example as to how to pull some of the logic back to the server-side, which, in my experience, that's where I want the logic to be implemented, our deep domain logic. I just want that to be on my server in a Rails controller, or a Rails model, or a command object, or any of those sorts of things, query objects, all of these wonderful things but server-side that's centralized in one space. Nonetheless, though, we had to build a mobile app. These are the truths of the world. Sometimes it just comes down to the expectation of your user base. And there are certain things that by building a mobile app we will get so, for instance, in our case, having biometric login, so fingerprint, or facial ID, or any of those sorts of things. Those are actually material security differences. They are actually, as far as I can tell, available on the web but not consistently on every browser, et cetera. So that's something that we can get by having our app as a native app. Push notifications is another one that certain platforms, certain web platforms have dragged their feet on, Apple Safari. iOS Safari, specifically, I'm looking at you, but that's an example of something that by going the truly native route, we'll get that. Similarly, access to some of the lower-level things, cameras, et cetera, that is something that we'll get a better experience of. And again, you can hear in my voice I don't want to really seed it to the native platform, but it is true right now, at a minimum. So we had a decision to make as to how we would implement these applications, and we went with an interesting route. So for anyone that's familiar with Turbolinks native, or I believe Turbo iOS is pretty similar. But I'm more familiar with Turbolinks native as there was a talk I Can't Believe It's Not Native I think is the name of the talk that was given a while back talking about the Turbolinks native architecture. So basically, what's happening under the hood is let's still render these things server-side. Let's send down some HTML. In our case, it's a weird sort of hybrid of HTML and not HTML. But broadly, let's say that the server is rendering things. And our native application is going to then be a native shell that wraps around WebViews. But it does so in not just a single WebView sort of way. It's instead trying to find that optimum hybrid spot where let's do native things where they make sense. So, for instance, we have introduced a tab bar at the bottom of our application that is a truly native UI. We similarly have push notifications, biometric login, et cetera. Those are features of the native platform that we're using. But then, for most of the screens, most of the screens that are just some text, maybe a button, maybe a form, et cetera, we are using the server-rendered code that we have. And so server-rendered, in our case, because we're Inertia, it's sort of a misnomer because technically it is being rendered on the client-side in the WebView. But, I don't know; we're now getting too nuanced and in the weeds for it. But what we've opted for is to reuse the same views, controllers, et cetera. All of that is still being reused. Our iOS and our Android codebase at this point are wrappers around those WebView stacks. So it's not just a singular WebView; it's a stack of WebViews. So if you're doing swipe to navigate thing on iOS, that'll work...or Android. I think Android has an actual back button, though, within the applications. But most importantly, we've introduced a tiny little bridge layer. So from our WebViews, we can communicate to the wrapping native context. And similarly, from our native context, we can send messages into our WebView. So we can have a button in our native UI. And when a user clicks that button, it will send a message to the WebView that it's wrapping around and vice versa. We can do push notifications. We can do all that sort of stuff. For any given view, like, say, the login view, we can say, "Hey, don't render the normal server-side thing. Instead, render this truly native, local Swift or Kotlin view that we want to use there." So it's an interesting choice. I think it's something that I've certainly seen applications that are just like, let's take some HTML and wrap it in a WebView, and it'll be fine. And they don't make great apps. But I think this time it might just be a good idea. I actually do think that the approach that we're taking, at a minimum, is buying us a ton of simplicity in terms of having to duplicate what are somewhat nascent domain concepts across multiple platforms. We're not entirely certain as to what our platform and what our business is going to be. So we'd love to non-enshrine that across three different platforms that are hard to update. Like the web, I can kind of change that every day. But iOS and Android because I have to go through review cycles, because I have to get them out to devices, because there are slow update cycles that individuals will use, I'm going to be stuck supporting whatever version of these applications are out there. And so if more of that is the dynamic content that's driven by the server, frankly, I just feel way better about that, at least for now, at least for the point in time that we're at. But I kind of believe that this may be a really useful architecture for us long term. That was a bunch of me rambling about the architecture. Let me pause there, thoughts, questions, comments, concerns? STEPH: First, I really appreciate the thoughtful approach and explanation. Also, you highlighted the reasons that y'all are pursuing having a native app, and all of that makes a lot of sense. Because there is that user expectation of you told me about a service that then there must be an app that I can download because that's what I'm accustomed to using versus having to go to a browser and then having to then remember the URL of the site that I'm supposed to go to. So there's that convenience factor. There's also the idea that some people go to the App Store and search for their solutions instead of going to a browser and searching for a service. So having that presence in the App Store can seem like a really huge win because then even if it maybe slowly pushes them back to use the website or as long as they get a decent experience, they've now at least been exposed to the idea of the service and that it's out there. But then, as you pointed out, building a mobile native application is a lot of work. And then it becomes a question of like, well, are you going to hire people to work specifically on these platforms? And then, is it really worth that investment at this point? Or is it worth the approach that you're taking where you're going the more hybrid approach? I am curious; maybe this is something that you'll know. So as you are investing in this hybrid approach and you are starting to collect more users that are then using the app versus going to the browser, then what does that pivot look like, or how does that further investment look like? If you realize that the UI isn't quite delivering the expectations that you want that if you'd actually built a native iOS or Android application, then what does that investment look like? Can you still reuse some of the work that you've done? Is it totally scrapping that work? I think that would be my biggest question around taking this first approach. Is it an all-in bet that we are now stuck to this? Or is there some salvageable pieces to then move this forward into native apps should we need to do that? CHRIS: That's a heck of a question. Have you made a terrible decision or just like an iffy decision? I think that the framework that we're choosing or, frankly, building right now will actually be amenable to a potential transition entirely into the native world in the future. So again, one of the options that we have here is the ability to say, no; this facet of the application is entirely native. We're going to opt-in. And so it actually happens at the navigation layer. So we can say, if a person transitions to the /user/signin route, instead of just rendering that WebView right in place, push a native Swift or Kotlin. Depending on the context that we're in or the platform that we're in, push the native view onto the stack and use that. And so we're able to, on a screen-by-screen basis, make a decision of no, we'd like to opt into native behavior here. And so, if we did eventually see that the vast majority of the users of the platform are using it via the native app, we should probably continue to invest in that and push in that direction. I think we could do it in sort of a gradual style, and that is critically important to me. I don't want to make a big bet and then be like, oh no, we got to rewrite from the ground up. And there's no way to do that incrementally. It's going to be a whiz-bang Friday launch that everyone's going to hate. That's the thing I want to avoid most in the world. And so I think what we found now is this seems great for right now because it allows us to avoid this complexity explosion of three different platforms and trying to keep them in sync and trying to keep them up to date. But it does, I think, give us an opportunity as we move forward to slowly sort of transition things over. We are, to state it, this isn't just like wrapping a WebView around things. We are building essentially a mini framework on both iOS and Android, or roughly Swift and Kotlin is what the actual languages are, to work with Inertia because inertia is the core technology that we're using. Inertia, thankfully, has a nice little event system in there, so we can say, Inertia on navigate. And when a navigate event happens, we can hook into that and then connect it to whatever Swift or Kotlin runtime that we're building here. And there are a couple of different events that we can opt into. And so that's giving us the hooks that we need in the current architecture. But longer-term, if we needed to, we could just, I think, slowly transition everything over to be truly native mobile, and then that would probably be backed by more traditional API endpoints and that sort of thing. I want to avoid that. That's my dream is to stay in this happy place where we're always going to need some web presence. And I would hate for those to be fractured distinct things. I've worked with enough mobile apps that are wonderful native experiences, and yet I'm like, could you just give me the desktop view? Just scaled to...like, I'll even pinch and zoom because you're hiding data from me, and that makes me very, very sad. Please give me the buttons, and the text, and the content that you would give me on the web. And the fact that you're not is just breaking my heart right now. And, frankly, for our user base, consistency of experience is something that I think is really important. So that's another facet of the conversation that is really interesting to me of like; I don't want it to be different on each platform. Certainly, a three-column layout doesn't work on an iOS app that is zoomed in 150%. But we can turn that into each column is just floated down and then otherwise have all the content in there. And I believe in that as sort of a fundamental truth of let's reshape the content but not fundamentally rethink it. I say that as something that I believed deeply. But as I said it out loud, I was like, yeah, but also, I don't know, make it work on the platform it's on. So I can see both sides. But I have had enough experiences personally where I'm sad about the app that I'm using. STEPH: Yeah, I could also see an argument for both ways where you don't want it to be fundamentally different, but then also, you want it to fit the platform. And then there may be some advantages to the fact that there is a different platform, and you want to utilize that. I also agree with the not hiding of the data. I have felt that pain where I have an app, but I really want to go to my desktop, and I really want to use it there. But then on mobile, it's then hiding, and I realize it's hiding. And that inconsistency really frustrates the heck out of me. So I can understand that as well. Overall, I really like this. You're taking a bet in a direction of we should have a mobile presence, and we should start attracting people through this new marketplace. But we want to reuse a lot of the logic that we already have before we go so far as then we're going to have to start building for each different platform. Because while I don't have a lot of experience in that area, the times that I have been part of teams that are building native apps, it's a big investment. I mean, they hire people very focused on that; designers have to design for browser, for mobile, and then for native, and then everything has to stay in sync across. You have to think about how a feature is going to work across all three of those different views. And so it is certainly not something to go into lightly, which I think is exactly what you're describing is that you're looking for that in-between to how can we start working our way in this direction but yet also do it in a way that we're reusing a lot of the work that we have versus having to invest full sail into then building out these different platforms? So I'm going to go with this is not a terrible idea. [chuckles] I'm excited to see how it feels once I can download this and check it out. I'm excited to then see how that feels from a UX perspective. But overall, everything you're saying really jives with me. It makes a lot of sense. I am curious, what about React Native? Is that something that you considered using? CHRIS: Oh yeah, great question and definitely something that we considered. We're not using React on the backend, so that was actually a consideration when I was thinking about Svelte initially is I assumed we'd be building a React Native app eventually for the native platforms. But I talked myself into Svelte for the web, and that is not the reason that we're not using React Native for the native apps. But it is an interesting sort of constellation of technologies that we have now. We're not using React Native because I'm clinging to this idea of what if we could have a singular experience? So React Native fundamentally you're building a native app that this is this bundle that you download that's got all of the UI and that front-end logic in that bundle that you download. And then when it wakes up, it makes some calls back to some APIs to get some data or to decide if I can do an action or to actually do an action, all those sorts of things. But you're building out a Rest or GraphQL or one of those APIs. And with my explorations of Inertia, I found that what if I didn't need to do that? What if I could do a more traditional Rails CRUD-like experience but CRUD in a good way (I mean it in the very positive sense of the familiar architecture) and still give users a delightful experience but not have to build a distinct API where all of the or majority of the logic was on our client-side? So if I did that, then my web client would need to be that much smarter. And each of the iOS and Android clients would need to be that much smarter because that's fundamentally how these technologies work. UI components they can give a higher fidelity experience, more native-like experience, but they tend to own a lot more of the smarts. And one of my core beliefs is however long I can get away with this, I want to keep as much intelligence on the server as possible and have my view layer be as minimal and as simple as possible. So I think React Native is a really fantastic technology for that sort of work. But my goal was to avoid that sort of work entirely. What if we had a singular way that we had the logic exist on the server-side, and then we rendered pretty minimal view layers? Or, from a user experience, the view should do all this stuff and show all of the things that they want. But I want that view layer to be as naive as possible. And by naive, I mean in the positive sense of like, I want to be able to change this very rapidly. I want to be able to evolve it and iterate it. And so this is more of a buy into I think the thing that Inertia gave me is valuable enough and if I can keep using that and reuse it, especially on these mobile platforms...now if we add a new fundamental part of our Sagewell platform, if we have that, it just exists on each of the iOS, the Android, and the web, and that's fantastic. And we're going to keep a really close eye on what experience that gives to the user. And is it still great? But presuming it is, the complexity savings there are so huge. Our team is a team of web developers that is able to think about things holistically and singularly. We implement it once within our stack, and it just works. And if we can do that, that is worth a ton. We may not be able to do that forever. But for now, especially while we're figuring things out, while we're super early on as a company, I think that savings and complexity is worth a lot. So it'll be interesting to see how it plays out, and will certainly report back. But I'm a big believer in this little adventure we're on. STEPH: Yeah, you said it perfectly there at the end; you're a team of web developers. And so as long as you can stick to that, then that's what's best for y'all and the team and the product. So that's wonderful. I have a short segue because I had a little bit of inspiration when we were talking about terrible ideas. I want to circle back to your other terrible idea because I have a terrible idea for your terrible idea about strings and symbols. Okay, so my terrible idea is you're talking about using HashWithIndifferentAccess for everything. What if you had a class or method that then will first try to access via string and if that fails, access via symbol, and then if that fails, then it fails loudly? So you now have this let's try this, and then let's try the next thing. I have strong feelings about this as I'm saying it. CHRIS: [laughs] STEPH: But we're in the terrible idea segment, so I'm going to embrace it. This is my terrible idea. CHRIS: HashWithIndifferentAccess with runtime exceptions. I think HashWithIndifferentAccess under the hood probably does what you're describing of, like checks one and then checks the other or checks has_key is probably the underlying implementation. I haven't actually looked at it. But some version of that makes sense. Falling back to the key error gets interesting. I did see a different thing recently of a deep fetch, which is something that I want, to stop trying to make fetch happen, except I'm going to try and make fetch happen. We thought about this a bunch where we have these objects that we need to traverse into. So we use dig to get into the third layer of the object, but dig doesn't care. And it's just going to happily nil out whatever. So I'm like, no, dig but then right at the end, fetch, deep fetch. I saw somebody post this recently. So deep fetch is something I want to make happen. HashWithIndifferentAccess, which raises at the end also intriguing. STEPH: So yes, but this will be a little different because this one, you don't have to do the transformation process upfront with HashWithIndifferentAccess where you have to pass the data first, and then it transforms it so then it can do these two different lookups or the fallback. This one, you're skipping the transformation process, and you're using your own custom method that then does that first check for a string or first check for a symbol and then default back to the other one and then fail loudly, yeah, if both of those fail. CHRIS: Interesting, and I have to see what it looks like in practice. But I mean, broadly, I'm into something in this space. Let us find some simplicity. That is what I want. STEPH: Let's find some terribleness and see which one feels not so terrible. [laughs] CHRIS: Some terrible simplicity. Well, I like that idea. We'll see where we get to with it. But I think on that note, and we've said a bunch of stuff today, should we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeeee!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Happy New Year (for real)! Chris and Steph both took some end-of-year time off to rest and recharge. Steph talks about some books she enjoyed, recipes she tried, and trail-walking adventures with her dog, Utah. Chris' company is now in a good position to actually start hiring within the engineering team. He's excited about that and will probably delve into more around the hiring process in the coming weeks. Since they aren't really big on New Year's Eve resolutions, Steph and Chris answer a listener question regarding toxic traits inspired by the listener question related to large pull requests and reflect on their own. The Midnight Library by Matt Haig (http://www.matthaig.com/books/midnight-library/) Tim Urban on Twitter (https://twitter.com/waitbutwhy/status/1367871165319049221) How to Stop Time by Matt Haig (http://www.matthaig.com/how-to-stop-time/) Do the Next Right Thing (https://daverupert.com/2020/09/do-the-next-right-thing/) Debugging Why Your Specs Have Slowed Down (https://thoughtbot.com/blog/debugging-why-your-specs-have-slowed-down) test-prof (https://github.com/test-prof/test-prof) Tests Oddly Slow Might Be Bcrypt (https://collectiveidea.com/blog/archives/2012/11/12/tests-oddly-slow-might-be-bcrypt) Transcript: STEPH: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: What's new in my world? Well, spoiler, we actually may have lied in a previous episode when we said, "Hey, happy New Year," because, for us, it was not actually the new year. But this, in fact, is the first episode of the new year that we're recording, that you're hearing. Anyway, this is enough breaking the fourth wall. Sorry, listener. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Inside baseball, yadda, yadda. I'm doing great. First week back. I took some amount of vacation over the holidays, which was great, recharging, all those sorts of things. But now we're hitting the ground running. And I'm actually really enjoying just getting back into the flow of things and, frankly, trying to ramp everything up, which we can probably talk about more in a moment. But how about you? How's your new year kicking off? STEPH: I like how much we plan the episodes around when it's going to release, and we're very thoughtful about this is going to be released for the new year or around Christmas time, and happy holidays to everybody. And then we get back, and we're like, yeah, yeah, yeah, we can totally drop the facade. [laughs] We're finally back from vacation. And this is us, and this is real. CHRIS: Date math is so hard. It just drains me entirely to even try and figure out when episodes are going to actually land. And then when we get here, also, you know, I want to talk about the fact that there was vacation and things, and the realities of the work, and the ebb and flow of life. So here we are. STEPH: Same. Yeah, I love it. Because I'm in a similar spot where I took two weeks off, which was phenomenal. That's actually sticking to one of the things we talked about, for one of the things I'm looking to do is where I take just more time off. And so having the two weeks was wonderful. It was also really helpful because the client team that I'm working with also shut down around the end of the year. So they took ten days off as well. So I was like, well, that's a really good sign of encouragement that I should also just shut down since I can. So it's been delightful. And I have very little tech stuff to share because I've just been doing lots of other fun things and reading fiction, and catching up with friends and family, and trying out new recipes. That's been pretty much my last two weeks. Oh, and walks with Utah. His training is going so well where we're starting to walk off-leash on trails. And that's been awesome. CHRIS: Wow, that's a big upgrade right there. STEPH: Yeah, we're still working on that moving perimeter so he knows how far he can go. Before then, he needs to stop and check on me. But he's getting pretty good where he'll bolt ahead, but then he'll stop, and he'll look at me, and then he'll wait till I catch up. And then he'll bolt ahead again. It's really fun. CHRIS: I like that that's the version of it that we're going for. This is not like you're going to walk alongside me on the trail; it's you're obviously going to run some distance out. As long as you check back in once every 20 feet, we're good; that's fine. Any particularly good books, or recipes, or talks with friends to go with that category? But that one's probably a little more specific to you. STEPH: [laughs] Yes. There are two really good books that I read over the holidays. They're both by the same author. So I get a lot of books from my mom. She'll often pick up a book, and once she's done with it, she'll drop it off to me or vice versa. So the one that she shared with me is called The Midnight Library. It's written by Matt Haig, H-A-I-G. And it's a very interesting story. It's a bit sad where it's about a woman who decides that she no longer wants to live. And then, when she moves in that direction to go ahead and end her life, she ends up in this library. And in the library, every time she has made a different decision or made a decision in life, then there is a new book written about what that life is like. So then she has an opportunity to go explore all of these lives and see if there's a better life out there for her. It is really interesting. I highly recommend it. CHRIS: Wow. I mean, that started with, I'm going to be honest, a very heavy premise. But then the idea that's super interesting. I would, actually...I think I might read that. I tend to just read sci-fi. This is broadly in the space, but that is super interesting. There's an image that comes to mind actually as you described that. It's from Tim Urban, who's also known as Wait But Why. I think he posts under that both on Twitter, and then I think he has a blog or something to that effect. But the image is basically like, all of the timelines that you could have followed in your life. And everybody thinks about like, from this moment today. Man, I think about all of the different versions of me that could exist today. But we don't think about the same thing moving forward in time. Like, what are all the possibilities in front of me? And what you're describing of this person walking around in a library and each book represents a different fork in the road from moving forward is such an interesting idea. And I think a positive reframing of any form of regret or looking back and being like, what if I had gone the other way? It's like, yeah, but forward in time, though. I'm very intrigued by this book. STEPH: Yeah, it's really good. It definitely has a strong It's a Wonderful Life vibe. Have you ever watched that movie? CHRIS: Yes, I have. STEPH: So there's a lot of that idea of regret. And what if I had lived differently and then getting to explore? But in it's A Wonderful Life, he just explores the one version. And in the book, she's exploring many versions. So it's really neat to be like, well, what if I'd pursued this when I was younger, had done this differently? Or what if I got coffee instead of tea? There are even small, little choices that then might impact you being a different person at a point in time. The other book that I read is by the same author because I enjoyed Midnight Library so much that I happened to see one of his other books. So I picked it up. And it's called How to Stop Time. And it's about an individual who essentially lives a very long time. And there are several people in the world that are like this, but he lives for centuries. But he doesn't age, or he ages incredibly slowly, at a rate that where say that he's 100 years old, but he'll still look 16 years old. And it's very good. It's very interesting. It's a bit more sad and melancholy than I typically like to read. So that one's good. But I will add that even though I described the first one, it has a sad premise; I found The Midnight Library a little more interesting and uplifting versus the other one I found a bit more sad. CHRIS: All right. Excellent additional notes in the reading list here. So you can opt like, do you want a little bit more somber, or do you want to go a little more uplifting? Yeah, It's a Wonderful Life path being like, starts in a complicated place but don't worry, we'll get you there in the end. STEPH: But I've learned I have to be careful with the books that I pick up because I will absorb the emotions that are going on in that book. And it will legit affect me through the week or as I'm reading that book. So I have to be careful of the books that I'm reading. [laughs] Is that weird? Do you have the same thing happen for when you're reading books? CHRIS: It's interesting. I don't think of it with books as much. But I do think of it with TV shows. And so my wife and I have been very intentional when we've watched certain television shows to be like, we're going to need something to cut the intensity of this show. And the most pointed example we had was we were watching Breaking Bad, which is one of the greatest television shows of all time but also just incredibly heavy and dark at times, kind of throughout. And so we would watch an episode of Breaking Bad. And then, as a palate cleanser, we would watch an episode of Malcolm in the Middle. And so we saw the same actor but in very different facets of his performance arc and just really softened things and allowed us to, frankly, go to bed after that be able to sleep and whatnot but less so with reading. So I find it interesting that I have that distinction there. STEPH: Yeah, that is interesting. Although I definitely feel that with movies and shows as well. Or if I watch something heavy, I'm like, great, what's on Disney? [laughs] I need to wash away some of that so I can watch something happy and go to sleep. You also asked about recipes because I mentioned that's something I've been doing as well. There's a lot of plant-based books that I've picked up because that's really my favorite type of thing to make. So that's been a lot of fun. So yeah, a lot of cooking, a lot of reading. How about you? What else is going on in your world? CHRIS: Well, actually, it's a super exciting time for Sagewell Financial, the company that I've joined. We are closing our seed financing round, which the whole world of venture capital is a novel thing that I'm still not super involved in that part of the process. But it has been really interesting to watch it progress, and evolve, and take shape. But at this point, we are closing our seed round. Things have gone really well. And so we're in a position to actually start hiring, which is a whole thing to do, in particular, within the engineering group. We're hiring, I think, throughout the company, but my focus now will be bringing a few folks into the engineering team. And yeah, just trying to do that and do that well, do that intentionally, especially for the size of the team that we have now, the sort of work that we're doing, et cetera, et cetera. But if anyone out there is listening, we are looking for great folks to join the team. We are Ruby on Rails, Inertia, TypeScript. If you've listened to the show anytime recently, you've heard me talk about the tech stack plenty. But I think we're trying to do something very meaningful and help seniors manage finance, which is a complicated and, frankly, very underserved space. So it's work that I deeply believe in, and I think we're doing a good job at it. And I hope to do even a better job over time. So if that's at all interesting, definitely reach out to me. But probably in the coming weeks, you'll hear me talk more and more about hiring and technical interviews and all of those sorts of things. I got to ramp myself back up on that entire world, which is really one of those things that you should always be doing is the thought that I have in my head. Now that I'm in a position to be hiring, I wish I'd been half-hiring for the past three months, but I'll figure it out. It'll be fine. STEPH: That's such a big undertaking. Everything you're saying resonates, but also, it's like that's a lot of hard work. So if you're not in that state of really being ramped up for hiring, I understand why that would be on the backburner. And yeah, I'm excited to hear more. I've gotten to hear some more of the product details about Sagewell, but I don't think we've really talked about those features here on the show. So I would love it if we brought some more of the feature work and talked about specifically what the application does. I am intrigued speaking of how much energy goes into hiring. Where are you at in terms of how much...like, are there any particular job boards that you're going for? Or what's your current approach to hiring? CHRIS: Oh, that's a great question. I have tweeted once into the world. I have a draft of a LinkedIn post. This is very much I'm figuring out as I go. It's sort of the nature of a startup as we have so many different things to do. And frankly, even finding the time to start thinking about hiring means I'm taking time away from building features and growing out other aspects. So it's definitely a necessary thing that we're doing at this point in time. But basically, everything we're doing is just in time compiling and figuring out what are the things that are semi-urgent right now? And to be honest, I like that energy overall. I've always had in the back of my mind that I like this sort of work and this space, especially if you can do it intentionally. It shouldn't feel like everything's on fire all the time, but it should feel like a lot of constraints that force you to make decisions quickly, which, if we're being honest, I think that's something that is not my strongest suit. So it's something that I'm excited to grow that muscle as part of this work. But so, with that in mind, at this point, my goal is to just start getting the word out there into the world that we are looking to hire and get people interested and then, from there, build out what's the interview process going to look like? I will let you know when we get there; I will. I will figure that out. But it's not something that I've...I haven't actually very intentionally thought about all of this. Because if I were to do that, it would delay the amount of time until I actually say into the world, "Hey, we're hiring." So I very purposely was like, I just need to say this into the world and then continue doing the next steps in that process. I'm prone to the perfect is the enemy of the good just trying to like, I want to have a complete plan and a 27-step checklist, and a Gantt chart, and a burndown. And before I take any first action and really trying to push back, I'm going to be like, no, no, just do something, just take a step in the right direction. There's actually a blog post that comes to mind, which is by Dave Rupert, who is a former guest on this podcast. It was wonderful getting to interview him. But he wrote a blog post. The title of it is Do the Next Right, which is a line from a song in the movie Frozen 2, I believe. He is like, all right, stick with me here. And I know this is a movie for kids, maybe. But also, this is a very meaningful song. And he framed it in a way that actually was surprisingly impactful to me. And it's that idea that I'm holding on to of you can't do it all, and you can't do it perfectly. Just do the next right thing. That's what you're going to do. So we'll link to that blog post in the show notes. But that's kind of where I'm at. STEPH: I love that. I'm looking forward to reading that because that has been huge for me. I used to be held back by that idea of perfection. But then I realized other people were getting more work done more quickly. And so I was like, huh, maybe there's something to this just doing the next thing versus waiting for perfection that is really the right path. So, how do folks reach out to you? Should they reach out to you on Twitter or email? What's best for you? CHRIS: Oh yeah, Twitter. This is all probably going to be said at the end of the show as well. But Twitter @christoomey. ctoomey.com is my blog. I'm on GitHub. I make it very easy to contact me because I haven't regretted that up to this point in my life. So basically, anywhere you find me on the internet, you will be able to email me or DM me or any of the things. I'm going to see how long I can hold on to that. I want to hold on to that forever. I want just a very open-door policy. So that's where I'm at right now, but any of those starting points. And bikeshed.fm website will somehow link to me in any of the various forums, and they're all kind of linked to each other, so any of those are fine. I will happily take inquiries via any of the channels. STEPH: Cool. Well, I'm excited to hear about how it goes. CHRIS: Me too, frankly. But in a very small bit of little tech news or tech happenings from my holiday time, this was actually just before I started to go on break for the holidays. I had noticed that the test suite was getting very slow, like very, very slow but on my machine. It was getting a little bit slow on CI, but the normal amount where we just keep adding new things. And we're adding a lot of feature specs because we want to have that holistic coverage over the whole application, and we can, so for now, we're doing that. But our spec suite had gotten up to six-ish minutes on CI and had a couple of other things. We have some linting and some TypeScript and things like that. But on my machine, it was very slow. So I hadn't run the full spec suite in a long time. But I knew that running any individual spec took surprising amounts of time. And in the back of my head, I was like; I guess I hadn't configured Spring. That seems weird. I probably would have done that, but whatever. And I'd never pushed on it more until one day I ran the specs. I ran one model spec, and it took 30 seconds or something like that. And I was like, well, that's absurd. And so I started to look into it. I did some scanning around the internet. There was a wonderful post on the Giant Robots blog about how to look through things from Mike Wenger, a wonderful former thoughtboter. Unfortunately, none of the tips in there were anything meaningful for me. Everything was as I expected it to be. So I set it down. And there were a couple of times that this happened to me where I'd be like, this is frustrating. I need to look into this a little bit more, but it was never worth investing more time. But I mentioned it in passing to one of the other developers on the team. And as a holiday gift to me, this person discovered the solution. So let me describe a little bit more of what we've got working on here. On CI, which in theory is less powerful than my new, fancy M1 MacBook, on CI, we take about six minutes for the test suite. On my computer, it was taking 28 minutes and 30 seconds. So that's what we're working with. The factories are all doing normal things. We're not creating way too many database records or anything like that. So any thoughts, anything that you would inspect here? STEPH: Ooh, you've already listed a number of good things that I would check. CHRIS: Yeah, I took all the easy ones off the list. So this is a hard question at this point. To be clear, I had no ideas. STEPH: Could you tell if there's a difference if it's like the boot-up time versus the actual test running? CHRIS: Did that check; it is not the boot-up time. It is something that is happening in the process of running an individual spec. STEPH: No, I'm drawing a blank. I can't think of what else I would check from there. CHRIS: It's basically where I was at. Let me give you one additional piece of data, see if it does anything for you. I noticed that it happened basically whenever executing any factory. So I'd watch the logs. And if I create this record, it would do roughly what I expect it to. It would create the record and maybe one or two associated records because that's how Factory Bot works. But it wasn't creating a giant cascade or waterfall of records under the hood. If we create a product, the product should have an associated user. So we'll see a product and a user insert. But for some reason, that line create whatever database record was very, very slow. STEPH: Yeah, it's a good point, looking at factories because that's something I've noticed in triaging other tests is that I will often check to see how many records are created at a certain point because I've noticed there's a test where I think only one record is created, but I'll see 20. And that's an interesting artifact. But you're not running into that. But it sounds like there's more either some callback or transaction or something that's getting hung up and causing things to be slow. CHRIS: I love those ideas. I didn't even know those were sort of ideas in the back of my head. I didn't know how to even try and chase that down. There was nothing in the logs. I couldn't see anything. And again, I just kept giving up. But again, this other developer on the team found the answer. But at this point, I'll just share the answer because I think we've run out of the good bits of the trivia. It turns out bcrypt was the answer. So password-hashing was incredibly slow on my machine. What was interesting is I mentioned this to the other developer because they also have an M1. But there are three of us working on the project. The third developer does not have the M1 architecture. So that was an interesting thing. I was like, I feel like this maybe is a thing because we're both experiencing this, but the other developer isn't. So it turns out bcrypt is wildly slow on the M1 architecture, which is sort of interesting as an artifact of like, what is password hashing, and how does it work? And in normal setups, I think the way it works is Devise will say by default, "We're going to do 12 runs of bcrypt." So like take the password, put it into the hashing algorithm, take the output, put it back into the hashing algorithm, and do that loop 12 times or whatever. In test mode, it often will configure it to just run once, but it will still use the password hashing. Turns out even that was too slow for us. So we in test mode enabled it so that the password hashing algorithm was just the password. Don't do anything. Just return it directly. Turn off bcrypt; it's too painful for us. But it was very interesting to see that that was the case. STEPH: Yeah, I don't like that answer. [laughs] I'm not a fan. That is interesting and tricky. And I feel like the only way I would have found that...I'm curious how they found it because I feel like at that point, I would have started outputting something to figure out, okay, where is the slow process? What's the thing that's taking so long to return? And if I can't see tailing the test logs, then I would start just using a PUT statement to figure out what's taking a long time? And start trying to troubleshoot from there. So I'm curious, do you know how they identified that was the core issue? CHRIS: Yes, actually. I'm looking back at the pull requests right now. And I'm mentioning that this was related to the M1 architecture, but I don't think that's actually true because the blog post that they're linking to is Collective Idea blog post: Tests Oddly Slow? Might be bcrypt. And then there's a related Rails issue. They used TestProf, which is a process that you can run that will examine, I think the stack trace and say where are we spending the most time? And from that, they were able to see it looks like it's at the point where we're doing bcrypt. And so that's the answer. As an aside, my test suite went from 28 minutes and 30 seconds to 1 minute and 30 seconds with this magical speed up. STEPH: Nice. That's a great idea, TestProf. I don't know if I've used that tool. It rings a bell. But that's an awesome sales pitch for using TestProf. CHRIS: Similarly, I don't think I'd ever use it before. But it truly was this wonderful holiday gift. Because the minute I switched over to this branch, I was like, oh my God, the tests are so fast. I have one of those fancy, new fast computers, [laughs] and now they're so fast. STEPH: Wait, you had to switch to a branch? I figured it was something that you had to do special on your machine. So I'm intrigued how they fixed it for you, and then you switched to a branch and saw the speed increase. CHRIS: So they opened a pull request. And that pull request had the change in the code. So it was a code-level configuration to say, "Hey, Devise, when you do the password hashing thing, maybe just don't, maybe be easy for a moment," [laughter] but only in the test configuration. So all I had to do was check out the branch, and then that configuration was part of the Rails helper setup, and then we were good to go from there. I added an extra let me be terrified about this because the idea of not hashing passwords in production is terrifying. So let me raise...I put a couple of different guards against like, this should only ever run in test. I know it's in the spec support directory, so it shouldn't. Let me just add some other guards here just to superduper make sure we still hash passwords in production. STEPH: Devise has a bcrypt chill mode. Good to know. [laughs] And I like all the guards you put in place too. CHRIS: Yeah, it was really frankly such a relief to get that back to normal, is how I would describe it. But yeah, that's a fun little testing, and password hashing, and little adventure that I get to go on. Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. STEPH: So I have something that I've been wanting to ask you, and it's not tech-related. But we can make this personal and work however we want to tackle it. But there is a previous episode where we read a listener question from Brian about their self-diagnosed toxic trait being large pull requests. And Brian was being playful with the use of the term toxic trait. But it got me thinking, it's like, well, what is my toxic trait? And it seems like a fun twist on you, and I aren't really big on New Year's Eve resolutions. And in fact, I think you and I are more like if we're interested in achieving a goal, we'd rather focus on building a habit versus this specific, ambiguous we're going to publish ten blogs this year. But rather, I'd rather sit down and write for 15 minutes each day. And it seemed like a fun twist instead of thinking about what are my toxic traits, personal, at work? Large pull request is a really fun example. So I'll let you choose. I can go first, or you can go first, but I'm excited to hear your thoughts on this one. CHRIS: I think I've been talking too much. So let's have you go first at this point/ also, I want a few more seconds to think about my toxic trait. STEPH: [laughs] All right, I have a couple. So that's an interesting point start there [laughs], but here we are. So I was even bold because I asked other people. Because I'm like, well, if I'm going to be fully self-aware, I can't just...I might lie to myself. So I'm going to have to ask some other people. So I asked other folks. And my personal toxic trait is I am tardy. I am that person who I love to show up 5, 10, 15 minutes late. It's who I am. I don't find it a problem, but it often bothers other people. So that is my informed toxic trait. That might be a strong term for it. But that's the one that gives people the most grief. CHRIS: Interesting. I do find the framing of I don't find my own tardiness to be a problem as a really interesting sort of lens on it. But okay, it's okay. STEPH: I see it as long as I'm getting really good quality time with someone; if I'm five minutes late, I'm five minutes late. I think the voice going high means I'm a little defensive. [laughs] CHRIS: But at least you're self-aware about all of these aspects. [laughs] That's critical. STEPH: I am self-aware, and most of the people in my life are also self-aware, although I do correct that behavior for work. That feels more important that I be on time for everything because I don't want anyone to feel that I am not valuing their time. But when it comes to friends and family, they thankfully accept me for who I am. But then, on the work note, I started thinking about toxic traits there. And the one I came up with is that I'm a pretty empathetic person. And there's something that I learned that's called toxic empathy. And it's when you let people's emotions hijack your own emotions, or you'll prioritize someone else's physical or mental health over your own. So, for example, it could be letting another person's anxiety and stress keep you from getting your current tasks and responsibilities done. And there's a really funny tweet that I saw where someone says, "Hey, can I vent to you about something?" And the first person telling it from their perspective they're crying in the middle of a breakdown. And they're like, "Yeah, sure, what's up?" And I felt seen by that tweet. I was like, yeah; this seems like something I would do. [laughs] So over time, as something I'm aware of about myself, I've learned to set more boundaries and only keep relationships where equal support is given to both individuals. And this circles back to the book anecdote that I shared where I had to be careful about the books that I read because they can really affect my mood based on how the characters are doing in that book. So yeah, that's mine. I have one other one that I want to talk about. But I'm going to pause there so you can go. CHRIS: Okay, fun. [laughs] This is fun. And it is a challenging mental exercise. But it is also, I don't know, vulnerable, and you have to look inside and all that. I think I poked at one earlier on as we were talking, but the idea of perfect is the enemy of the good. And I don't mean this in the terrible like; what's your worst trait in a job interview? And you're like, "I'm a perfectionist." I don't mean it in that way. I mean, I have at times struggled to make progress because so much of me wants to build the complete plan, and then very meticulously worked through in exactly the order that I define, sort of like a waterfall versus agile sort of thing. And it is an ongoing very intentional body of work for me to try and break myself off those habits to try and accept what's the best thing that I can do? How can I move forward? How can I identify things that I will regret later versus things that are probably fine? They're little messes that I can clean up, that sort of thing. And even that construing it as like there's a good choice and a bad choice, and I'm trying to find the perfect choice. It's like almost nothing in the world actually falls into that shape. So perfect is the enemy of the good is a really useful phrase that I've held onto that helps me. And it's like, aiming for that perfection will cause you to miss the good that is available. And so, trying to be very intentional with that is the work that I'm doing. But that I think is a toxic trait that I have. STEPH: I really like what you just said about being able to identify regrets. That feels huge. If you can look at a moment and say, "I really want to get all this done. I will regret if I don't do this, but the rest of it can wait," that feels really significant. So the other one that I wanted to talk about is actually one that I feel like I've overcome. So this one makes me happy because I feel like I'm in a much better space with it, but it's negative self-talk. And it's essentially just how you treat yourself when you make a mistake. Or what's your internal dialogue throughout the day? And I used to be harsh on myself. If I made a mistake, I was upset, I was annoyed with myself, and I wouldn't have a kind voice. And I don't know if I've shared this with you. But over time, I've gotten much better at that. And what has really helped me with it is instead of talking to myself in an unkind voice, I talk to myself how someone who loves me will talk to me. I'm not going to talk to a friend in a really terrible, mean voice, and I wouldn't expect them to talk to me. So I channel someone that I know is very positive and supportive of me. And I will frame it in that context. So then, when I make a mistake, it's not a big deal. And I just will say kind things to myself or laugh about it and move through it. And I found that has been very helpful and also funny and maybe a little embarrassing at times because when pairing, I will talk out loud to myself. And so I'll do something silly, and I'll laugh. I'm like, "Oh, Stephanie," that was silly. And the other person hears me say that. [laughs] So it's a little entertainment for them too, I suppose. CHRIS: Having observed it, it is charming. STEPH: It's something that I've noticed that a lot of people do, and we don't talk about a lot. I mean, there's imposter syndrome. People will talk about that. But we don't often talk about how critical we are of ourselves. It's something that I will talk to people who I highly admire and just think they're incredibly good at what they do. And then when they give me a glimpse into how they think about themselves at times or how they will berate themselves for something they have done or because they didn't sit down for that 15 minutes and write per day, then it really highlights. And I hope that if we talk about this more, the fact that people tend to have such a negative inner critical voice, that maybe we can encourage people to start filtering that voice to a more kind voice and more supportive voice, and not have this unhelpful energy that's holding us back from really enjoying our work and being our best self. CHRIS: That's so interesting to hear you say all of that for one of your traits because it's very similar to the last one for myself, which is I find that I do not feel safe unless (This is going to sound perhaps boastful, and I definitely do not mean it as boastful.) but unless I'm perfect. I guess the standard that I hold myself to versus the standard that I hold others to are wildly different. Of course, for other people, yes, bugs will get into the code, or they may misunderstand something, or they may miss communicate something, or they may forget something. But if I do that, I feel unsafe, which is a thing that I've slowly come to recognize. I'm like, well, that shouldn't be true because that's definitely not how I feel about other people. That's not a reasonable standard to hold. But that needing to be perfectly secured on all fronts and have just this very defensible like, yeah, I did the work, and it's great, and that's all that's true in the world. That's not reasonable. I'm never going to achieve that. And so, for a long time, there have been moments where I just don't feel great as a result of this, as a result of the standard that I'm trying to hold myself to. But very similarly, I have brought voices into my head. In my case, I've actually identified a board of directors which are random actual people from my world but then also celebrities or fake people, and I will have conversations with them in my head. And that is a true thing about me that I'm now saying on the internet, here we are. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And I'm going to throw it out there. It is fantastic. It is one of my favorite things that I have in my world. As a pointed example of a time that I did this, I was running a race at one point, which I occasionally will run road races. I am not good at it at all. But I was running this particular race. It was a five-mile January race a couple of years back. And I was getting towards the end, and I was just going way faster than I normally do. I was at the four-mile mark, and I was well ahead of pace. I was like, what is this? I was on track to get a personal record. I was like, this is exciting. But I didn't know if I could finish. And so I started to consult the board of directors and just check in with them and see what they would think about this. And I got weirdly emotional, and it was weirdly real is the thing that was very interesting, not like I actually believed that these people were running with me or anything of that nature. But the emotions and the feelings that I was able to build up in that moment were so real and so powerful and useful to me that it was just like, oh, okay, yeah, that's a neat trick. I'm going to hold on to that one. And it has been continuously useful moving forward from that of like, yeah, I can just have random conversations with anyone and find useful things in that and then use that to feel better about how I'm working. STEPH: I so love this idea. And I'm now thinking about who to put on my board of directors. [laughs] CHRIS: I'm telling you, everybody should have one. As I'm saying this, there is definitely a portion of me that is very self-conscious that I'm saying this on the internet because this is probably one of the weirdest things that I do. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: But it is so valuable. And it's one of those like; I like getting over that hump of like, well, this is an odd little habit that I have, but the utility that I get from it and the value is great. So highly recommend it. It's a fun game of who gets to go on your board. You can change it out every year. And it is interesting because the more formed picture that you have of the individual, the more you can have a real conversation with them, and that's fun. STEPH: So, as I'm working on forming a board of directors, how do you separate? Is it based on one person is running work and one is finance? How does each person have a role? CHRIS: So there are no rules in this game. [laughs] This is a ridiculous thing that I do. But I find value in it's sort of vaguely the same collection of individuals. Some of them are truly archetypal, even fictitious characters. As long as I can have a picture in my head of them and say, "What would they say in a situation?" If you're considering, say, moving jobs? What would Arnold Schwarzenegger have to say about that? And you'd be surprised the minute you ask it in your head; your brain is surprisingly good at these things. And it's like, let me paint The Terminator yelling at you to get the new job. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: Not get to the chopper, but get the new job. And it's surprisingly effective. And so I don't have a compartmentalized like, this is my work crew, this is my life crew. It's a nonsense collection of fake people in my head that I get to talk to. I'm saying this on the internet; here we are. [laughs] STEPH: That makes sense to me, though, because as you're describing that situation, I do something similar, but I've just never thought about it in these concrete terms where I have someone in mind, and it's a real person in my life who are my confidence person. They're the one that I know they are very confident. They're going to push for the best deal for themselves. They're going to look out for themselves. They're going to look out for me. They're going to support me. I have that person. And so, even if I can't talk to them in reality, then I will still channel that energy. And then I have someone else who's like my kind filter, and they're the person that's going to be very supportive. And you make mistakes, and it's not a big deal, and you learn, and you move on. And so I have those different...and in my mind, I just saw them as coaches. Instead of board of directors, I just see them as different things that I don't see as strong in my character. And so I have these coaches in those particular areas that then I will pull energy from to then bolster myself in a particular way or skill. This was fun. I'm so glad we talked about this because that is very insightful to you, and for me as well, and to myself. CHRIS: Yeah, we went deep on this episode. STEPH: No tech but lots of deep personal insight. CHRIS: I talked a little bit about bcrypt. [laughs] You can't stop me from talking about tech for an entire episode. But then I also talked about my board of directors and the conversations I have with myself, so I feel like I rounded it out pretty good. STEPH: It's a very round episode. CHRIS: Yeah, I agree. And with that roundedness, should we wrap up? STEPH: Let's wrap up. CHRIS: The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee!!! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

Chris talks feature flags featuring Flipper (Say that 3x fast!), and Steph talks reducing stress by a) having a work shutdown ritual and b) the fact that thoughtbot is experimenting with half-day Fridays. (Fri-yay?) Flipper (https://featureflags.io/2016/04/08/flipper-a-feature-flipper-feature-toggle-library/) Drastically Reduce Stress with a Work Shutdown Ritual (https://www.calnewport.com/blog/2009/06/08/drastically-reduce-stress-with-a-work-shutdown-ritual/) Iceland's Journey to a Short Working Week (https://autonomy.work/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/ICELAND_4DW.pdf) Burnout: The Secret to Unlocking the Stress Cycle (https://www.burnoutbook.net/) Transcript: STEPH: Hey, do you know that we could have an in-person recording at the end of October? CHRIS: I do. Yes, I'm planning. That is in the back of my head. I guess I hadn't said that to you yet. But I'm glad that we have separately had the same conversation, and we've got to figure that out, although I don't know how to do noise cancellation and whatnot in the room. [laughs] How do we...we'll have to figure it out. Like, put a blanket in between us but so that we can see across it, but it absorbs sound in the middle. It's weird. I don't know how to do stuff. Just thinking out loud here. STEPH: We'll just be in the same place but still different rooms. So it'll feel no different. [laughter] Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. Hey, Chris, what's new in your world? CHRIS: Feature flags. Feature flags are an old favorite, but they have become new again in the application that I'm working on. We had a new feature that we were building out. But we assumed correctly that it would be nice to be able to break it apart into smaller pieces and sort of deliver it incrementally but not necessarily want to expose that to our end users. And so, we opted with that ticket to bring along the feature flag system. So we've introduced Flipper, in particular, which is a wonderful gem; it does the job. We're using the ActiveRecord adapter. All that kind of makes sense, happy about that. And so now we have feature flags. But it was one of those mindset shifts where the minute we got feature flags, I was like, yes, okay, everything behind a feature flag. And we've been leaning into that more and more, and it really is so nice and so freeing, and so absolutely loving it so far. STEPH: I'm intrigued. You said, "Everything behind a feature flag." Like, is it really everything or? Yeah, tell me more. CHRIS: Not everything. But at this point, we're still very early on in this application, so there are fundamental facets of the platform, different areas of what users can do. And so the actual stuff that works and is wired up is pretty minimal, but we want to have a little more surface area built out in the app for demo purposes, for conversations that are happening, et cetera. And so, we built out a bunch of new pages to represent functionality. And so there are sidebar links, and then the actual page itself, and routing, and all of the things that are associated with that, and so all of those have come in. I think there are five new top-level nav sections of the platform that are all introduced behind a feature flag right now. And then there's some new functionality within existing pages that we've put behind feature flags. So it's not truly every line of code, but it's basically the entry point to all new major features we're putting behind a feature flag. STEPH: Okay, cool. I'm curious. How are you finding that in terms of does it feel manageable? Do you feel like anybody can go into the UI and then turn on feature flags for demos and feel confident that they know what they're turning on and off? CHRIS: We haven't gotten to that self-serve place. At this point, the dev team is managing the feature flags. So on production, we have an internal group configured within Flipper. So we can say, "Ship this feature for all internal users so that we can do testing." So there is a handful of us that all have accounts on production. And then on staging, we have a couple of representative users that we've been just turning everything on for so that we know via staging we can act as that user and then see the application with all of the bells and whistles. Down the road, I think we're going to get more intentional with it, particularly the idea of a demo account. That's something that we want to lean into. And for that user, we'll probably be turning on certain subsets of the feature flags. I think we'll get a little more granular in how we think about that. For now, we're not as detailed in it, but I think that is something that we want to expand as we move forward. STEPH: Nice. Yeah, I was curious because feature flags came up in our recent retro with the client team because we've gotten to a point where our feature flags feel complex enough that it's becoming challenging and not just from the complexity of the feature flags but also from the UI perspective. Where it feels challenging for users to understand how to turn a feature on, exactly what that impacts, and making sure that then they're not changing developer-focused feature flags, so those are the feature flags that we're using to ship a change but then not turn it on until we're ready. It is user-facing, but it's something that should be managed more by developers as to when we turn it on or off. So I was curious to hear that's going for you because that's something that we are looking into. And funnily enough, you asked me recently, "Why aren't y'all using Flipper?" And I didn't have a great answer for you. And that question came up again where we looked at each other, and we're like, okay, we know there was a really good reason we didn't use Flipper when we first had this discussion. But none of us can remember, or at least the people in that conversation couldn't remember. So now we're asking ourselves the question of we've made it this far. Is it time to bring in Flipper or another service? Because we're getting to the point that we're starting to build too much of our own feature flag system. CHRIS: So did you uncover an answer, or are you all just agreeing that the question makes sense? STEPH: Agreeing that the question makes sense. [laughs] CHRIS: That's the first step on a long journey to switching from internal tooling to somebody else managing that for you. STEPH: Yeah, because none of us could remember exactly. But it was funny because I was like, am I just forgetting something here when you asked me that? So I felt validated that others were like, "Oh yeah, I remember that conversation. But I too can't recall why we didn't want to use Flipper in the moment or a similar service." CHRIS: I'll definitely be interested to hear if you do end up trying to migrate off to another system or find a different approach there or if you do stick with the current configuration that you have. Because those projects they're the sort of sneaky ones that it's like, oh, we've been actually relying on this for a while. It's a core part of our infrastructure, and how we do the work, and the process, and how we deploy. That's a lot. And so, to switch that out in-flight becomes really difficult. It's one of those things where the longer it goes on, the harder it is to make that change. But at some point, you sometimes make the decision to make it. So I will be very interested to hear if you do make that decision and then, if so, what that changeover process looks like. STEPH: Yeah, totally. I'll be sure to keep you up to date as we make any progress or decisions around feature flags. CHRIS: But yeah, your questions around management and communication of it that is a thing that's in the back of my mind. We're still early enough in our usage of it, and just broadly, how we're working, we haven't really felt that pain yet, but I expect it's coming very soon. And in particular, we have functionality now that is merged and is part of the codebase but isn't fully deployed or fully released rather. That's probably the correct word. We have not fully released this functionality, and we don't have a system right now for tracking that. So I'm thinking right now we're using Trello for product management. I'm thinking we want another column that is not entirely done but is tracking the feature flags that are currently in flight and just use that as a place to gather communication. Do we feel like this is ready? Let's dial this up to 50%, or let's enable it for this beta group or whatever it is to sort of be able to communicate that. And then ideally, also as a way to track these are the ones that are active right now. You know what? We feel like this one's ready. So do the code change so that we no longer use the feature flag, and then we can actually turn it off. Currently, I feel like I can defer that for a little while, but it is something that's in the back of my mind. And then, of course, I nerd sniped myself, and I was like, all right, how do I grep the codebase for all the feature flags that we're using? Okay. There are a couple of different patterns as to how we're using…You know what? I think I actually need an AST-based parser here, and I need to use the Visitor...You know what? Never mind. Stop it. Stop it. [laughs] It was one of those where I was like...I was doing this not during actual work hours. It was just a question in my mind, and then I started to poke at it. I was like, oh, this could be fun. And then I was like, no, no, no, stop it. You need to go read a book or something. Calm down. STEPH: As part of the optimization around our feature flag system that we've created, we've added a few enhancements, which I think is also one of the reasons we're starting to question how far we want to go in this direction. One of them is we want a very easy way to track what's turned on and what's turned off for an environment. So we have a task that will easily check, or it prints out a really nice list of these are all your flags, and this is the state that they're in. And by using the system that we have, we have one file that represents...well, you mentioned migration because we're migrating from the old system to this new one. So it's still a little bit in that space of where we haven't fully moved over. So now, moving over to a third thing like Flipper will be even more interesting because of that. But the current system, we have a file that lists all the feature flags and a really nice description that goes with it, which I know is supported by Flipper and other services as well. But having that one file does make it nice where you can just scan through there and see what's in use. I really think it's the UI and the challenges that the users are facing and understanding what a feature flag does, and which ones they should turn off, and which ones they shouldn't touch that that's the point where we started questioning okay, we need to improve the UI. But to improve the UI, do we really want to fully embrace our current system and make those improvements, or is now that time that we should consider moving to something else? Because Flipper already has a really nice UI. I think there is a free tier and a paid tier with Flipper, and the paid tier has a UI that ships. CHRIS: There's definitely a distinct thing, Flipper Cloud, which is their hosted enterprise-y solution, and that's the paid offering. But Flipper just the core gem there's also Flipper web, I want to say is what it is, or Flipper UI. And I think it's an engine that you mount within your Rails app and that displays a UI so that you can manage things, add groups and teams. So we're definitely using that. I've got my eye on Flipper Cloud, but I have some fundamental questions around I like to keep my data in the system, and so this is an external other thing. And what's the synchronization? I haven't really even looked into it like that. But I love that Flipper exists within our application. One of the niceties that Flipper Cloud does have is an audit history, which I think is interesting just to understand over time who changed what for what reasons? It's got the ability to roll back and maintain versions and whatnot. So there are some things in it that definitely look very interesting to me. But for now, the open-source, free version of Flipper plus Flipper UI has been plenty for us. STEPH: That's cool. I didn't know about the audit feature. CHRIS: Yeah. It definitely feels like one of those niceties to have for a more enterprise offering. So I could see myself talking me into it at some point but not quite yet. On that note though, so feature flags we introduced a week and a half, something like that, ago, and we've been leaning into them more and more. But as part of that, or in the back of my mind, I've wanted to go to continuous deployment. So we had our first official retro this week. The project is growing up. We're becoming a lot of things. We used retro to talk about continuous deployment, all of these things that feel very real. Just to highlight it, retro is super important. And the fact that we haven't had one until now is mainly because up till now, it's been primarily myself and another developer. So we've been having essentially one-on-ones but not a more formal retro that involves others. At this point, we now have myself and two other developers that are working on the project, as well as someone who's stepped into the role of product manager. So we now have communication collaboration. How are we doing the work? How are we shipping features and communicating about bugs and all of that? So now felt like the right time to start having that more formal process. So now, every two weeks, we're going to have a retro, and hopefully, through that, retro will do the magic that retro can do at its best which is help us get better at all the things that we're doing. But yeah, one of the core things in this particular one was talking about moving to continuous deployment. And so I am super excited to get there because I think, much like test-driven development, it's one of those situations where continuous deployment puts a lot of pressure on the development process. Everything that is being merged needs to be ready to go out into production. And honestly, I love that as a constraint because that will change how you build things. It means that you need to be a little more cautious. You can put something behind a feature flag to protect it. You decouple the idea of merging and deploying from releasing. And I like that distinction. I think that's a really meaningful distinction because it makes you think about what's the entry point to this feature within the codebase? And it's, I think, actually really nice to have fewer and more intentional entry points into various bits of functionality such that if you actually want to shut it off in production, you can do that. That's more straightforward. I think it encourages an intentional coupling, maybe not a perfect decoupling but an intentional coupling within the system. So I'm very excited to explore it. I think feature flags are going to be critical for it, and I think also observability, and monitoring, and logging, and all those things. We need to get really good at them so that if anything does go wrong when we just merge and deploy, we want to know if anything goes wrong as quickly as possible. But overall, I'm super excited about all of the other niceties that fall out of it. STEPH: [singing] I wanna know what's turned on, and I want you to show me. Is that the song you're singing to Flipper? [laughs] CHRIS: [laughs] STEPH: Sorry, friends. I just had to go there. CHRIS: That was just in your head. You had that, and you needed to get it out. I appreciate it. [laughter] Again, I got Flipper UI, so that's not the question I'm asking. I think that's the question you have in your heart. STEPH: [laughs] Mid-roll Ad And now we're going to take a quick break to tell you about today's sponsor, Orbit. Orbit is mission control for community builders. Orbit offers data analytics, reporting, and insights across all the places your community exists in a single location. Orbit's origins are in the open-source and developer relations communities. And that continues today with an active open-source culture in an accessible and documented API. With thousands of communities currently relying on Orbit, they are rapidly growing their engineering team. The company is entirely remote-first with team members around the world. You can work from home, from an Orbit outpost in San Francisco or Paris, or find yourself a coworking spot in your city. The tech stack of the main orbit app is Ruby on Rails with JavaScript on the front end. If you're looking for your next role with an empathetic product-driven team that prides itself on work-life balance, professional development, and giving back to the larger community, then consider checking out the Orbit careers page for more information. Bonus points if working in a Ruby codebase with a Ruby-oriented team gives you a lot of joy. Find out more at orbit.love/weloveruby. STEPH: That's funny about the CI deployment adding pressure to the development process because you're absolutely right. But I see it as such a positive and improvement that I don't really think about the pressure that it's adding. And I just think, yes, this is awesome, and I want this to happen and if there are steps that we have to take in that direction. It dawned on me that what you said is very true, but I've just never really thought about it from that perspective about the pressure. Because I think the thing that does add more pressure for me is figuring out what can I deploy, or do I need to cherry-pick commits? What does that look like? And going through that whole cycle and stress is more stressful to me than figuring out how do we get to continuous deployments and making sure that everything is in a safe space to be deployed? CHRIS: That's the dream. I'm going to see if I can live it. I'll let you know how it goes. But yeah, that's a bit of what's up in my world. What else is going on in your world other than some lovely singing? STEPH: Oh, there's always lots of singing. It's been an interesting week. It's been a mix of some hiring work. Specifically, we are helping our client team build their development team. So we have been helping them implement a hiring process. And then also going through technical interviews and then going through different stages of that interview process. And that's been really nice. I haven't done that specifically for a client team where I helped them build a hiring pipeline from scratch and then also conduct those interviews. And one thing that stood out to me is that rotations are really important to me and specifically that we don't ask for volunteers. So as we were having candidates come through and then they were ready to schedule an interview, then we are reaching out to the rest of the development team and saying, "Hey, we have this person. They're going to be scheduled at this time. Who's available? Who's interested? I'm looking for volunteers." And that puts pressure on people, especially someone that may be more empathetic to feel the need to volunteer. So then you can end up having more people volunteer than others. So we've established a rotation to make sure that doesn't happen, and people are assigned as it becomes their next turn to conduct an interview. So that's been a lot of fun to refine that process and essentially make it easier. So the rest of the development team doesn't have to think about the hiring. But it still has an easy way of just saying, "Hey," and tapping someone to say, "Hey, it's your turn to run an interview." The other thing I've been working out is figuring out how to measure an experiment. So we at thoughtbot are running an experiment where we're looking to address some of the concerns around sustainability and people feeling burned out. And so we have introduced half-day Fridays, more specifically 3.5 Fridays, as our half-day Fridays just to help everybody be certain about what a half-day looks like. And then also, you can choose your half-day. Everybody works different schedules. We're across different time zones, so just to make sure it's really clear for folks and that they understand that they don't need to work more than those hours, and then they should have that additional downtime. And that's been amazing. This is the second Friday of the experiment, and we're doing this for nine Fridays straight. And one of the questions that came up was, well, how do we know we did a good thing? How do we know that we helped people in terms of sustainability or addressing some of the feelings that they're having around burnout? And so I've collaborated with a couple of other thoughtboters to think through of a way to measure it. It turns out helping someone measure their wellness is incredibly complex. And so we went for a fairly simple approach where we're using an anonymous survey with a number of questions. And those questions aren't really meant to stand up to scientific scrutiny but more to figure out how the team is feeling at the time that they fill out the survey and then also to understand how the reduced weekly hours have impacted their schedule. And are people working extra hours to then accommodate the fact that we now have these half Fridays? So do you feel pressured that because you can't work a full day on Friday that you are now working an extra hour or two Monday through Thursday to accommodate that time off? So that survey just went out today. And one of the really interesting parts (I just haven't had to create content for a survey in a while.) was making sure that I'm not introducing leading questions or phrasing things in a very positive or negative light since that is a bias that then people will pick up on. So instead of saying, "I find it easy to focus at work," and then having like a multiple choice of true, always, never, that kind of thing, instead rephrasing the question to be, "Are you able to focus during work hours?" And then you have a scale there. Or instead of asking someone how much energy they have, maybe it's something like, "Do you experience fatigue during the day?" Or instead of asking someone, "Are you stressed at work?" because that can have a more negative connotation. It may lead someone to feel more negatively as they are assessing that question. Then you can say, "How do you feel when you're at work?" And then you can provide those answers of I'm stressed, slightly stressed, neutral, slightly relaxed, and relaxed. So it generated some interesting conversations around the importance of how we phrase questions and how we collect feedback. And I really enjoyed that process, and I'm really looking forward to seeing what folks have to say. And we're going to have three surveys total. So we have one that's early on in the experiment since we're only two Fridays in. We'll have one middle experiment survey go out, and then we'll have one at the end once we're done. And then hopefully, everybody's responses will then help us understand how the experiment went and then make a decision going forward. I'll be honest; I'm really hoping that this becomes a trend and something that we stick with. It is a professional goal of mine to slowly reduce the hours that I work each week or quickly; it doesn't have to be slowly. But I really like the four-day workweek. It's something that I haven't done, but I've been reading about it a fair amount lately. I feel like I've been seeing more studies conducted recently becoming published, and it's just very interesting to me. I had some similar concerns of how am I still going to be productive? My to-do list hasn't changed, but my hours are changing. So how am I still going to get everything done? And does it make sense for me to still get paid the same amount of money if I'm only working four out of the five days? And I had lots of questions around that, and the studies have been very enlightening and very positive in the outcome of a reduced workweek, not just for the individuals but for the companies as well. CHRIS: It's such an interesting space and exploration. The way that you're framing the survey sounds really great. It sounds like you're trying to be really intentional around the questions that you're asking and not being leading and whatnot. That said, it is one of the historically hard problems trying to quantify this and trying to actually boil it down. And there are so many different axes even that you're measuring on. Is it just increased employee happiness? Is it retention that you're talking about? Is it overall revenue? There are so many different things, and it's very tricky. I'm super interested to hear the results when you get those. So you're doing what sounds like more of a qualitative study like, how are you feeling? As opposed to a more quantitative sort of thing, is that right? STEPH: Yes, it's more in the realm of how are you feeling? And are you working extra hours, or are you truly taking the time off? CHRIS: Yeah, I think it's really hard to take something like this and try and get it into the quantitative space, even though like, oh yeah, if we could have a number, if it used to be two and now it's four, fantastic. We've doubled whatever that measure is. I don't know what the unit would be on this arbitrary number I made up. But again, that's the hard thing and probably not feasible at all. And so it makes sense the approach that you're taking. But it's super difficult. So I'm very interested to hear how that goes. More generally, the four-day workweek thing is such a nice idea. We should do that more. I'm trying to think how long I did that. So during the period that I was working freelance, I think there were probably at least five months where I did just a true four-day workweek. Fridays were my own. It was fantastic. Granted, I recorded the podcast with you. But that day was mine to shape as I wanted. And I found it was a really nice decompression period having that for a number of weeks in a row. And just getting to take care of personal stuff that I hadn't been and just having that extra little bit of space and time. And it really was wonderful. Now I'm working full five days a week, and my Fridays aren't even investment days, so I don't know what I'm doing over here. But I agree. I really like that idea, and I think it's a wonderful thing. And it's, I don't know, sort of the promise of this whole capitalism adventure we're supposed to go on, increasing productivity. And wasn't this the promise the whole time, everybody, so I am intrigued to see it being explored more, to see it being discussed. And what you're talking about of it's not just good for the employees, but it's also great for the companies. You're getting people that are more engaged on the days that they're working, which feels very true to me. Like, on a great day, I can do some amazing work. On a terrible day, I can do mediocre to bad work. It is totally possible for me to do something that is actively detrimental. Like, I introduce a bug that is going to impact a bunch of customers. And the remediation of that is going to take many more hours. That is totally a realistic thing. I think we often think of productivity in terms of are you at zero or some amount more than zero? But there is definitely another side of that. And so the cost of being not at your best is extremely high in my mind. And so anything we can do to improve that. STEPH: There's a recent study from a non-profit company called Autonomy that published some research called Going Public: Iceland's Journey to a Shorter Working Week. It's very interesting. And a number of people in my social circle have shared it. And that's one of the reasons that I came across it. And they commented in there that one of the reasons...I hope I'm getting this right, but we'll link to it in case I've gotten it a bit wrong. But one of the reasons that Iceland was interested or open to this idea of moving workers to a shorter workweek is because they were struggling with productivity and where people were working a lot of hours, but it still felt like their productivity was dropping. So then Autonomy ran this study to help figure out are there ways to improve productivity? Will shortening a workweek actually lead to higher productivity? And there was a statement in there that I really liked where it talks about the more hours that we work; we're actually lowering our per hour productivity which rings so true for me. Because I am one of those individuals where I'm very stubborn, and so if I'm stuck on something, I will put so many hours into trying to figure it out. But at some point, I have to just walk away, and if I do, I will solve it that much faster. But if I just try to use hours as my way to chip away at a problem, then that's not going to solve it. And my ability to solve that problem takes exponentially more time than if I had just walked away and then come back to the problem fresh and engaged. And some of the case studies I admired the way that they tackled the problem. They would essentially pay the company. So the company could reduce the hours for certain employees so then they could run the experiment. So if they reduced employees to say 32 hours but the company didn't actually want to stop working at 32 hours and they wanted to keep going, so then they brought in other people to work the remaining eight hours. Then as part of that study, they would pay the company to help them stay at their current level of productivity or current level of hours. This way, they could conduct the study. And I thought that was a really neat idea. I do have lots of questions still around the approach itself because it is how do you reduce your to-do list, essentially? So just because you dropped to a four-day workweek. So essentially, you have to just say less stuff gets done. Or, as these case studies promise, they're saying you're actually going to be more productive. So you will still continue to get a lot of your work done. I'm curious about that. I'd like to track my own productivity and see if I feel similarly. And then also, who is this for? Is this for everybody? Does everybody get to move to a four-day workweek? Is this for certain companies? Is it for certain jobs? Ideally, this is for everybody because there are so many health benefits to this, but I'm just intrigued as to who this is for, who it impacts, how can we make it available for everyone? And is the dream real that I can work four days a week and still feel as productive, if not more productive, and healthier, and happier as I do when working five days a week? Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is leading-edge application performance monitoring that's designed to help Rails developers quickly find and fix performance issues without having to deal with the headache or overhead of enterprise platform feature bloat. With a developer-centric UI and tracing logic that ties bottlenecks to source code, you can quickly pinpoint and resolve those performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, memory bloat, and much more. Scout's real-time alerting and weekly digest emails let you rest easy knowing Scout's on watch and resolving performance issues before your customers ever see them. Scout has also launched its new error monitoring feature add-on for Python applications. Now you can connect your error reporting and application monitoring data on one platform. See for yourself why developers call Scout their best friend and try our error monitoring and APM free for 14 days; no credit card needed. And as an added-on bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. Learn more at scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: I remember there was an extended period where working remote was this unique benefit that some organizations had. They had adopted that mode. They were async, and remote, and all of these wonderful things. And it became this really interesting selling point for those companies. Now the pandemic obviously pushed public opinion and everything on that in a pretty significant way such that it's a much more common thing. And so, as a result, I think it's less of a differentiator now. It used to be a way to help with recruiting. I wonder if there are organizations that are willing to take this, try it out, see that they are still close to as productive. But if it means that hiring is twice as easy, that is absolutely...especially if it is able to double your ability to hire, that is incredibly valuable or retention similarly. If you can increase retention or if you can make it easier to hire, the value of that is so, so high. And it's interesting in my mind because there's sort of a gold rush on that. That's only true for as long as a four-day workweek is a unique benefit of working at the organization. If this is actually the direction that everything's going and eventually everyone's going to settle to that, then if you wait too long to get there, then you're going to miss all the benefits. You're going to miss that particular benefit of it. And so I do wonder, would it be advantageous to organizations...I'm thinking about this now. Maybe this is the thing I have to do. But would it be advantageous to be that organization as early on as possible and try to get ahead of the curve and use that to hire more easily, retain more easily? Now that I say it all out loud, I'm sold. All right. I got to do this. STEPH: Yeah, I think that's a great comparison of where people are going to start to look for those types of benefits. And so, if you are one of the early adopters and you have the four-day workweek or a reduced workweek in general, then people will gravitate towards that benefit. And it's something that people can use to really help with hiring and retention. And yeah, I love it. You are CTO. So you have influence within your company that you could push for the four-day workweek if you think that's what you want to do. And I would be really intrigued to hear how that goes and how you feel if you...well, you've done it before where you've worked four days a week. So applying that to your current situation, how does that feel? CHRIS: Now you're actually holding me accountable to the things that I randomly said in passing. But it's interesting. So we're so early stage, and there's so much small work to do. There's all…oh, got to set up a website. We've got to do this. We've got to build that integration. There's just kind of scrambling to be done. And so there's a certain version in my mind that maybe we're in a period of time where additional hours are actually useful. There's a cost to them. Let's be clear about that. And so how long that will remain true, I'm not sure. I could see a point perhaps down the road where we achieve a little bit closer to steady-state maybe, who knows? It depends on how fast growth is and et cetera, a lot of other things. So I'm not sure that I would actually lead with this experiment myself, given where the organization is at right now. But I could see an organization that's at a little bit more of a steady-state, that's growing more incrementally, that is trying to think really hard about things like hiring and retention. If those were bigger questions in my mind, then I think I would be considering this more pointedly. But for now, I'm like, I kind of just got to do a bunch of stuff. And so my brain is telling me a different story, but it is interesting. I want to interrogate that and be like, brain, why is that the story you have there, huh? Huh? STEPH: I really appreciate what you're saying, though, because that makes sense to me. I understand when you are in that earlier stage, there's enough to do that that feels correct. Versus that added benefit of having a reduced workweek does benefit or could benefit larger companies who are looking to hire more heavily, or they're also concerned about retention or just helping their people address feelings of burnout. So I really appreciate that perspective because that also rings true. So along this whole conversation around wellness and how we can help people work more sustainable hours, there's a particular book that I've read that I've been really excited to share and chat with you about. It's called Burnout: The Secret to Unlocking the Stress Cycle. It's written by two sisters, Emily and Amelia Nagoski. And they really talk through the impact that stress has on us and then ways to work through that. And specifically, they talk about completing the stress cycle. And I found this incredibly useful for me because I have had weeks where I have just worked hard Monday through Friday. I've gotten to the end of my day Friday, and I'm like, great, I'm done. I've made it. I can just relax. And I walk away from work, and I can't relax. And I'm just like, I feel sick. I feel not good. Like, I thought I would walk away from work, and I would just suddenly feel this halo of relaxation, and everything would be wonderful. But instead, I just feel a bit ill, and I've never understood that until I was reading their book about completing the stress cycle. Have you ever had moments like that? CHRIS: It has definitely happened to me at various points, yes. STEPH: That makes me feel better because I haven't really chatted about this with someone. So until I read this book and I was like, oh, maybe this is a thing, and it's not just me, and this is something that people are experiencing. So to speak more about completing the stress cycle, they really highlight that stress and feelings, capital F feelings, can cause physiological symptoms. And so it's not just something that we are mentally processing, but we are physically processing the stress that we feel. And there's a really big difference between stressors and stress. So a stressor could be something like an unmeetable deadline. It could be family. It could be money concerns. It could be your morning commute, anything that increases your stress level. And during that, there's a very physical process that happens to your body anytime there's a perceived threat. And it's really helpful to us because it's frankly what triggers our fight, flight, or freeze response. And our bodies receive a rush of adrenaline and cortisol, which essentially, if we're using that flight response, that's going to help us run. And a number of the processes in our system will essentially go into a state of hibernation because everything in our body is very focused on helping us run or do the thing that we think is going to save our life in that moment. The problem is our body doesn't know the difference between what's more of a mental threat versus what is a truly physical threat. So this is the difference between your stress and your stressors. So in more of a physical threat, if there's a lion that you are running from, that is the stressor, but then the stress is everything that you still feel after you have run from that lion. So you encounter a lion, you run. You make it back to your group of people where you are safe, and you celebrate, and you dance, and you hug. And that is completing the stress cycle because you are essentially processing all of that stress. And you are telling your body in a body-focused language that I am safe now, and everything is fine. So you can move back, and anything that was in a hibernation state, all of that dump of adrenaline and cortisol can be worked out of your system, and everything can go back to a normal state. Most of us aren't encountering lions, but we do encounter jerks in meetings or really stressful commutes. And whenever we have survived that meeting, or we've gotten through our commute to the other side, we don't have that moment of celebration where we really let our body know that hey, we've made it through that moment of stress, and we are away from that stressor, and we can actually process everything. So if you're interested in this, the book's really great. It talks about ways that you can process that stress and how important it is to do so. Otherwise, it will literally build up in your system, and it can make you sick. And it will manifest in ways that will let us know that we haven't dealt with that stress. And one of the top methods that they recommend is exercise and movement. That's a really great way to let your body know that you are no longer in an unsafe state, and your body can start to relax. There's also a lot of other great ways. Art is a really big one. It could be hugging someone. It could be calling someone that you love. There are a number of ways that you can process it. But I hadn't recognized how important it is that once you have removed yourself from a stressor, that doesn't necessarily just mean you're done, and you can relax. You actually have to go through that physical process, and then you can relax. So I started incorporating that more into my day that when I'm done with work, I always find something to do, and it's typically to go for a walk, or it's go for a run. And I have found that now I really haven't felt that ill-feeling where I'm trying to relax, but I just feel sick. Saying that out loud, I feel like I'm a mess on Fridays. [chuckles] CHRIS: I feel like you're human. It was interesting when you asked the question at the beginning. You were like, "Is this a thing that other people experience?" And my answer was certainly, yes; I have experienced this. I think there's something about me that I think is useful where I don't think I'm special at all on any axis whatsoever. And so whenever there's something that's going on, I'm like, I assume that this is just normal human behavior, which is useful because most of the time it is. And this is the sort of thing where if I'm having a negative experience, I will look to the external world to be like, I'm sure other people have experienced this, and let me pull that in. And I've found that really useful for myself to just be like, I'm not special. There's nothing particularly special about me. So let me go look from the entirety of the internet where people have almost certainly talked about this. And I've not read the book that you're describing here, but it does sound like it does a great job of describing this. There is a blog post that I found that has stayed in the back of my mind and informed a little bit of my day-to-day approach to this sort of thing which is a blog post by Cal Newport, who I think at this point we've mentioned him a handful of times on the show. But the title of the post is Drastically Reduce Stress with a Work Shutdown Ritual. And it's this very interesting little post where he talks about at the end of your day; you want to close the book on it. I think this is especially pointed now that many of us are working from home. For me, this is a new thing. And so, I've been very intentional with trying to put walks at the beginning and end of my day. But in this particular blog post, he describes a routine that he does where he tidies things up and makes his list for the next day. And then he has a particular phrase that he says, which is "schedule shut down, complete." And it's a sort of nonsense phrase. It doesn't even quite make sense grammatically, but it's his phrase that he internalized, and somehow this became his almost mantra for the end of the day. And now when he does it, that's like his all right, okay, turned off the brain, and now I can walk away. I know that I've said the phrase, and I only say the phrase when I have properly set things up. And so it's this weird structure that he's built in his mind. But it totally works to quiet those voices that are like, yeah, but what about…Do we think about…Do we complete…And he's got now this magic phrase that he can say. And so I've really loved that. For myself, I haven't gotten quite to that level, but I've definitely built the here's how I wind down at the end of the day. Here's what I do with lists and what I do so that I can ideally walk away comfortably. Again, this is one of those situations where I sound like I know what I'm doing or have my act together. This is aspirational me. Day-to-day me is a hot mess like everybody else. [laughs] And this is just what I...when I do this, I feel better. Most of the time, I don't do this because I forget it, or because I'm busy, or because I'm stressed, [chuckles], and so I don't do the thing that reduces stress, you know, human stuff. But I really enjoyed that post. STEPH: I haven't heard that one. I like a lot of Cal Newport's work, but I haven't read that particular blog post. Yeah, I think the idea of completing the stress cycle has helped me tremendously because by giving it a name like completing the stress cycle has been really helpful for me because working out is important to me. It's something that I enjoy, but it's also one of those things that's easy to get bumped. It is part of my wellness routine. And so, if I'm really busy, then I will bump it from the list. And then it's something that then doesn't get addressed. But recognizing that this is also important to my productivity, not to just this general idea of wellness, has really helped me recenter how important this is and to make sure that I recognize hey, it's been a stressful day. I need to get up and move. That is a very important part of my day. It is not just part of an exercise routine, but this is something that I need to do to close out my day to then make sure I have a great day tomorrow. So bringing it back, it's been a week that's been filled with a lot of discussions around burnout and then ways that we can measure it and then also address it. And I've really enjoyed reading this book. So I'll be sure to drop a link in the show notes. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Schedule shut down, complete. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeeee!!! Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

What do you get when you mix a worm and a hammerhead shark? Also ants. Steph made some cool new discoveries in bug-land. She also talks about deploys versus releases and how her and her team has changed their deploy structure. Two words: feature flags. Chris talks about cookies: cookie sessions, cookie payloads, cookie footprints, cookie storing. Mmm cookies! The convo wraps up with lamenting over truthiness in code. Truthy or falsy? What's your call? Flipper (https://www.flippercloud.io/) Bike Shed - Ask a Question Form (https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdaFfPYoWmtV3IR3eQRjNz731GJ_a2X6CpZFxKjdPZeztGXKA/viewform) Transcript: STEPH: At the top of my notes for today, I have marauder ants and hammerhead worms. [laughs] CHRIS: I'm sorry, what? I lost you there for...not lost you, but I stopped following. I...what? Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, how's your week going? STEPH: Hey, Chris, it's been a good week. It's been busy, lots has been happening. I learned about a new creature that's in our backyard. They're called hammerhead worms. Have you ever heard of those? CHRIS: I've heard of hammerhead and worms, but not together. The combination is new and novel for me. STEPH: Cool. Cool. So take a hammerhead shark and a worm and combine the two and then you have a hammerhead worm. And it rained really heavily here recently because there's a tropical storm that's making its way up the East Coast. And when I was outside on the porch, I noticed that there were these new worms or worms that I'd never seen before on the back porch. And so I had to Google them to understand because they had the interesting hammer-shaped head. And I found out that they're called hammerhead worms. They're toxic worms that prey on earthworms. And they're basically immortal because if you cut them into multiple pieces, each section can regenerate into a fully developed organism within a few weeks, which is bananas. And a lot of people online highly recommend that you should kill them because they are a toxic predator and they prey on earthworms, which you want in your garden and in your yard. But I didn't, but I learned about them. CHRIS: Wow. That's got some layers there, toxic, intense worms that you can cut in half. And so does their central nervous system just spread throughout their whole body? Where's their brain? How does it...I don't have any real thoughts here. That's just a bunch of stuff, and it's awesome. Thank you for sharing. STEPH: I will warn you. I wouldn't read about hammerhead worms right before bed. Otherwise, you might have some nightmares because the way that they do prey and consume earthworms or other creatures that they prey on is the stuff of horror movies, which I find happens so much in nature, but them especially they fall into that category. So just be aware if you're reading about hammerhead worms and how they consume their food. Now I feel like everybody's going to go read. But as long as you have that warning, I feel safe sending you in that direction. CHRIS: Yeah, first thing in the morning on a very sunny morning, that is the time to do this research. STEPH: Exactly. He got it. I also learned about marauder ants because apparently, this is the day that I'm having. I'm learning about all these creatures. But I won't go into that one, but they're really interesting. And this one's thanks to someone on Twitter who shared, specifically @Rainmaker1973 is their Twitter handle if you want to go see what they shared about marauder ants. So I'll just leave that one for those that are curious. I won't dive into that one because I don't want to take us in the direction of that we're all about worms and ants now. CHRIS: Not all about worms and ants but definitely some. STEPH: But in technical news, I've got some stuff to share, but I was so excited about worms and ants that now I have to figure out which is the thing that I want to share from the week. So there's a couple of interesting things that I'd love to chat about with you, one of them, in particular, is there's been some interesting conversations going on with my client team around deploys versus releases and how we have changed our deploy structure, and then how that has impacted the rest of the team as they are communicating to customers as to what features are available. And there have been some interesting conversations around how to migrate this process forward. So to provide a bit of context, we were previously having very strict, rigid deploys. So we would plan our deploys typically every Tuesday. It was usually once a week. And then we would make sure that everything had been through QA, things had been reviewed and tested. And then we would have one of those more like grand deploys, things are going out. And then hey, if you need to get something into the deploy, let us know; we need to talk about it. So there was just more process and structure to that. And so deploy really mapped to the idea that if we are doing a deploy, then that means all these feature bug fixes are going out, and this is now the time that we can tell customers, "Hey, this new feature is available or this bug that you reported to us has now been fixed." We have since been moving towards a more continuous deployment structure where we're not quite there where we're doing continuous deploy, but we are deploying at least once a day, so it's a lot more frequent. And so this has changed the way that we really map the idea of the work that's being done versus the work that's actually available to customers. Because as we are merging work into the main branch, and then let's say if I'm working on a feature and then I merge that into the main branch and then push it up staging, we have an overnight QA process. So then overnight QA, if they say, "Hey, there's something that's wrong with this feature. It didn't quite meet the required specs," then they can kick that ticket back to me, but that's not true for my code. We could do a revert and take my code out at that point. But at this point, it's in main, and main may have been deployed at that point. So there have been some interesting strategies around how can we safely continue to deploy while we know we often have a 24-hour wait period for QA and to get sign-off on this work? But we want to keep moving forward and then also communicate that just because the code has been deployed doesn't necessarily mean that it's available to customers. There's a lot there. So I'm going to pause and see if you have questions. CHRIS: Well, first, I'm just super excited to talk about this. This is something that's been very much top of mind for me, and it's a direction that I want to be going more and more, so yeah, excited that you're pushing the boundaries on this. I am intrigued. I'm guessing feature flags is the answer about how you're decoupling that and how you're making it so that you've got that separation of deployment and actual availability of the feature. So, yeah, can you talk more about that? STEPH: Definitely. And yes, you're right. We're using feature flags, so we'll use the same scenario. I'm working on a feature, and I want to be able to release it safely, so I'm going to wrap it in a feature flag. And I'll probably wrap it, and maybe it's like a beta feature flag, something to indicate that this is a feature that's going to be available to all, but we don't actually want to turn it on until we know that it's truly ready to be turned on. So then that way, it's hidden, but then we can still merge it into the main branch. We can still have a deploy even if my code hasn't gone through QA at that point, but we know it's still safe to deploy. And then, QA can go to a staging environment; they can test it. And if they say, "No," it's fine because nothing was churned in production. But then, if it gets approved, then we can turn it on, and then we'll have a follow-up to then remove that feature flag. CHRIS: So some follow-on questions. I'm wondering about the architecture of the application. Is this like traditional Rails app rendering HTML on the server, or do you have any more advanced client-side stuff? And then I'm also wondering what you're using for the actual feature flagging, and those will probably inform each other. But what's the story on both of those fronts? STEPH: It's a traditional Rails application. So we're not using any other client-side application. It is Rails and rendering HTML. As for feature flags, so we're not using something traditional. And by traditional, I mean I typically have reached for Flipper in the past for managing feature flags. We're using more of a hand-rolled approach because there's a lot of context there that I don't know is necessarily helpful. But to answer your question, we essentially do have feature flags as columns in the database, and we can just check if they are enabled or disabled. And then that also allows us to easily turn it on, turn it off as well since it's just a database update. CHRIS: Okay, that makes sense. I think the nature of being a Rails application rendering HTML on the server like what you're doing totally makes sense in that context. I think it becomes a lot harder the more complex the architecture of your application is. So if you've got microservices, then suddenly you've probably got to synchronize across some of them, and that sounds like a whole thing. Or even if you have a client-side application, then suddenly you've got to serialize the feature flag stuff across the boundary or somehow expose that, which really does push the issue of we could just render stuff on the server and send it to the client and let that be good enough, then man, is stuff simpler. But unfortunately, that's not the case in a lot of situations. I'm expecting to be introducing feature flags on the app that I'm working on pretty soon. And again, we've got...so it's a Rails server-side thing. So there's going to be plenty of feature flag logic on that side. And then I'll need to do something to serialize it across the boundary and get it onto the client-side without ballooning every payload and adding complexity, and lookups, and whatnot. I think it's doable. Inertia, again, being the core architecture of the application, I think will make this a little bit easier, but I am interested to see what I'm able to pull off and how happy I am with where I get to. Another question that I have for you then are you testing the various flows? So given a Boolean feature flag, you now have two different possible paths for your code to go through. And then there may be even more than Boolean, or you may have feature flags that sort of interact with each other. And how much complexity are you trying to manage and represent in the test suite? STEPH: Yeah, good question, and we are. So we're testing both flows, especially if it's a new feature, then we are testing when the flag is enabled or disabled. One that's been tricky for me is what about a bug fix? Is that something that should be feature flagged? And I think at the surface level, if you're presuming that it needs to go through QA before this is live on production, then the answer is yes, that then you have to feature flag a bug fix, which feels weird. But then the other consideration would be, well, it is a bug fix. And could we find another way to QA this faster or some other approach so that way we don't have to wrap it in a feature flag? And I don't have a great answer for that one because I can see arguments in favor of either approach. Although wrapping everything in a feature flag does feel tedious, it's something that I'm not accustomed to doing. And it's something that then becomes a process for the team to remind each other that, hey, is this wrapped in a feature flag? Or just being mindful of that as part of our process. And it prompted me to think back on the other projects that I've worked on and how did we manage that flow? How did we go from development to staging to QA and then out to production? And one additional consideration with this flow is that we do have an overnight QA team. So in the past, when I've worked with teams, often product managers or even other developers, we would QA each other's work. So then it was a pretty fast turnaround that then you could get something up on staging. Someone could check it out and say, "Yes" or "No." But then I'm also pretty confident most of the teams that I've worked with we have had a distinct staging branch. So we would often merge work into a staging branch, and then deploy that work, and then get it tested. And then, if it passed everything, then we would essentially cherry-pick that work and move it over into production. And I can see there's a lot of arguments against that, but then I have also experienced that and had a really positive experience where we could test everything and not have to worry about going out to production. We didn't have to wrap everything in feature flags, and it just felt really nice to know that everything in the main or production branch, whatever you call your production branch, that everything in there was deployable versus having to go the feature flag route, or the hey, did this go through QA? I don't know. Let me check. Can I include this? Should I cherry-pick some commits into our actual deployment to avoid stuff that hasn't gone through QA? I've been through that dance before too, and that one's not great. CHRIS: I like the way you're framing the different sort of trade-offs that we have there in velocity or deployment speed and ease of iteration versus confidence as things are going out. I have worked with a staging branch before, and I personally did not find it to be valuable. It ended up adding this indirection. Folks had to know how to use Git in a pretty deep way to be comfortable with that just as a starting point. So it already introduced this hurdle of knowledge, and then beyond that, that idea that you have commits going in in a certain order on the staging branch. But then say we verify the functionality of the third commit in that list, and we want to cherry-pick it across to the main branch. Commits don't actually...you can't just take the thing that you had there. That commit existed in the context of all the others. There are subtleties of how history exists in Git. And I would worry about those edge cases where you're taking a piece of work out of the context of the rest of the commits that were around it or before it is, more importantly…that preceded it in the history on the staging branch, and you're now bringing it across to the main branch. Have you now lost something that was meaningful? Ideally, you would get a conflict if it was really bad, but that's more of like a syntactic diff level thing. It's not a functionality-level thing. So personally, I may be overly cautious around this, but I really like as much as possible to have the very boring linear history in Git and do everything I can such that work happens on feature branches and then gets merged in as a fast forward into the main branch or rather the main branch is fast-forward marched into my feature branch such that I'm never working with code that I haven't fully worked with in an integrated way before. But again, even that, as I'm saying that, I have this topological map of Git in my head as I'm saying all of that, and it's complicated. And having any of that complexity leak out into the way we talk about the work is something that I worry about, but maybe I'm worried about a bunch of things that don't matter. Maybe a staging branch is actually fantastic. STEPH: I think you make a lot of good points. Those are a lot of good concerns that come up with...it comes back to the idea that we want to mimic production as much as possible, and we don't want to lose that parity. So then, by having a staging branch, then it feels that we've lost that parity. There could be stuff that's in staging that's not in production. And so staging could be a little bit of this Wild West area, and then that doesn't fully represent then what's going to production. So I certainly understand and agree with those points that you're making. And to speak specifically to the Git challenges, I agree. It does require some more Git knowledge to be able to make that work. Specifically, I think how we handled it on a previous project is where we'd actually cherry-pick our commits into staging and then deploy that. But we always had the PR issued against main. So then merging into main was often a bit easier. But then you're right; things could get out of sync. And the PR is issued against main, so then you still could run into those oddities where then if you are cherry-picking commits in the staging, but then you have your final draft that's going into main. And then what are the differences between those, and what did you lose along the way? And as I say all of that out loud, I definitely understand the Git concerns. And I don't know; I just feel like there's not a great answer then here, which is shocking to me. I've been doing this for a while, and yet here I am feeling like there's not a great answer to this very vital part of our workflow. And I'm surprised even though that we do have a delayed QA process that this still feels like a painful thing to figure out how do we have a continuous deployment workflow even though we do have that delayed QA process? CHRIS: I think somewhat fundamentally your comment there of "I'm surprised that we don't have a good answer to this is," I'm not surprised, I guess, is my reaction. I don't want to go to the software is bad and broken, and we don't know anything end of the spectrum. But I don't feel like we have great answers to a lot of the things about development. I feel like software is more broken than it should be. It costs more to develop. It is difficult. It's hard to create, and maintain, and build over time. And that's just, to get lofty about it, that's what the entire focus of my career is, is trying to solve that problem. But it's a big, hard problem that I do not think is solved, unlike just about any of the fronts. I know how to put stuff in a database and take it back out. And even that, I'm like, oh yeah, but what if the database gets really big? Or what if the database...everything has complexities and edge cases. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And we've joked a handful of times about the catchphrase of The Bike Shed being it depends, and that really feels true, though. I don't know that that's unique to this industry either. I feel like everything in the world is just more complicated the more you look at it, and there aren't clear, good, obvious answers to just about anything in the world, but that's the human condition. I got weirdly philosophical on this, so we should probably round this out. [laughs] STEPH: Well, I can circle us back because I was providing context, and I went a bit into the deep end providing all of that context. So if I circle back to what I wanted to share with you around deploys and releases, there has been that interesting conversation. Now that we have the context, there has been that interesting conversation around originally; we had this very structured deploys, a deploy map to the fact that features were going out to the world. And now we have this concept of a deploy doesn't necessarily mean that's available to customers. It doesn't mean that the code is running. It is more a deploy represents that we have placed a commit. We have placed code on the server. But that doesn't mean that it is accessible to anyone because it's probably hidden behind a feature flag. But from the perspective of the rest of the team that then is communicating these changes out to customers, they still really need to know, okay, when is something actually available to customers? And we kept using this terminology around deploy. And so Joël Quenneville, another thoughtboter who's on this project with me, has done a lot of great, thoughtful work around how can we help them know when something is truly available versus when something is deployed? Because right now, we're using Jira for our ticket issue tracking. And there's a particular screen in Jira that was showing what's being deployed. And from that screen, you can see the status of the ticket, and you would see stuff like in code review, in QA. So, of course, those looking at the tickets are like, hold up, you're deploying something that's in QA? That sounds really dangerous and risky. Why are you doing that? And then we'd have to explain, well, we're deploying it, but it's not actually live or accessible to anybody, but we want to get close to that continuous deploy cycle. So we have shifted to using the terminology of a release. So a deploy is more for the we're putting the code on the server and then release really represents okay, we have now released these features and these bug fixes, and they're now available all with the goal just to make sure that our teams are working well together. But it's been such an interesting conversation around how tickets move, the fact that they can progress linear and then also get moved backwards. But in continuous deployment, things don't go backwards and then making those things align. Typically, things don't go backwards. Technically, yes. CHRIS: History is a directed acyclic graph that only points forward. The arrow of time is very clear on this matter. Yeah, that really does add one more layer of like; what does it mean to actually be out there in the world? I do wonder if giving view-only visibility to the feature flag dashboard and only when it's fully green does someone think that that's deployed? But if you're putting feature flags around everything, there's complexity. And yeah, it's just one more layer to having to manage all of this. And it sounds like you've gotten to a good place, or at least you're evolving in a way that's enjoyable. But yeah, it's complicated. STEPH: Yeah, it definitely feels like we're moving in the right direction and that this will be a better...I want to say workflow, but it really focuses more around vocabulary and some of the changes to our processes and how we surface tickets in Jira. But it's more focused on how we talk about the changes that are getting shipped and when they're available. So, yeah, that's my story. What's new in your world? CHRIS: Well, I very much appreciate your story. In my world, I am in the thick of the MBP initial drive to get something into production, which is one of my favorite times, especially if everyone's in agreement about what exactly do we mean by MVP? Who are the users going to be? What's it going to look like? What's the bar that we're going to maintain? What features can we drop? What can't we drop? When there's a good collaborative sort of everyone rowing in the same direction set of conversations around that, I just love the energy of that time. So I'm happily in that space hacking away on features building as much as I can as quickly as I can. But as part of that, there are a lot of just initial decisions and things that I have to wire up and stuff that I have to change or configure. Thankfully, Rails makes a lot of that not the case. I can just go with what's there and be happy about that. But there is one thing that I did decide to change just today. But it's interesting; I don't think I've actually ever made this change before. I'm sure I've worked on an app that had this configuration, but typically, a Rails app will store the session in a cookie. So there is a signed HTTP only encrypted. I think those are all the things, but it uses a cookie to store that. And the actual data of the session lives in the payload of that cookie. And so, each time there's a request-response lifecycle, the full payload of that cookie is going up and down from the server to the client and then back and forth with all of the requests. And there's a limit; I think it's 4k is the limit on the cookie session. But there are some limitations to cookie sessions as far as I'm coming to understand them; one is the ability to do replay attacks. So if someone gets a hold of that cookie, then unless you rotate the secret key base, which will have some pretty wide-ranging effects on your application, that cookie can be reused in the future because it basically just has like, this is the user's ID. There you go. And there's no way to revoke that other than rotating the secret key base. Additionally, there are just costs of that payload of data, especially if you're putting a non-trivial amount of stuff. Like, if you're getting close to that 4K limit, then you have 4K of overhead, both on the request and the response of your HTTP requests. So especially in apps that are somewhat chatty and making a bunch of Ajax requests or doing different things, that's some weight that you should consider. So all of those mixed together, more so on the security side, I decided to look into it. And I have now switched from a cookie store, and I went all the way to the ActiveRecord database store. So I skipped over...there's a middle option that you can do with Memcached or Redis. We do have Redis in this particular application. We don't have Memcached yet; we probably will at some point. But you can do a memory store, so do Redis and store the session there, but I opted to go all the way to the database. And my understanding of the benefits here are we have a smaller cookie footprint, so smaller overhead on all the requests because now we're only sending the session ID. And then that references the actual payload of data that's stored in the database. We do have the ability now to invalidate sessions, so we can just truncate that table if we just want to sign all the users out and reset the world, which can be useful at times. We also have the ability...if there's any particular user that's like, "I left myself logged in somewhere," we can…well, I actually don't know how to do this now that I say that. I don't know how to log out a specific user because the sessions don't inherently have the user associated with them. You can have an unauthenticated session, which then transitions to be authenticated when someone signs in, and then the user ID gets installed in there. I would love to have these indexed to users such that I could invalidate and have a button on the admin dashboard that says, "Sign out all instances," and that will revoke all of the sessions or actually delete them from the database table now. I think I would have to add some extra instrumentation to do that. So anytime a user signs in via device, we annotate the session records so that it's got a user ID column and then index on that so that we can look them up efficiently. I think that's how that would work, but that's one of those things that I'm like; I think I should think very hard about this before I do it. It has security implications. It's not part of the default package. There's probably a reason for that. I'm going to do that another day. But yeah, overall, it was a pretty easy upgrade. I think I'm happy with it. It feels like one of those things that it's not clear to me why this isn't the default sort of thing where SQLite is often the database that you use just because it's slightly easier to get up and running? But for any application that we're working on, we're like, no, no, no, we're going to go to Postgres for local development and for everything because obviously, that's what we want to do. And I'm wondering if this should be in that space, like yeah, of course, the session should go in the database. There are so many reasons that it's better that way. I'm wondering if there are some edge cases that I'm not thinking about, but overall it seems cool. Have you ever worked with an alternative to the cookie store? STEPH: I'm thinking back to the recent projects that I've worked on. And it's been a while since I've mucked around with session work specifically. And the more recent projects that I've been on, we've used JWTs, or they're pronounced jots, I found out, which is really surprising. I don't know why, but that's a thing. CHRIS: What? STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: This doesn't feel true. STEPH: It's JWT, but it's pronounced jot, J-O-T. CHRIS: I think I'm just going to not do that. This is a trend I'm not going to get on board with. [chuckles] STEPH: I don't even know if it's a trend. I'm not sure who decreed this into the world. CHRIS: You're familiar with the great internet war around GIF versus JIF, right? I think there's room for different opinions. STEPH: I mean, it's really not a war. There's a correct side. CHRIS: We're on the same side, right? STEPH: [laughs] And this is how The Bike Shed ended. No, this is perfect for The Bike Shed. What am I talking about? CHRIS: This is perfect for The Bike Shed. I'm just going to need to hear you say the word real quick. [chuckles] STEPH: Oh, it's GIF, absolutely, CHRIS: Okay. All right, phew. Steph, I was worried, I was worried. Also, anyone out there that says JIF, it's fine. These things don't really matter. Although I am surprised when you have an acronym that gets turned into...I think it's an initialism, like jot versus JWT. I forget which is which. I think JWT would be the acronym. But jot, that's not even...I'm going to move on and say...[laughs] And so I think that JWTs, which is what I'm going to call them in this context, are, as far as I understand it, an orthogonal, different sort of thing. Like, you can put a JWT in the session, and the session can be stored in a cookie or in the database or wherever. You can also put JWTs...often, they are in local storage, which my understanding is that's a bad idea. That is a security vulnerability waiting to happen from cross-site scripting, I think, is the one that is coming to mind. But I think that's an independent thing where JWT is this signed assertion that you are someone. But it's coming often from an external system versus I'm using devise in this case on a Rails app and so devise is using the warden session, which is signing and encrypting and a bunch of stuff that I'm not thinking about. But it's not using JWTs at the end of the day. Jot, really, huh? STEPH: [laughs] I like how that's the thing that stuck out to you. CHRIS: Of course it is. STEPH: But it's fair because it did the same to me too, so I had to share it. [laughs] CHRIS: This is The Bike Shed, after all. [laughs] STEPH: So, going back to your question, what you've done sounds very reasonable to me, especially because you wanted to address that possibility of a replay attack. So I like the idea. I'm also intrigued by why it's not the default. What's the reasoning there? And I'm trying to think of a reason that it wouldn't be the default. And I don't have a great answer off the top of my head. Granted, it's also been a while since I've been in this space. But yeah, everything that you've done sounds really reasonable. I like it. I also see how being able to sign out a specific user would be really neat. That seems like a really nice feature. I don't know how often that would get used, but that seems like a really nice thing to be able to do to identify a particular user if they submitted and, I don't know, if some scenario came up and someone was like, "Help, please sign me out," then to have that ability. So I'll be intrigued to hear how this advances if you still really like this approach or if you find that you need to change back to using Memcached or the cookie store. CHRIS: Yeah, I'm in that space where as I'm looking at it, I'm like, I only see upside here. I guess there's a tiny bit of extra complexity. You have to watch that database table and set up a regular recurring job to sort of sweep old sessions that haven't been touched in a while because this is sort of like an append-only store. Every time someone signs in anew, they're getting a new session. So over time, this database table is just going to grow and grow and grow. But it's very easy to stay on top of that if you just set up a recurring job that's cleaning them. It's part of the ActiveRecord session store is the name of the gem. It's under the Rails namespace or the Rails GitHub organization. So that seems manageable. Maybe that's the one complexity is it has this sort of runaway trait to it that you have to stay on top of, whereas the cookie-based sessions don't. But yeah, I'm seeing a lot of upside for us, so I'm going to try it. I think it's going to be good. I'm also unfortunately in that space where I think I see all the moving parts as to how I could implement the sign out a user in all of their sessions. But I'm worried that I'm tricking myself there. It's one of those things it's like this feels like it would be built in if it was that straightforward, or it could easily have subtle...it's like, don't invent your own crypto. Like, I think I know how crypto algorithms work. I can just write one real quick. No, don't do that, definitely don't do that. And this one, it seems clear enough, but it's still in the space of crypto security, et cetera, that I just don't want to mess with without really thoroughly convincing myself that I know what I'm talking about. So maybe six months from now, I will have talked myself into it. Or if anyone out there is listening and knows of a good founded, well-thought-out version of yeah, this is totally a thing that we do; here's what it looks like; I would love to hear that. But otherwise, I'll probably just be happy with the ability to wipe everyone's session as necessary. If any one user leaves themselves logged in at a library and needs me to log them out, I'll just log out every user. That's fine. That's a good enough solution. STEPH: Yeah. All of that makes sense. And also, the part that you highlighted around that there is that additional work of where then you have to make sure that you have a rake task that's running to then sign people out since there's that additional lift that you mentioned. But I'm excited to hear what folks have to say if they're using this approach and what they think about it. It is super interesting. CHRIS: Well, yeah, I am very excited about this new development and the management of sessions. And I will let you know if I make any headway on the signing out a user sort of thing. But I think that covers that topic. As an aside, I just wanted to take a quick moment to ask folks out there; we are getting to the bottom of our listener question queue, and we absolutely love getting listener questions. They really help us find novel things to talk about that whenever we start talking about them, it turns out that we have a lot to say. So please do send in any questions that you have. You can send them to hosts@bikeshed.fm. That's an email option. You can tweet at us; we're @bikeshed, or either of us individually. I'm @christoomey. STEPH: And I'm @SViccari. CHRIS: And we also have a Google Form, which we will link in the show notes of this episode. So any of those versions send us questions. It can be about more tech stuff, more process stuff, more team-building, really anything across the spectrum. But we really do love getting the questions in, and definitely helps provide a little bit more structure to the show. So, with that aside, Steph, what else is going on in your world? STEPH: Yeah, I love when we call from our listener questions, for the reason that you highlighted because it often exposes me to different ways of thinking in topics that I hadn't considered before. And you're right; we're often very opinionated souls. [laughs] And along that note, so I have a question for you. The context is another developer, and I ran into a bug. And when we initially looked at the bug, it was one of those there's no way. There's no way the code is in this state. That does not make sense. And then, of course, it's one of those well, the computer says otherwise, so clearly we're wrong. We just can't see how the code is getting to this place. And what was happening is we were setting a value. We were parsing some JSON. We're looking for a value in that JSON, and we're using dig specifically in Ruby. So if it's the JSON or if it's a hash, and then we're doing dig, and then we're going two layers deep. So let's say we're going foo and then bar, and then dig; if it doesn't find those values, instead of erroring, it's just going to return nil. And then we have an or, and then we have a hard-coded string. So it's like, hey, we want to set this attribute to this value. If it's the hash, then give us back that value; if not, it's going to be nil, and then give us this hard-coded string. What we were seeing in the actual data is that we were getting an empty string. And initially, it was one of those; how are we possibly getting an empty string when we gave you a hard-coded string to give us instead? And it's because empty strings are truthy. When we were performing the dig, it was finding both of those values, but that value was set to an empty string. And because that evaluates to truthy, we weren't getting the hard-coded string, and then we were setting it to an empty string, and then that caused some problems. So then my question to you is should we have truthiness in our code? CHRIS: Oh wow. That's a big question. It's also each language I might have a slightly different version of my answer. Yeah, I'm going to have to go sort of across languages to answer. I think in Ruby, I have generally been happy with Ruby's somewhat conservative implementation of truthiness. Yeah, anything that isn't nil false...is that it? Are those the only falsy values? There's maybe one more, but zero is not a falsy value. Empty string is not a falsy value. They're truthy, to name it in the affirmative. And I like that Ruby has a more conservative view of what things are. And so it can have this other surprising edge. I will say that I do reach for present? in Rails, so present? Present with a question mark at the end, that method in Rails, which I pronounce as present, huh? STEPH: Which is delightful, by the way. CHRIS: Well, thank you. That method I reach for often or presence would be the variant in this case where you can presence or and then chain on the thing that you want, and that gets the value. It will basically do the thing that you want here. And so, I do find myself reaching for that, which does imply that maybe Ruby's default truthiness is not quite what I want. And I want a little more permissive truthiness, a little more like, no, empty strings are not truthy. Empty string is an empty value, so it is empty. But yeah, I think I can always convince myself of the other argument when I'm angrily fighting against a bug that I ran into, and I'm surprised by. Like, I've experienced this from both sides many times in my life. I will say in JavaScript, I am constantly surprised by the very, very permissive type coercion that happens where you compare a string and a number, and suddenly they're both strings, and they get smashed together. It's like, wait, how is that ever the thing that I would want? And so JavaScript's version feels like it is definitively foundationally wrong. Ruby's feels like it's maybe a tiny bit conservative, but I like that as a default and then Rails building on top of that. I think I lean towards that most of the time. I will say at the other end of the spectrum, I've worked with Haskell, and Haskell has I want to say it's like a list of chr, like C-H-R list of characters as the canonical way to do strings. I may be mixing this up. It may be actually the string type, but then there's also a text type, and they're slightly different. Maybe it's UTF. I forget what the distinction was, but they both exist, and they are both often found in libraries and in code. And you end up having to constantly convert back and forth. And there are no subtle equivalents between them or any type coercion between them because it's Haskell, and there isn't really any of that. And this was early on. I never got particularly far in Haskell, but I found that so painful and frustrating. It was just like, come on; they're like strings. Please just do the thing. You know what I mean. And Haskell was like, "I do not. And I require you to be ridiculously specific about it." So that was sort of the high end for me of like nope, definitely not that JavaScript of like anything's anything and it's fine. That feels bad. So somewhere in the middle, Ruby feels like it's a happy in the middle. Maybe Rails is actually where I want to land, but I don't know that there is a good answer to this. I don't know that there's a language that's like, we got it. It's this very specific set of things. It's truthy, and these are falsy, and it's perfect every time. Like, I don't think that can happen. STEPH: As an aside, I like how your Haskell voice had the slight air of pretension that really resonated with me. [laughs] CHRIS: I don't know what you're talking about. That doesn't sound familiar to me at all. [laughs] STEPH: I agree. I don't know that anyone has gotten this perfect. But then again, I also haven't tried all the languages that are out there, so I don't feel like that's really a fair statement for me to make either. Specific to the Ruby world, I do think Boolean coercions are a bit nice because then they do make certain checks easier. So if you are working with an if statement, you can say, "If this, and then do that, else, do this." And that feels like a pretty nice common idiomatic flow that we use in Ruby but then still feels like one of those areas that can really bite you. So while having this conversation with some other thoughtboters, Mike Burns provided a succinct approach to this that I think I really like where he said that he likes the use of truthy and falsy for if statements, Booleans for the and statement, and only truthy falsy for Booleans, so no nulls. So Boolean should not have three states is what that last part is highlighting. It should be just true or false. And then if we're working with the double ampersand and in Ruby, that then if you have that type of conditional that you are conveying, then to use a strict Boolean, be more strict and use the methods that you were referring to earlier, like empty and explicitly checking is this an actual...like turn it into a Boolean instead of relying on that that truthy falsy of is it present? Is it an empty string? Does that count? But then, for the if statements, those can be a little more loose. And actually, now that I'm saying it, that first part, I get it. It's convenient, but I still feel like bugs lie down that path. And so, I think I'm still in favor of being more explicit. If I really care if something is true or false, I want to call out explicitly. I expect this to be true or false versus relying on the fact that I know it will evaluate, although I'm sure I do it all the time, just because that's how you often write idiomatic Ruby. So I'm interested in watching my own behavior now to see how often I'm relying on that truthy, falsy behavior, and then see the areas that I can mitigate that just because yeah, that bug is fresh in my mind, and I'd like to prevent those bugs going forward. CHRIS: I really liked that phrase of that bug is fresh. So that bug is going to own a little bit more mindshare than that old bug that's a bit stale in the back of my brain. I will say as you were talking about idiomatic Ruby, I think you're right that the sort of core or idiomatic way to do it would be if the user or whatever to see is the user here, or are they nil? Did we find one, or did we not? That sort of thing is commonly the way it would be done. I almost always write those as if users are not present? I will convert it into that because A, I'm writing Ruby, and I write Ruby because I want it to sound like the human words that I would say. And so I wouldn't say like, "If user," I would say, "If the user is present, then do the thing." And so I write the code to do that, but I also get the different semantics that present? Brings or blank? Is the counterpart, the other side of it. That seems to be the way that I write my code. That's idiomatic me, Ruby, and I don't know how strongly I hold that belief. But that is definitely how I write those, which I find interesting in contrast to what you were saying. The other thing that came to mind as you were saying this is that particular one of an empty string. I kind of want to force empty strings to not be okay, particularly at the database level. So I'll often have null false on a string column, but then I'll find empty strings in there. And I'm like, well, that's not what I meant. I wanted stuff in there. Database, I want you to stop it if I was just putting in an empty string because you're supposed to be the gatekeeper that keeps me honest. And so I do wonder if there is a Postgres extension that we could have similar to the citexts, citext, which is case-insensitive text. So you can say, "Yeah, store this as it is, but whenever you compare it, compare case-insensitively," because an email is an email. Even if I capitalize the third letter, it doesn't make it a different email. I want a non-empty text as a column type that is both null false but also has a check constraint for an empty string and prevents that. And then similarly, the three-state Boolean thing that you're talking about, I will always do null false on a Boolean column because it's a lie if I ever tell myself. I'm like, yeah, but this Boolean could be null, then you've got something else. Then you've got an ADT, which I also can't represent in my database, and that makes me sad. I guess I can enum those, but it's not quite the same because I can't have additional data attached. That's a separate feeling that I have about databases. I'm going down a rabbit hole here. I wish the database would prevent me from putting in empty strings into null, false string columns. I understand that I'm going to have to do some work on my side to make that happen, but that's the world I want to live in. STEPH: I'm trying to think of a name for when you have a Boolean that's also a potential null value. What do you have? You have nullean at that point? CHRIS: Quantum Boolean. STEPH: Quantum Boolean. [laughs] CHRIS: Spooky Boolean. STEPH: The maybe Boolean? CHRIS: Yeah. STEPH: No, that's worse. [laughs] Yeah, I'm with you. And I like the idiomatic Ruby. I think that is something that I would like to do more of where I'm explicitly checking if user instead of just checking for that presence and allowing that to flow through doing the present check and verifying that yes, we do have a user versus allowing that nil to then evaluate to falsy. That's the type of code that I think I'd like to be more strict about writing. But then it's also interesting as I'm formulating these ideas. Is it one of those if I'm reviewing a PR and I see that someone else didn't do it, am I going to advise like, hey, let's actually check or turn this into a true Boolean versus just relying on the truthy and falsy behavior? And probably not. I don't think I'm there yet. And I think this is more in the space that I'm interested in pursuing and seeing how it benefits the code that I'm writing. But I don't think I'm at the state where then I would advocate, at least not loudly, on other PRs that we do it. If it is, it'd be like a small suggestion, but it wouldn't be something that I would necessarily expect someone else to do. CHRIS: Yeah, definitely the same for me on that, although it's a multi-step plan here, a multi-year plan. First, we say it on a podcast, then we say it again on a podcast, then we change all the hearts and minds, then everyone writes the style, then we're all in agreement that this is the thing that we should do. And then it's reasonable to bring up in a pull request, or even then, I still wouldn't want it. Then it's like standard rb or somebody else's job. That's the level of pull request comment that I'm like, really? Come on. Come on. STEPH: This is a grassroots movement for eradicating truthiness and falsyness. I think we're going to need a lot of help to get this going. [laughs] CHRIS: Thankfully, there are the millions of listeners to this show that will carry this torch forward, I assume. STEPH: Millions. Absolutely. CHRIS: I'm rounding roughly a little. STEPH: There are a couple, yeah. [laughs] I'd be far more nervous if I knew we had millions of people listening. CHRIS: I kind of know that people listen. But at the same time, most of the time, I just entirely forget about that, and I feel like we're just having a conversation, which I think is good. But yeah, the idea that actual humans will listen to this in the future is a weird one that just doesn't do good things in my head. So I just let that go. And you and I are just having a chat, and it's great. STEPH: Yeah. I'm with you. And just to reiterate what you were saying earlier, we love getting listener questions. So if there's anything that you'd like to send our way and have us to chat about or something you'd like to share with us, then please do so. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review in iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. All: Byeeeeeeeeee. Announcer: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success._

Solon was Athens' original wise man.  Can his guidance and prudent laws help the city avoid disintegrating into civil conflict?For the life of Solon we return to Athens, where we started the podcast and learned about Theseus, the hero who the Athenians celebrate as their founder because he ended the tribute to King Minos of Crete, brought the people of Attica together, and established some of Athens traditions and festivals.Chris:  Not to mention slaying a minotaur, and attempting to kidnap a wife on more than one occasion Ryan:  Right – Theseus led a very eventful life to say the least And Chris, I am excited to be moving forward and taking on the life of Solon today because it means we are now moving into more solid Greek history.  Unlike Theseus who can be placed into the category of myth, and Lycurgus who sits maybe halfway between man and myth, we can be pretty certain that Solon really existed and when he existed.  The year that Solon was appointed to arbitrate the differences of the Athenian people is most likely 594-593 BC.  I know you have been eager to get to some actual dates ChrisChris:  Ha ha, yes it feels good to hear an actual date Ryan:  Agreed.  Now Solon is considered one of the Seven Sages, or Seven Wise Men, according to the Classical Greek tradition.  The earliest surviving list of Seven Wise Men comes from Plato's Protagoras.  Solon expressed his wisdom through poetry – writing in prose was uncommon.  It is said that Solon travelled widely in his younger days - some say that Solon travelled purely to gain wisdom and knowledge, others that he was a merchant, having come from a noble family whose wealth had ebbed and so it fell to Solon to restore their fortune.  For his part, Plutarch sees no shame in Solon possibly engaging in trade to restore his families wealth – pointing out that trade brings home the good things from other countries, increases friendship with their kings, and is a source of valuable experience. Chris:  Very good points.......Check out the podcast, hope you enjoy and looking forward to seeing you in the comments!Support the show (https://www.paypal.com/donate?hosted_button_id=RLVZ3VNNPSRAL)

Host Colby Cummings and guest Chris Chesebro discuss current NFL Hall of Famer's and future nominees Hall of Fame resumes' and offer a vote and whether or not they should be in or should get in one day. Listen to find out how we voted and defended each players' chance of landing in Canton. Joe Namath: Colby- Yes Chris- NoBob Griese: Colby-NoKen StablerAntonio Brown Julian Edelman: Colby and Chris- Not now, wait and seeWes Welker: Colby- Yes Chris- YesChandler Jones: Colby and Chris- Not now Wait and seePhillip Rivers: Colby- No Chris- YesEli Manning: Colby- Yes Chris- YesJimmy Graham: Colby- No Chris -YesGreg Olsen: Chris- NoClay MatthewsMichael VickTory HoltMarshawn Lynch: Colby- YesLesean McCoy: Chirs-Yes--- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

On this episode of the "Dailicast Moment" host Chris Laning speaks with Peter Stewart, a long time radio presenter and host of the "28 Day Flash Briefing Briefing". Today, they wrap up their discussion by talking about what they see as the future for dailicasts. TRANSCRIPT:   CHRIS: With your "Dailicast Moment" for today, I'm Chris Laning from NeighborhoodStage.com. Now today I'm going to finally wrap up my conversation with Peter Stewart from the "28 Day Flash Briefing Briefing". If you haven't caught any of these dailicasts from earlier this week, you want to go back and listen because Peter is a wealth of knowledge on this subject and even though I'm in and I've been doing dailicasts and I tell you guys how to do it, I continue to learn from him not only on his "28 Day Flash Briefing Briefing", but even just in the ones he's done for us this week. So Peter, once again, welcome to the "Dailicast Moment". PETER: Chris, you're very kind. Thank you very much indeed for your words. CHRIS: I think it's been very clear among people this week if they haven't picked up on it that both you and I are extremely passionate about this format. We see big things for this format! So I kind of wanted to take a moment to discuss where we see this format going and what kind of increase in listenership we think it might be in the near future. PETER: I really think that flash briefings, Chris are the sleeping giant of what a Amazon Echo devices have got. As I understand it, they were almost put in as a bit of an afterthought and were mainly for the professional broadcasting companies. You know the BBCs and the CBSs is of this world to be putting out information almost hourly. You know, updated news bulletins of content they already had. I don't believe they thought that it was going to be opened up for everyone to be able to get in there to do these dailicasts or briefcasts, these micro podcasts or to give them their proper name, the flash briefings. I really think they are undiscovered at the moment, but they are just waiting to be discovered and to be opened up. PETER: Let me give you a few ideas. I really think we call them estate agents over here in the UK, in London, but I know you refer to them as real estate agents. What a fantastic opportunity for real estate agents to really own the area. And I don't mean to have a flash briefing talking about you know, a four bedroom detached house with two bathrooms and a large garden and an in and out drive. I don't mean that. That's far too much advertising! Who's going to be listening to that time and time again every single day? You won't. However, if you're a real estate agent, you should be owning your geographical area. You should be talking about the news that's happening in your area. You can become known for that, particularly with fewer and fewer local newspapers. You can be talking about the schools and the education system. How good your local schools are. How clean the local parks are. Talk about local events. Talk about how far it is to the beach. About developments or road closures that are going on because something's going to be retarmacked or there's been a burst water main so avoid this area. Be known for your local geographical area. And then when people want to move from one side of the city to the other or if people want to move into your fantastic city, then they we'll already know you are an authority in that. You're staking your claim in knowledge of the local area. And if you are giving that kind of advice perhaps along with, I don't know, DIY tips around the house, then people will come to you. Your name is going to be front of mind when people want to buy or sell their home. As an example of how a local business can really use flash briefings to be loud and proud on this new platform. CHRIS: And I love that example and that's one of the things that I think both you and I are out there trying to convince people to do and saying, look, you know, look into this, see what you can do in your industry and take advantage of the fact that it's still relatively new. I mean that's changing. I mean even the last six months and there was be like maybe 10, 15 new flash briefing showing up every day. Now you go in there, there's 30, 40, maybe 50 new ones a day. So people are starting to catch on. You need to jump in now to claim your niche and go with it. PETER: Absolutely. And all the time people are doing slightly different things. I've got a few ideas in the back of my mind for a couple of things, which I'm hopefully going to be launching in the next few months or certainly by the early part of next year. But think of maybe quizzes and competitions or formats. Think of creativity. Think of perhaps the kind of radio shows or radio formats, radio competitions, radio features that are already used out there. May be on your local station or maybe on PBS or something like that. Whatever you do, don't steal them. However you can mix some ideas with something that is a passion of yours already and put something out that really cuts through that is really creative and can grab other people by the ears. I was going to say by the scruff of the neck, by the ears to show what a force this is to be reckoned with. It's sign up marketing. People will sign up, will subscribe to listen to what you have got to say every single day. You shouldn't be advertising on it, but you can stake your claim and you can put your name of your business front of mind. CHRIS: Now I'm going to make one point in this. I'm probably going to talk about this on a future "Dailicast Moment", but while I have you on the line, I just wanted to be, if you're out there looking for an idea, don't go out there and you find somebody doing something similar to yours and go, ah, it's already being done. I guess I can't do that. There is room for similar shows in that vein. And the second part of that I would say is don't feel like it's a competition. You know, I'm sitting here talking to you. Obviously your's came out way before mine and we do have similar topics. But I think people can listen to both of ours and get different views, different types of information that just rounds that out. So like I don't look at you as a competitor. I look at you as somebody that I enjoy listening to and being in the same space and hopefully together we can really promote dailicasts. PETER: Absolutely Chris! You're very generous and thank you. And I love the work that you're doing as well and how you've been dividing up the different content topics and the different angles that people can choose has been tremendous as I've been listening to your back catalog. So thank you for all your doing in this space and I really appreciate you asking me along to speak on your dailicast about flash briefings. CHRIS: Not a problem. And I will say now that I've gotten past the 30 to 40 day mark, I see the beauty in your 28 day repeating every month. That's a brilliant idea! PETER: Well again, bit of kind of creativity if I could kind of pat myself on the back. But yeah, taking the idea of a short course and putting it out as a flash briefing and anyone can do that. Not necessarily as a flash briefing course, but again, a 28 day course because obviously that's the shortest month in the calendar. And to just go through one to 28 so people listen on the first day of the month for the episode one and they work their way through in those kind of bite sized chunks. They are a little bit longer than most flash briefings. It has to be said. However, if you're really keen on learning how to do a flash briefing to market your brand, your business, yourself, your hobby, your charity, your nonprofit, then perhaps sign up to the "28 Day Flash Briefing Briefing".. It's free to listen and it's available on all Amazon Echo devices. Speaker 2: My guest has been Peter Stewart, who is the host of the "28 Day Flash Briefing Briefing" And again, I've mentioned this before, I definitely recommend you go and add that because you will learn so much from them. Thanks again, Peter for being here on "Dailicast Moment". With your "Dailicast Moment" for today, I'm Chris Laning from NeighborhoodStage.com Have a great day.    

Download this Episode We've all been there. Life hits you like a freight train and knocks you off course. Today we discuss how to get the train back on its track. Tune in to hear about how we deal with death, struggle, and negative outside voices. reThink Real Estate Podcast Transcription Audio length 28:18 RTRE 60 – Breaking Out of a Rut in Your Real Estate Business [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Everybody and welcome back to re:Think Real Estate. I'm Chris here with Christian and Nate is back. No longer sick. Welcome back Nate.  [Nathan]: Thanks. Thank you. [Chris]: Yes. All of energy today. [laughter]  [Christian]: He is possessed to be here. [Chris]: Oh. Let's see those jazz hands Nate. [Nathan]: Hold on. [laughter]. [Christian]: What are you typing? [Chris]: Not even…Not even ready to start. There we go.  [Christian]: Yeah don't worry about this.  [Chris]: So we were just talking before getting started here about, you know, what do you do when you're in a rut. Like you're just out of it, you know, listening to Nate's voice. He's in a rut right now. Even if it's just for the next hour. So like Christian what do you do when you're in a rut? Like how do you pull yourself out of it? [Christian]: I mean I'll tell you one thing that's key to not do and that's to quit, and to listen to the demons, you know, that are speaking…speaking lives in your head about how your failure and your, you know, nothing's ever gonna change and it's gonna be like this forever. I'm sure I'm just the only one that hears those negative thoughts but… [Chris]: It's gonna be like this forever. You're a failure. [Christian]: Don't listen to them. I know. See now I'm hearing the voices for real. This is so real. [Chris]: [laughter] In your headphones.  [Christian]: Yeah in my headphones. So that's the first thing you don't do. [Chris]: Yeah I gotta agree. [Christian]: For me personally, you know, I just kind of keep my head down and keep going. But I mean I lot of it depends on why I am in a rut. Is it like a family rut where relationships aren't going great? Is it work? Is it financial? You know. Because I think, you know, the solution to those are all gonna be a little different. But the key to getting out of those is leaning…leaning on people. You know, like being honest. Having people that can come around to you and speak truth into that. Whether it's co-workers or family members or, you know, besties, you know. Don't isolate yourself because that's…that's doesn't go well for most people. [Chris]: Gotta have your besties. Nate. [Nathan]: Yep. [Chris]: What do you think? [Nathan]: What's the question again? [Chris]: How do you get out of a rut. [Nathan]: Oh how do you get out of a rut. [Christian]: It's your topic buddy. [Chris]: Yeah this is your choice Mr. “I'm in a rut.”  [Nathan]: How do you…You know, I don't know. You got to find, you know, how you used to work triggers. You got to find….one you got to be able to identify you're in a rut. Right. I mean, you know, yeah I just kind of went through one. Yeah I was sick for a week. Had some unfortunate family things happen. And, you know, it was just [censored] death of you. I mean it's what it was but you know it side tracks you. Right. You know, as I call it the…the train gets off the rail. So you one you got to recognize that the…the freaking train you're on is off the rails. And then you got to figure out what's the trigger to get it back on. You know, for me it's being very scheduled and stuff. And just it's…I don't know you have to just recommit.  You know, what's the…I used to have a mentor who used to say “You kind of have to recenter the salt on the plate.” And I think that's what you got to do. You got to be able to identify it. You got to figure out, you know, why you're in it. OK get out of it, you know, and then , you know, there's certain things. I don't know you can read motivational stuff. I mean Gary Vee I, you know, it's not for all people but he's for me. And I can get on a pity party and he gets me out of the pity party. So [Christian]: Yeah nice kick to the junk to get you back on track. [Nathan]: Yeah and I think in our industry, I think we all get kind of jaded at times. You get….you get I don't know. You get frustrated and then you get sidetracked.  [Christian]: And it's just you. [Nathan]: Yeah all right. [Chris]: No it's definitely not just you.  [Nathan]: Yeah I know it's everybody. I was talking with a colleague the other day and, you know, he said “Man I just…” he said “I didn't do [censored] for six months.” And now you know, he knew it. He identified it. But, you know, he's like the worst part is now I gotta play catch-up. I, you know, we all, you know, we get these peaks and valleys. And I don't…I don't like to get in those peaks and valleys. I like to have, you know, a nice steady stream of income. Right. [Chris]: Well six months is a little bit too long. That…that's not all right. Six months is an active decision to say “You know what, I'm just not gonna work.” [Nathan]: Yeah. [Christian]: I think it's called clinical depression. [Nathan]: Yeah well, you know, he was working on his home doing some other things. Fine. But… [Christian]: OK so he's just distracted. [Nathan]: He's just distracted and I think we all can get distracted. And then I think we just get frustrated. You know, we can get in our own way. So and, you know, it's, you know, you hear a realtor say “Oh I'm…” You know, we talked about this before. You know, “I'm so busy” And you say “What do you have going on?” And they're like “Oh I got one house in contract.” But you're so busy like…I don't know. It's…when I'm not busy, I'm not busy. You know, I don't even like the question what people say “Oh it's spring time right now. You're, you know, you must be busy as all get out. I'm steady. I'm not busy as I'll get out. But when you talk to me in November, December, January and February, guess what? You get the same response. Versus a lot of people say “Well I ain't got nothing going on.” So staying out of a rut I think is important. I think it's important that you identify how long you're in one. And it only took two weeks to get in one. Just because of, you know, being sick. And we're all self-employed. Right. o… [Chris]: Yeah I think I think one of the things is it doesn't take too long to get into a rut. Like one thing can happen and throw you completely off the rails. And then it…you have to go through…well depending upon what it is, you've got to go through these stages of healing to kind of get back into your groove. So if it's…if, you know, if it's family that's throwing, you know, things at you that are like “Oh, you know, what you're wasting your time. You're not in a good environment. The industry is gonna end soon. Your real estate agents are gonna be obsolete. Everything's gonna be AI in tech.” I just got that from my [censored] father the other day. And… [Christian]: Ouch. [Chris]: Yeah like “Really, no I…I don't think it is but, you know, that…that's great that you're encouraging me. I really appreciate that.” But you got to go through this stage of accepting what has happened. Seeing it from, you know, multiple points of view. Realizing that, you know, you're either making the right decision and then you double down on your decision, or there's some corrective action that needs to happen. And then you need to make the corrective action. [Christian]: I mean I'd say that, this is kind of cliché, but I definitely say that it's very important to…as you're trying to, you know, realize, you know, “OK what's…what set me in this rut and how do I get out?” is to try to only focus on things that you can affect. Right. As most of stuff in our life we have no control over. You can't control other agents, can't control the market. You control what you do and how focused you are. And, you know, your attitude and all that kind of stuff.  But I'd say that's definitely key to getting out of it is not…not, you know, what we call catastrophizing, if that's a word, which I don't think it is. But, you know, essentially… [Nathan]: It sounds great. [Chris]: Yeah if it's not a word it sounds like a word and it should be a word. So yeah… [Christian]: It's…it's a word that would they use in in the military's newer…what they call it, resiliency training . Essentially, you know, one of the keys to, you know, not getting in a rut or recognizing when you are going into rut is recognizing, you know, a mindset that's a downward spiral of catastrophizing everything. Where, you know, one thing happens and then you just assume the worst and then that, you know, self-fulfilling prophecy happens. And you keep spiraling downwards as opposed to, you know, “OK let's look at the big picture. Let's not think of the worst thing let's think of, you know, outcomes that are positive and, you know, be optimistic as opposed to pessimistic”, you know.  This is one of the mental tricks of, you know, how are you going to position yourself mentally to get out of the rut. As opposed to, you know, staying in that rut. [Chris]: I like that. That's really good. So Nate, cuz you ran for 24 hours last year, what was like what was going on in your head and do you think that any of those things could be used to get you out of a rut ? [Nathan]: Well I'm getting ready to run for twelve hours soon again. I think it's just it's…it's a semental staying power if you would. Because what's the easiest thing to do in any of those scenarios are with what we do for a living, what's the easiest thing to do? [censored] it. Quit. Right. [Chris]: Like quit. Don't even… [Nathan]: Just quit. Right. I mean I think what most people don't realize and, you know, I can use it running wise or even and, you know, in this rut…What we think of and perceive is something that maybe feels like forever, is really not that long of a period of time. Right. When I did that race out in Colorado or run out in Colorado, there was a gentleman that, you know, he quit after, you know, about 16 hours. And he said “I can't do it anymore.” And I said “Dude just take a break. Don't leave the course. If you leave the, you know, if you leave the course, you can't restart. But you can you could take a rest, that's fine. It's OK. If you want a rest for thirty minutes or three hours then you could start back up on whatever mile you're on.”  Right. And he said no he couldn't do it. He went back to his hotel. About twenty three hours and thirty minutes into it I seen him at the finish line, start/finish line. And, you know, him lapping through and he comes and pulls up beside me and starts running. And I was like “What are you doing back out here?” He's like “I should have listened to you.” He's like “I left. I got back to the hotel. I took 30 minutes. Laid down and I was like nah I feel great now.”  So I think what we do is it's…it's how we perceive that. Right. like “Oh you're in a rut.” And I have been in a rut for two weeks. And it's that like Christian said, you get the self-fulfilling prophecy. And then it does spiral out of control. Right. versus if we can kind of slam the [censored] brakes on things, and go “Hold up. All right. Reset.” And…and grab a hold of it by the balls a little bit, you know, then…then you've got a good opportunity. But I think we just we, you know, society as a whole and what, you know, whether it's real estate or not, we…we just get caught up in that bad moment. So you got to be more optimistic than pessimistic. [Christian]: Yeah well I think it also help if, you know, kind of speaking to people getting into the industry, if there was a more realistic portrayal of what it's like to be a new agent. Because I mean I've, you know, speaking of our first quarter was very, very rough financially. And we have like five agents that just gave up. Just “I'm done. I'm not renewing my license. This was too hard.” And it's kind of that lack of resiliency because they'd…I don't think they had a realistic expectations coming into it. They're like “You can't just sit on YouTube while you, you know, quote to do your calls.” [laughter] Like you're not gonna get…You know, so there's a lack of resiliency. There's a lack of hustle. A lack of urgency and then, you know, no matter what, you know, your brokerage does, or people come up alongside you, they don't do it. They don't listen. And then they quit. And you're like “Yeah I kind of saw the writing on the wall.”  You're like, you know, it's…from the perspective of a broker like it's really easy to become jaded. And, you know, my version of a rut looks differently, you know, because I'm looking at agents and productivity and, you know, margins. And that kind of stuff. From agent perspective, you know, it's trying to get business, you know, having people say no to you. Or if you're new to an area trying to figure out how to get the word out there. And, you know, that kind of stuff. But either way it comes down to like not giving up, being resilient when things don't go perfectly, not letting that spiral and ruin the rest of your day.  [Nathan]: I would agree. [Chris]: Definitely, you know, you've got to be able to compartmentalize a little bit to know “Hey, you know what this is not that big of a deal.” Or, “You know what, this sucks. But, you know, I gotta keep ploughing on because if I stop I'm never gonna get this done. I'm never gonna hit my goal. So I've got to keep going.”  You know, it took, you know, I was in a rut a few weeks ago. And it took me a good five to six days to work my way through it. And it wasn't until I kind of saw some things from a different angle that, you know, it was…I realized, you know what, what I was doing was correct. And, you know, this one situation was an outlier. And it really didn't affect what I was doing as much as I thought it would. [Christian]: Yeah I mean a lot of what we're talking about here is your perspective. Right. And earlier I mentioned not letting yourself be isolated. And the reason for that is that other people can bring a perspective that you don't have. You know, they're looking at that from the outside. Where you may be, you know, kind of myopically looking at your feet. And, you know, where you just stumbled while they're looking at the big picture of like “But look at all this potential and look at where you came from and look at what's ahead of you.”  You know, I think that's very important to have that community around you, of people that can speak into you. Well that's your spouse or business partner or whatever. [Chris]: And sometimes you don't even want to hear it. Sometimes you're just like “You know what, I…I'm not even gonna listen” and you have to hear from some like third party that has nothing to do with you. Because, you know, those that are closest to us sometimes we feel like they're just, you know, boosting us up. And it's not authentic. [Christian]: Right. And then your wife says “That's what I've been saying to you.” And you're like “Oh sorry.”. [Chris]: Yeah. [Christian]: I get that [censored] all the time. My wife's like “Why wouldn't you just listen to me. That's what I was telling you.” And I am like “Oh [censored] you're right.” [Nathan]: Well that's…that's the funny flipside of being resilient. Another word for that could be stubborn. Or [laughter] hard-headed, you know. So what keeps you driving for it could also be what keeps you from listen to people. So … [Chris]: Yeah I think not so much that, but we have…we have this tendency that if something shakes us to our core. like that we're…if something happens it's that messes us up and throws us way off track, then we have this tendency to not exactly trust everything that we've done, up until that point 100%. So if there's something…if there's something that's in our core circle that's telling us something and then whatever happens throws us off our game, then we're gonna immediately have a certain distrust for this. And we're gonna go to an outside source to verify whether we're right or wrong. And once we do that, if we verify “You know what, what we've been doing is right.” then we come back to that circle and like “You know what, everything here is good.” We're happy. If something's wrong then we're gonna come back to that circle and be like “Wait what the [censored] is going on here? Like why…why are you saying this. Or, you know, why didn't…why…” You get it. Yeah it's…it's not just about listening to those that are closest to us. It's a mental thing. Like if something…mentally we've got to recenter ourselves. [Christian]: It sounds like you're saying that insecurity creeps in, depending on where we feel like things went wrong. [Chris]: Yeah definitely. And I mean it all depends on whatever happens. Right. because sometimes it's something small and it's not a big deal and it maybe, you know, maybe it's something that we're just disappointed in, and it's gonna take us, you know, a few minutes to get over. Or maybe it's something…maybe it's a personal attack or something that a relative is going in, the new agents is going. You're not making any money. You need to stop. Right. This is…you're…you're wasting your time, you're wasting your money, you're wasting our money, if it's a spouse. You know, even if you're doing the right things you may have not planned long enough. Nothing ever happens fast enough. Nothing ever happens, you know, the way that we want it. So you've got to kind of have that margin of error that you can work with. [Christian]: Sure and when you come into with…realistic expectations. Right. I mean so much of what happens in relationships that goes wrong, or getting in a rut that…that, you know, the reason we get there is because expectations are unmet, or our situation changes. You know, like if…if we think is gonna be easy and it's not, you know, we get in a rut. If, you know, we expect to make more money in the first quarter than we did, you know, it's easy getting in a rut. I mean it's just kind of…and not letting those quote failures drive you or dictate you. Because I mean what, you know, one man's failures is another person's learning, try opportunity. Yeah and that's something I've had to learn. Is like theoretically I understood. You know, as this ethereal concept I understood that failure was inevitable, and I need to be able to learn from that. But than going through that, that's experientially a lot different.  [Nathan]: So I need to get over this whole thing of how my job interferes me living my best life. [Chris]: You have the one job that you not interfere with you living your best life. [Nathan]: I don't have a job.  [Christian]: This is coming from the guy who's taken like several vacation this month to go down to…[crosstalk] [Nathan]: I know. I know. Listen you…listen I don't even have a job. I have…I do something I enjoy and love. I'm fortunate that I don't even do it as a job. I get to do what I enjoy. [Chris]: That's good. [Christian]: Yeah well let's…let's take us a little deeper and more personal. I mean Nate you kind of brought up the subject, cuz this last couple weeks have been pretty rough for you. I mean what have you found to be helpful kind of getting out of this rut for you? [Chris]: And first do you need to lay down on the therapist couch and put five cents in the jar? [Nathan]: No. Again it's…what's been helpful for me I mean again it's…I think, you know, what's the old saying? You know, you you're the average of the five people you spend the most time around. So I think it's also about the people you surround yourselves with. And that, you know, when you do get in that, they'll help you with that. You know, or they'll, you know, they'll they're kind of champion you and…and support you to say, you know, “Hey yeah…” You know, when you say “I'm in a rut or I'm this” they'll…they'll boost those spirits.  And it won't be an ego boost. It won't be one of those things like “You're the best thing in the world next to cotton candy.” But they know how to push you in the right direction to support you. And I think that's what…having that support is important. And I mean that ranges from colleagues that I have, to neighbors, to a wife. Like, you know, it's…it's all those things. You know, it…it makes, you know, surviving that period of time easier.  And…and sometimes you just need that outer push. And you also need it…I think you need the people around you that are honest with you. You know, what I mean? [Chris]: You don't need “Yes men. Yes.” [Nathan]: Yeah right. Yeah you need somebody to go tell you the truth. I mean that's, you know, that's, you know, my friends, the people I surround myself with will tell me, you know, what they think. And…and sometimes I don't want to hear it. [censored] A lot of times I don't want to hear it. But it is what I needed to hear. [Christian]: Sure. No one likes hearing the hard truth. [Nathan]: Yeah, no you know. [Chris]: But to be able to appreciate it though when it's in front of you. [Nathan]: Yeah. Yeah you're right. [Chris]: That's one of the hard…the hardest thing that I've found is when, you know, getting that criticism. Whe…when you just want to wall up and go into like active defence mode. Like just letting your body language relax. Having, you know, open gestures and trying to be open-minded to put yourself in the other person's shoes, and see what they're seeing.  [Nathan]: Right. [Chris]: And then trying to see if there's some corrective action that needs to be made there. That's…that's hard when you just go into like “Alright go ahead, give me the feedback because it's rare that I ever get feedback like this. So, you know, take advantage of it while you can.” [Christian]: Sure. Well it can be challenging too because, you know, no one's perfect and no feedback is gonna be perfect. So you have to like decide “OK what's an honest truth that I need to hear” versus “OK that part is kind of [censored]. I'm gonna not take that, you know, what I'll take, you know, kind of not throw the baby off the bathwater.” Like taking the truth where you find it whether that's in, you know, quote a rival or enemy, or that's in someone who's, you know, really close to you and has your best interest at mind. You know, like that could be…it can be challenging. Because, you know, typically I find that if you're playing it safe, there's gonna be a lot less friction and a lot less controversy and criticism. If you're really pushing the bounds, that's when things get tough and people can get ugly. So… [Chris]: Yeah. [Nathan]: You know, I know how to…at least I know how to do it. I know how to have a fight with myself. If that makes any sense. You find out [crosstalk] Yeah I know how to like… [Chris]: Elaborate on that. [Christian]: Yes do. [Nathan]: Because you've got to be willing to call your own [censored]. Right. You've got to be willing to kind of punch yourself in the face. Right. you've got to be… [Christian]: I need to watch conversations with you. [Nathan]: Yeah. Right. That's a staff meeting. Remember? It again it's, you know, you…it's like…I mean it sounds crazy but it's having that conversation in your head of “Hey Nathan, stop being a pussy and do what you know, what you need to do. Get your [censored] up off the couch. Or wake up on time. Or eat right. Or whatever it is. You're not doing these things. Stop…stop [censored] yourself.” And just having that honest, you know, that David Goggin [phonetics] said, you know, “You got to be able to look that man in the mirror.” Right. And that man in the mirror is, you know, me. And so if you can't have that honest fight, dialogue with yourself internally, I don't think it matters what anybody tells you then. [Christian]: Well the starting place for that is being self-aware. Like if you don't know yourself like you're gonna have a real tough time having that honest conversation. [Nathan]: Well most people can't do that though. They live in some [censored] fairyland. [Christian]: Well yeah, you know, I mean we all have our blind spots. Some people are more aware than…than others, you know. [crosstalk] The most important thing in life is…is being honest about that, you know.  [Nathan]: Right. Sorry. I don't know. You gotta find what works for you. I know what works for me. [Christian]: Yeah you…you be unique. [Nathan]: I'm good at doing that. Chris are we gonna wrap it up? [Chris]: Yeah so I think we…we hit on some good points. The…I think no matter where you are in your career you're gonna get hit with something that's gonna throw you off your game. You're gonna…you're gonna have a Nate moment where you got to be in front of the mirror and you got to kick yourself in the [censored].  You know, one of the things that I tell some of the new agents is, you're always gonna have a boss. And even when you're self-employed you still have a boss. It's the person in the mirror. And who do you want to work for? Do you want to work for a strong leader? Somebody who's going to step up and challenge the things that needs to be challenged to make sure that things are getting done that need to be done? Somebody that's gonna keep it on track? Or do you want to work for somebody who is just very lackadaisical and doesn't really care when you clock in?  And you have a boss, whether you're working for somebody else or yourself. So it's just a matter of making sure that you're doing the right things for you. When you get stuck in a rut, you got to pull yourself out of it. One way or another.  [Nathan]: Yeah, you know, Henry David Thoreau [phonetics] comes to mind. Sorry. Pulling out the big gun. But, you know, he said “What lies…what lies ahead of us and what lies behind us are small matters compared to what lies within us. And when you bring what's within you, out into the world, great things happen.” Right so, you know, I think you gotta remember what's inside. [Chris]: We need to set up Nate's…Nate's motivational quotes of the week. [Christian]: I know that's good. That's a good one. And as kind of closing thoughts…kind of reflecting on our conversation here. You know, obviously people's struggles are vary based on them, their personality, situation and what not. A lot of we've been saying is, you know, kind of “Don't give up. Keep trying. Push harder.” Yeah that kind of stuff. But I also want to say that it's not entirely up to you or it's not just about working hard or trying harder. Because sometimes, you know, you push too hard and you work too much and you get sick. And, you know, your body forces you to…to take a break. So I know for me one thing that's rejuvenating, and it can help me get out of a rut sometimes even when I feel like my rut is I have too much to do, is to act…intentionally take a break. Spend more time with the family. Unplug from work. Now some agents, you know, err on that side too much. Where, you know, spend too much time…they spend too much time relaxing. And not enough time working. I don't think that's our problem. And I think that's a lot of agents problems.  But give yourself permission to take a break, rejuvenate, spend time with family, you know, not always be…be working. Because sometimes that's all it takes to get out of a rut.  [Chris]: I couldn't agree with you more. And, you know, it's…sometimes it's hard for…for agents to take off, you know, an entire week from work. Just do a few long weekends every now and then. You don't have to…you don't have to take off a week or two weeks. Sometimes that's…that's not realistic. But make sure that your mental health is in check. And that you're taking some time to decompress and unwind and put things in perspective. What I've found is that when…when I'm able to do that, I'll come back with some new ideas. Because I'm not thinking about, you know, the day-to-day. I'll be able to just kind of, you know, day dream. Whatever it is. Read a good book and come back with, you know, a new perspective on what we're doing. So couldn't agree more with you Christian. Nate great points.  Everybody thank you so much for tuning in to this week's episode of re:Think Real Estate. If you haven't already ,please go to the website which is rtrepodcast.com. sign up for the newsletter so you never miss an episode, whenever we drop one, which is every single week. Thanks for tuning in everybody. We'll see you next week. [music]  [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

Now that we're a few weeks into the new year it's time to evaluate our progress. Are we still on target with our goals? Are we busy or are we moving the needle? Join today's discussion and share your bad habits below. Episode Transcript RTRE_Ep_47  Audio length 22:49 RTRE 47 – Are You Busy or Productive? [music] [Chris] Welcome to re:Think Real Estate, your educational and hopefully entertaining source for all things real estate, business, news and tech.  [Christian]: I am Christian Harris in Seattle, Washington. [Nathan]: Hi, I am Nathan White in Columbus, Ohio. [Chris]: And I am Chris Lazarus in Atlanta, Georgia. Thanks for tuning in.  [music] [Chris]: Everybody and welcome back to re:Think Real Estate. I am Chris Lazarus here with my faithful hosts Nathan White and Christian Harris out of Columbus, Ohio and Seattle, Washington respectively. Thank you so much for tuning in. It is a still relatively early in 2019 and we were just talking about you know this is right around the time some people start dropping off their new years' resolution. So I hope…I know it's not anybody in our audience [laughter] but now we start to get in the busy time of year and it's that definition of busy.  What is busy? Is it…Is it necessarily productive or is busy making us money or is busy just the thing that we have to be doing? Because I don't know about you all but picking up my thumb that's like my thing. If I am not doing something right now I start to itch. Like I find myself sitting down sometimes and maybe I will be waiting on somebody for a business meeting and I have to cognitively think like actively think and just saying “You know what I should learn to comfortable just sitting and waiting” and it's something that is really weird. But when I am in that mode I can actually think about what needs to be done and I think that sometimes when we're busy we don't always do that.  So today we're gonna be talking about what the difference is between being busy and being productive. Christian? You're a broker owner, you're starting up a new company. You're back into selling. What…like how are you challenged with being busy versus how productive is your busy time? [Christian]: So you know the funny thing is and I don't think this is an experience unique to me but when I am talking with other agents or just people in general you know the small talk is you know “How are things going? How are you doing?” And the response 95% of the time is “I am so busy, so busy so much going on”. You know, and I think subconsciously we kind of wear that as a badge of honor like “I am so important that I am busy all the time”. At least in real estate. You know “I am just scrambling around because I got so much work”.  But the question really is “Is busyness a badge of honor or is that more a sign of no you're just ineffective in what you do and how you spend your time?” Which is why I find this conversation so interesting because being productive is way different than just being, busy you know. I can be busy and feel like I am getting stuff done by checking off my 2000 emails but you're not actually moving the ball forward. You're not actually accomplishing goals versus “I've got my dedicated time to do this one task and I am focused on, that's the only thing I am doing”.  You know, you can elude to the distractive nature of technology and things these days and make a whole episode on that. But you know I feel that same pull. I am older so and I like to say I am bilingual you know I grew up in a day before the internet and so I remember doing book reports with books you know and card catalogs as the research tools and that sort of stuff you know. [Chris]: You're not that old. I still had that. [Christian]: Yeah I am just saying you know. I remember a day before that and then in my 20s you know adopted technology as in internet and tan smartphones came online and what now.  [Nathan]: I was using an Atticus. [Christian]: And so I remember the times of… [Chris]: Hang on Nate did you just say you were using an Atticus? [Nathan]: Yeah Atticus. I am the old one out of the group [laughter]. [Christian]: Only by a couple of years. But the point is I feel that pull too to like never have down time. To always be doing something, always be stimulated with input. And usually that's in the form of I am sitting there like you said in the doctor's office and I feel the draw. Uncontrolled, my hand reaching my pocket pull out my phone and just mindlessly check Facebook or Instagram or emails like we can allow yourself some time to like reflect and think and ponder which we don't do a lot so we tend to live our lives in a stimulated anxious responsive posture. Instead of proactive duffle posture. [Chris]: Definitely. [Christian]: You know there is a lot in that but I think the business plays into that. [Chris]: So Nate obviously you've shared with the audience that you suffer from ADHD. So is busyness a good thing for you or does that impede your productivity? Like what's the difference between being busy and being productive for you? [Nathan]: Yeah I mean that is the million-dollar question right. I can be busy all the time. But I am not producing results.  [Chris]: Yeah you're good at that. [Nathan]: Yeah. So for me it's about…For me personally again it's about having a very regimented schedule. I mean those that are friends with me on Facebook whatever they're like…I actually had someone the other day saying “I don't know how you do it day in and day out like you check into the gym at 5 a.m.” Like I live and die by a schedule.  For me to get a result or to have production right productivity instead of me spinning my wheels getting around on Facebook and [censored] around and all that [censored] I have to be very regimented, right. Which means when I get to the offices one if it's quiet and the first thing I don't do is I don't get on Facebook right. I have an order to the way I do things because once I get into those realms if you would than I would squirrel.  [Chris]: Rabbit hole. [Nathan]: Yeah squirrel I am all over the place. So I have to be very regimented in what I do. And I will tell you like if I get out of that rhythm it sucks. But when I am in it I am in it. And man I tell you what, I feel great. And so I think you can tell as an agent broker whatever you are you don't have to have ADHD but you can follow…just have…I don't know kind of a purpose drill in life. Have a purpose to what you're doing. You see a lot of the people they get in and then they get on Facebook and then they're looking at their messages and they're here and they're there but they're busy but they're not producing any results.  So I…the way you quantify that to me is did…You know I set a goal list. I have to have a check list. And once I check things off it feels great. I perpetually add to that list. But, you know, in our world how do we judge our productivity? Dollars and sales right? I mean in the restaurant industry they used to say “Sales cure all”. And in our industry I think that's applicable right.  How productive are you? You know you have the agent that says “Oh I was such a great year I did a million dollars”. For them maybe it's great. You have the other ones that say “Hey I did 42 sides or 8 million dollars”. You know I think there's a big difference of who is productive and who is not. And I am giving to each his own. I am not trying to say that if you did a million dollars in 3 sides or whatever you weren't productive but let's be honest you probably weren't. [laughter] So… [Chris]: Well I mean you're right you probably weren't because the average full time realtors are doing 11 sides a year. [Nathan]: Is it 11? [Chris]: I think last I heard. [Nathan]: That is so many. [Christian]: That sounds high. [Nathan]: That sounds high. I thought it was like 6.6 full time. [Chris]: I think the average full time relator not the average realtor. [Nathan]: Oh yeah the average full time I get it.  [Chris]: The average person who makes a career out of it is doing about 11 sides. Not 11 transactions but 11 sides.  [Nathan]: Remember too we are realtors so what do we like to be about? All about being a realtor right. I mean God Almighty you know Facebook all watch it “#realtorlife #showingthistoday”. [Chris]: “#blast” [Nathan]: Yeah like it's like…Like it's all about you know last episode, right, we were talking about being client centric. I mean hell that's all about just being a realtor right. It drives me [censored] crazy. Like #realtor I am like listen our life isn't that bad right. What we do… [Chris]: I think what Christian just said a few moments ago is just spot on. It's about feeling important. People like feeling important and a lot of people in real estate are like “I am a real estate agent. I can help you with the biggest financial transaction of your life. I am so important”. And rather than focusing on going out and getting business and building a business they're focusing on being a realtor.  I had an agent that worked with me for a little while. It was a young kid just starting out. And we quickly realized that he was in love with the idea of being successful more that he was willing to work at being successful. And that is a big difference because you can be really busy and be in love with the idea of being successful. You know go to a show room and take picture with a Bentley and you know have your girlfriend modelling in your Instagram account. It really…But if it doesn't come down to you actually making money it doesn't really exist.  So I think that a big thing is feeling important and Christian hit the nail in the head with that. And people can be busy to feel important. That doesn't mean they're productive. That doesn't mean they're working on their business. So… [Nathan]: Yeah it takes me about the time one time I…another agent we were talking We did not know each other. We had met and I said “Oh you're a real estate agent?” she said “Sure I sure am?”. And I said “How did it go last year?” She said “It was great, I closed 4 houses.” [laughter] And I laughed and I said “You're not really an agent.” She got really mad. [Christian]: Can't imagine why. [Nathan]: [laughter] But again I go back to what you said about what Christian just said. It wasn't about…I don't know, I didn't feel any passion to what she was doing. You know I think those of us who really enjoy what we do we do it because we are passionate about it. Not because we love houses or watch HDTV or anything of that [censored]. Like we love what we do. We love…you know there is that narcissistic side again of you know part of it. But there's also the feeling of just helping somebody buy their home that is very rewarding. And so I don't know I could go preach on a lot of different angles on it.  [Chris]: I couldn't agree more. Now I think we kind of got the understanding for the audience of what is the difference between being busy and productive. So how do we focus on being productive with our time? How do we focus on not dealing with the busy work? Because there is about 20% of our daily activities that are gonna result in about 80% of our business. The parietal principal works in that way. So how do we take that 20% and be extremely productive in that? So that it is not really blowing out of proportion or taken away from the other aspects of our business? [Nathan]: How do we…? Are you asking how we measure like…our productivity? [Chris]: How do we focus? How do we not deal with the busy work? [Christian]: There's also all sorts of tactics on focusing. We've had several opportunities on it but I think it is good to kind of go over some of the basic stuff because you know even maybe in super organizing systems like think you know “I am efficient with my time” I get distracted you know in real estate you've got your phone blowing up in fires. You have that put out and you know  ”I am trying to time block to get this project done and the phone won't stop ringing”. And you know… So it could be very challenging but I think kind of like you know quote “new year's resolution” you just gotta if you follow the horse you gotta make it on keep going. Remind yourself “OK I need to turn off the technology and just be self-aware of like the things that are drawing your attention away from actually being on a state to focus on one thing at a time.” You know don't buy into this like “I can multitask and I can have my social media up while I am into MLS and while I am drafting an email and working onto the project”. You're not gonna get anything done and you're gonna be super stressed out.  [Nathan]: Multitasking is [censored] people. Multitasking is for people that can't focus on one thing at a time and complete it. So don't multitask. Get it done. Sorry I get really weird about that. [Christian]: Alright there you go. [Nathan]: Yes.  [Christian]: You said it.  [Chris]: You have no compassion for it. [Nathan]: Yes I can't stand people saying “I am multitasking”. No you have the inability to focus on one item specifically that's what that is. That is 100% what that is. [Christian]: That's a lack of discipline. [Nathan]: Yes. There are a million things to…that you can use in tools and resources. Again just daily habits, you know, goals. Writing goals and not looking at them a year later but looking at them daily. Periodically or whatever it is. I mean. Or you can be really anal like me and have a check list.  [Christian]: Nathan you're making me feel bad because you know that's illuminous stuff but I don't do it all the time. You're hurting my inner child. [Chris]: Yeah but…Nate how is that CRM going? [Nathan]: [laughter] My CRM is going horrible. Why? Because I didn't put a date on it. I know it. I own it. [Christian]: What's your date? Give me a date now.  [Nathan]: I have not…I don't have one yet. [Christian]: What's your calendar? Do it now. [Nathan]: I don't have one yet. I probably…I am actually. [Chris]: There's a couple…OK getting back on track I think there is a couple of things that work for me in trying to aim and being more productive. One is, I don't take on more than I can handle at any given time. [Christian]: How do you know what you can handle? [Chris]: Huh? [Christian]: How do you know what you can handle? [Chris]: Trial and error.  [Christian]: OK. [Chris]: When I realize that I am not spending enough time with the family and some of the projects that I am doing I don't see a future to, whether that be it doesn't improve the bottom line, it doesn't like it's not gonna be used, the reaction to the agent is not exactly the reaction that I thought it would have. I'll cut a project.  I don't take on too many volunteer roles. Like if I take on a new one I give one up. But when I do something I…when I changing a habit, when I am adding something into my routine, I do it one step at a time. I don't go and change my entire routine overnight. And for…you can go back over the last 3-4 months and I will talk about how I changed my entire morning routine off of what Nate did after what Obi said after Obi's show. But start small. Don't change the whole routine all at once.  If you're gonna start using a CRM you dedicate that is what you're gonna do and you just do that for you know 30 minutes a day every single day and then once you're used to doing that every single day than you add something on. But you don't say “It's 2019 I am not gonna use a CRM I am gonna call everyday, I am gonna follow up with this marketing, I am gonna do this that and the other and I am all gonna start it on January 1 and guess what it's now a few weeks in and I have dropped off the map”.  Well you dropped off the map because you have added too much to your plate. Start small than you slowly add on. And then the other thing that helps me be productive is a to-do list. Like what Nathan said. Put a checklist down. I aim for the top 3-5 things that I want to accomplish in a day. I write it down and then those are the first things I work on. So at the end of the day whatever has happened, whatever has gotten done I know that I made at least 3-5 different things that are moving the needle forward in the business every single day.  So that helps with the busy work. Because busy work comes. I got on 100 agents and it's all email all the time. Lots of administrative, lots of busy work. But I always get the productive stuff done. [Christian]: I would love to touch on what you just said because I couldn't agree more on the…because I was just the king of it for the longest time, taking on or challenging myself to something that was too big instead of thinking about it logically. So I look at it from a new agent perspective. I mean you meet a new agent. New agent says “Yeah I wanna do 7 million in sales next year” [laughter]. “OK right. Yeah right”.  We laugh now right and I would love to see it. But how about instead of saying 7 million in sales lets focus on just the first one. Right. And I think it's our human nature to set these lofty goals and then we fall short. We get discouraged and then we just quit at it right? It's OK to have a goal that is somewhat ambitious. But don't…we all know that if it's not within reach it's not worth doing. I mean myself I got a …I got a running partner, Jason Perkins here in town and we both thought about signing up for something called the Moab, 240, it's a 240 mile single loop run through in Moab, Utah, Arches national part of that whole area. 5…5 days around this thing.  I really want to do it. I like…It's on my list. And he said “Do we want to do it this year?” And I had to think through that for about 3 weeks. And as much as I wanted to say “Yes let's do it this year” I said “Eh I need another year to prepare”. You don't know how its gonna be but than it's a little more realistic. To say “I can go on and achieve that”. Maybe I could have done it this year. Maybe not. I think it probably wouldn't have happened but I rather give myself time to prepare to do some other thing. So coming from me, the guy who loves the big things, stepping back and really taking that hard look in the mirror, evaluating what your goals are I think it's huge. Don't bite off more than you can chew. [Chris]: Absolutely. That's been something major. And you to your point Nate with a new agent that's coming in saying “Oh I want to do 7 million” in even taking it a step back. Not even saying “Oh I just want to focus on that first transaction” break it down smaller. “I am gonna focus on getting 7 clients on this year”. Because if you're focusing on just getting the clients the transaction will come. But if you focus on the client you're focusing on the habits and the action items that need to be done to generate business. If you say “I want…I am gonna focus on getting a deal over the next month”. It's not specific enough. “Oh what am I gonna do to do it?” “Well if I am gonna get a deal I need…I need clients right? So why don't I just focus on getting clients and I am gonna aim from 5-7 clients this year. Then I know what my job is. And my job is to build those relationships and get in that position where somebody wants me to represent them”. The transaction will come. Whether that comes in the first 6 months or the second 6 months or the third 6 months it will come if you focus on doing the right things. That's what I got. [Nathan]: Yeah good.  [Chris]: Anything else on being productive? Guys final thoughts?  [Christian]: I don't know. What you said. I have realistic goals. Don't make them crazy. A to-do list is real easy tool and cheap. You don't need…You don't need…paper and a pen. [Chris]: Not even that. Notes apps.  [Christian]: [laughter] Yeah right. [Nathan]: I just say take it day by day. If you know you get distracted and your day goes to [censored] hey you got tomorrow. Start over. [Chris]: Absolutely start over. Don't wait. Don't set…Don't get half way through the year and say “You know what I didn't…I faltered, I am gonna wait until January 1”. Just start the next day. [Christian]: Don't wait until life is perfect and everything lines up just right because it never will. [Chris]: It's never perfect. It's never gonna be the right time. Just make little strives all the time. There's a great book. The compound effect by Darren Hardy, who talks about how making incremental efforts every day is the key to building a successful business. And I like in it to brushing your teeth. You brush your teeth once for 2 minutes, it doesn't do anything for you. But one of my good friend is a dentist. You brush your teeth twice a day everyday it's gonna prevent cavities. It's all about consistency. It's all about the small actions adding up to produce spectacular results if you stick with it. Go.  [Nathan]: So go brush your teeth people. [Chris]: Brush your teeth. [Christian]: That's how the world is conquered. A little goal at a time. [Chris]: That's how it is. Brush your teeth. Your colleagues will thank you and if you haven't already please go to re:Think Real Estate, our website which is rtrepodcast.com. Subscribe to the newsletter and you will get notified every time an episode hits the air. Go to iTunes, Google play, Spotify, leave us a great rate review even if you haven't really listened to the whole episode just give us 5 stars.  [Christian]: Yeah just do it. [Chris]: Just do it. Alright. Thank you so much for tuning in everybody. We will see you next Monday.  [music] [Chris]: Thanks for tuning in this week's episode of the re:Think Real Estate Podcast. We would love to hear your feedback so please leave us a review on iTunes. Our music is curtesy of Dan Koch K-O-C-H, whose music can be explored and licensed for use at dankoch.net. Thank you Dan. Please like, share and follow. You can find us on Facebook at Facebook.com/rethinkpodcast. Thank you so much for tuning in everyone and have a great week.  [music]  

Tis the “Season of Less?” Chris is back with his silky baritone voice. AJ & Chris are looking at letting go of various software, media content, and streaming services. Meanwhile, looking at new independent content creators. Heat up some peppermint tea and settle into your sofa. It's time once again... For the Bellingham Podcast.HousekeepingThanks to everyone who have reached out to the show, we have seen your messages. Shout-out to 40/20 https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/40-and-20/id1440949708?mt=2New look same site: bellinghampodcast.com (http://bellinghampodcast.com/) Information diet - Chris* Not much TV show consumption, or movies. * YouTube - carefully-curated channels subscribed to * Tasty, Frog Leap Studios, Marques Brownlee, and PostModern Jukebox* Not much news consumption. Once a day AM check Google News algorithm.* New Podcasts finds - ZigZag, The Future of Cities, Mozilla IRLInformation Diet - AJWildthingPodThe Ground Up ShowWatchfinder & CoHodinkee Radio40and20 Podcast https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/40-and-20/id1440949708?mt=2 Home Wireless Changes for Chris* Requiem for Apple Airport Base Station. * Enter Google Wifi mesh netwoHoliday Shopping - A counter-cultural mindset* NotMinimalism but anti-hoarding. * “The things you own, own you.” Papa Roach - Between Angels and insects (?!)* The power of saying “no”. The notion that you gotta have X to 'be in the game' * Matt Jacobson (https://pca.st/episode/ade50ef2-7b8e-4fa1-8966-8978f6f27ff6) * Matt D'Avella (https://www.youtube.com/user/blackboxfilmcompany)Cutting the streaming cord * AJ - Pandora cancelled, Netflix to be canceled January? * CP - Hulu, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Ebay, Paypal, and Apple Music - all under consideration of getting cancelled * Take one day a week and say NO to the TV or mindless flipping through instagram * “According to the university of sussex (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/5070874/Reading-can-help-reduce-stress.html), reading a book for as little as 6 minutes is enough to lower stress levels by more than 68%” * Listening to music reduced the levels by 61 percent, have a cup of tea of coffee lowered them by 54 per cent and taking a walk by 42 per cent.Analog Explorer Update* AJ- The Analog Explorer SE- Sold out! Second printing through Blurb (out by time of recording)

Tis the “Season of Less?” Chris is back with his silky baritone voice. AJ & Chris are looking at letting go of various software, media content, and streaming services. Meanwhile, looking at new independent content creators. Heat up some peppermint tea and settle into your sofa. It's time once again... For the Bellingham Podcast.HousekeepingThanks to everyone who have reached out to the show, we have seen your messages. Shout-out to 40/20 https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/40-and-20/id1440949708?mt=2New look same site: bellinghampodcast.com (http://bellinghampodcast.com/) Information diet - Chris* Not much TV show consumption, or movies. * YouTube - carefully-curated channels subscribed to * Tasty, Frog Leap Studios, Marques Brownlee, and PostModern Jukebox* Not much news consumption. Once a day AM check Google News algorithm.* New Podcasts finds - ZigZag, The Future of Cities, Mozilla IRLInformation Diet - AJWildthingPodThe Ground Up ShowWatchfinder & CoHodinkee Radio40and20 Podcast https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/40-and-20/id1440949708?mt=2 Home Wireless Changes for Chris* Requiem for Apple Airport Base Station. * Enter Google Wifi mesh netwoHoliday Shopping - A counter-cultural mindset* NotMinimalism but anti-hoarding. * “The things you own, own you.” Papa Roach - Between Angels and insects (?!)* The power of saying “no”. The notion that you gotta have X to 'be in the game' * Matt Jacobson (https://pca.st/episode/ade50ef2-7b8e-4fa1-8966-8978f6f27ff6) * Matt D'Avella (https://www.youtube.com/user/blackboxfilmcompany)Cutting the streaming cord * AJ - Pandora cancelled, Netflix to be canceled January? * CP - Hulu, Netflix, Amazon Prime, Ebay, Paypal, and Apple Music - all under consideration of getting cancelled * Take one day a week and say NO to the TV or mindless flipping through instagram * “According to the university of sussex (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/5070874/Reading-can-help-reduce-stress.html), reading a book for as little as 6 minutes is enough to lower stress levels by more than 68%” * Listening to music reduced the levels by 61 percent, have a cup of tea of coffee lowered them by 54 per cent and taking a walk by 42 per cent.Analog Explorer Update* AJ- The Analog Explorer SE- Sold out! Second printing through Blurb (out by time of recording)

KERI: Hey guys! It’s Keri TV. I have a very special guest today. I’m super excited to introduce Chris Dyson, a fellow colleague at the agency. We have something we’re so excited to share with you that’s become a little bit more mainstream in the agent circles.  It started as an agency exclusive, and it’s called the PLS, which stands for the... CHRIS: Pocket Listing Service. KERI: Pocket Listing Service. We’re going to explain a little bit today on our episode on what that means and how it benefits you, agents, and why It’s so great. KERI: First, to start things off, what is a pocket?  That can be a very confusing term. Pocket is slang for listings that we have that are not on the MLS. If something’s on the multiple listing service, It’s pushed out to Zillow, RedFin, and every website possible.  It’s a pocket, so It’s something secretive that you have in your pocket. CHRIS: Correct. KERI: It’s an off-market property.  Off-market, but with sellers that are willing to sell.  That being said, Chris, tell us a little bit more about the PLS.  Thanks for being here today, too. CHRIS: My pleasure, thanks for having me.  Very exciting. KERI: Very exciting. CHRIS: It’s what Keri perfectly described. Pocket listings have actually become more and more prominent in our market, as you know.  Frankly, it was born from frustration in, as you know as as well, we would get sent hundreds, probably, sometimes thousands of emails a month from clients saying that I have this pocket listing.  I’m looking for that pocket listing. Frankly, I was frustrated.  There was nowhere we could go and search for that information when you needed it. If the email came and you didn’t have a client, and it was gone and it was forgotten about. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: It was really born to try to fix that problem.  To have somewhere agents could find information that they’re already sharing in an email.  If that could live in a searchable platform, that was the goal. KERI: Yeah, and it’s amazing.  Who gets too many emails?  I know I do.  I’m trying to find that random email that had a pocket when you get a new call if the new buyer is just super hectic. CHRIS: That was really the impetus that started the platform. KERI: Cool. How does it work? You’ve got the platform. Tell us more about how it functions and helps agents and clients. CHRIS: The biggest key with PLS is that it is an agent-only platform. KERI: Okay. CHRIS: Obviously, the conundrum is, how to do you market an off-market property? KERI: It’s off-market. CHRIS: Exactly. What does that mean? KERI: How do you do that? CHRIS: The only way you can really do that effectively, the key with it, is that these are sellers who want to adopt an off-market strategy. They either demand discretion, which in the big cities, especially Los Angeles, we have a lot of celebrities who don’t necessarily want their information in the public realm. KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: I don’t know an agent who doesn’t have a client that would say, I will sell it at this number, but I don’t want to go to the hassle of putting it on the market.  KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: What do you do with those? KERI: Hey guys, want my very expensive listing? CHRIS: Yeah!  The key is to make the platform only accessible to agents.  That, one, helps keep the information out of the public domain, which is what the seller is asking for in the first place.  Secondly what that does, which is probably the most important thing that this site is designed to try to achieve, it lets agents leverage this information to give us all a competitive edge.  I think what’s really become a huge problem or an issue for agents is now the MLS is sharing information with the Zillows, the Trulias, and the Redfins. Clients are saying, why do I need an agent?  Everything’s available online. KERI: Right. CHRIS: Part of what the PLS allows the agent community as a whole to do is take the information that sellers want to be kept out of the public realm and leverage that to give us all the information that our clients don’t have access to, and in turn, make everybody more valuable. KERI: Very valuable  What happens if somebody’s got their property listed on the PLS and nothing happens?  Say there’s no showings or offers.  What happens next? CHRIS: This is probably where, again, the PLS can be valuable to potentially all listings.  I’m sure you have clients that think the house is worth more than you think it’s worth. KERI: Not at all! CHRIS: Not at all, right?  One of the coolest things that we’ve seen over the last year is that agents have used the PLS to list properties in a ‘coming soon’ capacity, before putting them on the MLS. KERI: Ah, okay. CHRIS: That’s right.  In a lot of instances, the property is sold, which is amazing.  A lot of agents have actually used it as a tool to get a price reduction out of their sellers.  Those sellers who think it’s too much, if it hasn’t moved and they haven’t gotten the activity, it’s given them the ammunition and the data to go back to the seller and say, listen.  The agent’s have seen this.  We haven’t got a call.  Let’s put it out and get it onto the MLS at a more realistic number.  Zero days on market.  That has been a really cool thing to see honestly. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: I’m delighted that that’s really happening. KERI: Because days on market can translate to a lack of value. If something’s on the market too long, it becomes a stale listing. You know. The whole nine yards.  So the type of agents that are on the PLS, when you say to your seller, it’s been on here and say we haven’t had much traction, who’s in this, besides the agency’s agents?  These are some of the top agents in the nation.  What other types of agents?  How do we explain to our seller’s who’s looking? CHRIS: I mean, the majority of our agents are LA based. KERI: LA based? CHRIS: It’s only effective if you have a critical mass of agents in any particular place. KERI: Exactly.  Those agents are on the site. CHRIS: That’s right. We now have just a shade under six thousand agents. KERI: Six thousand agents, oh my gosh. CHRIS: I include them. If you can reel off all the top agents in town, they all have memberships. KERI: Mh-hmm. CHRIS: You can really argue to your seller that the best agents in the business are going to see your information KERI: Mh-hmm. CHRIS: If it’s not selling, maybe we should rethink our strategy, going to the MLS. KERI: That’s an amazing, coming-soon platform, to make sure that you hit the market at the right price that attracts buyers. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Brilliant! I didn’t even think about that. CHRIS: See? KERI: What about for buyers that are looking?  How would they benefit working with agents who are members of the PLS? CHRIS: Again, it gives those buyer’s agents access of entry that their clients don’t have.  It makes you look better. KERI: Okay!  We like that. CHRIS: That’s exactly. KERI: Good. CHRIS: I think, in any business, someone’s only going to work with you if you offer value and have information they don’t have access too. KERI: Exactly. CHRIS: Part of this is to try to give that to the agents and help protect and ensure the industry as a whole, Keri. KERI: Yeah. CHRIS: That’s the plan. KERI: Transparency and value is the highest of important qualities all our clients want.  They want agents that are doing something, that are different, and that provide valuable information, because there’s so much of that online. They can get properties and comps. They can get all the tools they need, but something like this creates another echelon in our industry. CHRIS: Yes. KERI: Which is amazing. CHRIS: Perfect. That’s it. KERI: What are some examples of times where PLS has made a huge impact?  What are some of the success stories you’ve heard of? CHRIS: Listen, again, I’m delighted to say that I get texts and emails all the time. I actually got a text from Marshall Peck, mentioning him. Marshal listed a house.  He texted me in the morning to say that he had a house that was coming on the flats, Beverly Hills.  He put it on and then texted me back half an hour later and said, just got three calls in ten minutes.  Now, I’m able to go and actually get the listing signed.  We got a listing signed as a result of putting it on the site that he didn’t have the executed contract in full. KERI: That’s amazing. CHRIS: That’s unbelievable. KERI: That’s a huge benefit.  Yeah. CHRIS: Yeah.  We’ve had deals done, we had a deal that we followed. An agent brought a property on at six point five and sold it for seven point two within in a week. KERI: What! Multiple offers off-market. CHRIS: Multiple offers off-market, yep.  KERI: That’s brilliant. CHRIS: A lady at PLG estates, Carey Moore. This was for a property in Griffith Park.  She got her asking price through the site.  It’s really working. KERI: Amazing. CHRIS: It’s amazing.  I’m delighted. KERI: I actually had an interesting case.  I met some buyers, some clients, at an open house.  They knew eight other agents.  They were like, Keri, we know this person.  We know purple bricks.  We know all these different agents who are willing to give us money back, this whole thing.  When I met them for the second time, I let them know about the PLS, and it showed them inventory on there that wasn’t available through their other agent friends who were on the MLS and they were like, Keri, we love you.  Can’t wait to work with you. CHRIS: Amazing. KERI: Yeah. It’s been an incredible tool in this day, with all the information out there.  Yeah.  Okay, speaking of the PLS and some of these beautiful properties, I was just looking through, a couple days ago, I saw this one on Oriole in West LA. Not West LA.  The one for twenty-nine million, that was just listed.  That is unbelievable.  I’ll show you a picture. CHRIS: It’s a cool house. KERI: A few pictures of that one. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Then the one in Malibu, on Murphy. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Those views are amazing. The one in Playa on Trolleyway, that’s very rare for that area, on the beach there. CHRIS: I mean, we’re very lucky to have a ton of really relevant inventory, and, quite frankly, if you’re not on there, you’re unnecessarily putting yourself at a disadvantage.  I mean, God bless what everyone wants to do, but this is really information you should have access to.  And it’s free.  Still. KERI: And it’s free! CHRIS: There’s no excuse. KERI: It’s free.  We like that. CHRIS: Yeah. Still free. KERI: Definitely, if you’re an agent, let us know if you’re interested in the PLS, and if you’re looking to work with an agent, make sure they are a member of the PLS so you have all the access.  Here Chris, I know you’re busy with this entire new amazing website and obviously servicing all your clients. CHRIS: Yeah. KERI: Thank you so much for being here. CHRIS: My pleasure. KERI: I can’t wait to post this.  Thank you guys for watching.  See you next Tuesday on Keri TV.    

This episode is the the first of a series of interviews exploring how entrepreneurs scale up their serviced accommodation businesses. In this first episode Chris interviews Hitesh Mistry as he talks through the different ways to scale serviced accommodation businesses, and the ways he has personally done so with his own business. Hitesh is owner of Vision Lets who provide rooms with a difference: Modern, Bright and Clean. Hitesh runs Vision Lets with his wife and focusses a lot on the lifestyle that being a landlord gives, and the passive income it can bring.   Show Notes: The Serviced Accommodation Podcast is a show brought to you by Chris Poulter and Ritchie Mazivanhanga aimed at new and experienced property investors alike. With each show we help you Start, Systemise and Scale your Serviced Accommodation Business. If you would like to ask us a question or discuss anything in this episode, please join The Serviced Accommodation Podcast Community on Facebook, and ask away. To listen to more episodes or get more information go to www.thesapodcast.com. Find out more about Hitesh and Vision Lets at: http://visionlets.com/       Transcription: Chris: Hi, I am Chris. Hitesh: Hi, I am Hitesh. Chris: And welcome to the Serviced Accommodation podcast.   Chris: As you may have noticed, it is not Richie joining today, we have got our test results for our series on scaling up. So, we have been working Hitesh for a little while now and having been through the process of scaling up his business, and we thought it would be really interesting and useful (process) to talk about that painful process; right. So we are just going to have a kind of chat about the process you have been through, if there is any (parts) you can help people with — that kind of thing. So it would be really useful for everyone, just to start off with — to kind of under a bit more about you; who you are; where you are based; what you have kind of been through; and tell us your background career? Hitesh: Yeh nice one. Thank Chris. Thanks for inviting me today, I really appreciate that. I think when you said you have been working with me for a little while, a little bit longer than a little while. I think nearly around two years. Chris: Really! That long. Hitesh: Yeah, it’s been quite a long time and it’s definitely been a journey. I’ll tell you my background. It’s been a great journey though. Really hard. My background, I am actually a corporate person. I work for huge corporate conglomerate, global company, for ten years. I haven’t been a serial entrepreneur at all. Hitesh ordinary average guy, you know, just… Chris: That’s amazing. I find it hard to like envisage you in that whole corporate world. I guess the whole time I have known you, you have kind of been out of that you see. Hitesh: Yeah, exactly right. That’s exactly correct. But you know, I have done a lot of academic studying, I have went through the kind of traditional study modes, the university, I have got an MBA as well. So academically, I have really studied a lot, I have really always (sealed) myself in the kind of corporate world. But back in 2009, my wife and I, we started buying properties — our own properties — as buy to let. And that kind of got into the flavour of how we invested in property. And actually around 2004/2003… Sorry, 2013/2014, around there. Now we have we have get that decade… I started getting a little bit itchy in my corporate role and I was thinking, we have started building up a property portfolio, and the income we were getting was quite good. If you kind of called it this passive income whatever. And I really thought of, you know, if I can do it more in property, and left in the kind of corporate traditional job side of things, I know it’s a bit of cliché but I read that kind of “Rich Dad, Poor Dad” book. It really did flick on a lot of light in my mind actually. Chris: It might be a cliché but it genuinely does, kind of, I think the word is paradigm. I think it’s a great word, I don’t really understand it but certainly kind of, you can look at something and see it in a completely new light, and that’s certainly what it did for me. Because suddenly you will go, I can see the mistakes I am making, my money comes in and I spend it. Hitesh: Yes. Chris: In I just… The money comes in and I put even a fraction of that away to invest in assets and then start sending your money from that, that’s the wealth. It’s such a simple concept and yet so powerful; isn’t it? Hitesh: Really powerful. Really, really powerful. And really resonates very strongly enough for a while. And also, at that time, 2014, my son has been born and he is three years old. My wife was, in 2015, pregnant with my daughter. And I thought to myself, you know actually, in the first three years of my son’s life, actually… In fairness, because my job was a (field) based role, I generally have a lot of time and freedom to manage my own diary and my customers I was working with, so, I do get to spend quite a lot of time with him, probably more so than an average kind of person. But, I wanted more than that, I wanted to spend even more time with my son and my family, and I really saw property as a vehicle to do that. And those few things in my mind started to make me think perhaps I should leave my corporate job and go full time property and kind of just go through it and see what happens. Because another thing that I thought was that if I go through it, even if it doesn’t work out, I am young enough just to still go and get another job again. Very employable in that regard. So, if I don’t try that I might have a lot of regrets and that’s really my background and how I got into property. Chris: So what was it that kind of made you take the leap then — the final leap if you like, from the corporate world into the entrepreneurial world? Did you kind of have something (lined up); did you just go — I have got focus? Hitesh: I mean the property portfolio was supporting us, not obviously replacing the whole income (with me), but, it was a nice cushion. Chris: Yeah. So it was kind of a safety blanket, if you like. Whatever happens you would have some money coming in, at least enough to kind of live on. Even though it may be not as much as you used to; right. Hitesh: Absolutely. But even it was still a just in time because Kim, my wife, she was on maternity, so actually she was picking up a new kid. All of that was becoming — it was a bit of a risk, really. Chris: Particularly, because she is on maternity. Even that child too is on the way as well. Hitesh: Exactly. The cost are about to go through the roof. I kind of leave my job… Chris: So, was that something that Kim has always supported you in or was it kind of a battle? Because I think that a lot of people struggle with is that, you kind of start to come into this entrepreneurial world and you have a kind of mind-set around what you are doing. And if your partner doesn’t share that mind-set, it can be very hard to kind of communicate on the same level. So was that something that you struggled with or…? Hitesh: Yeah. I think Kim was — she was so supportive, like really supportive. You know, if you really feel that something you want you want to do, and it’s a dream, then go for it, I will fully support you — we will find a way of doing it. She really gave me that extra confidence to take that step (how) you want and really go through it. The other really interesting thing as I have always been involved with — personal development, and psychology, and mind-set, and believe (system), and things like that — being involved in practicing, and trying to improve myself, and make myself more accountable for man years. And I thought to myself, you know what, let’s just go through it, one way or another I will just make it work. Do you know what I mean? I think when you really are focused on something, like very focused, I think then you really do make it work. Especially, if you then say to yourself, you know; we needed to kind of live a good life as well. I don’t need more pressure but, it is true that… For me, I thought I didn’t think working and going major on property was going to work for me — that I just don’t think I would have the focus. I need to really, really, really focus in one thing only. Chris: Yeah. And I would say you are absolutely right. It’s very hard to really make something successful unless you have the focus around it. Certainly for years I have like two or three businesses, really. At least three businesses going on at any one time, and none of them really did (anything) because they didn’t get the full focus and attention that they needed to really start growth. So, now I completely understand that. When you went full time in property then; what were you focusing on that time; was it single let still? Hitesh: I went for the rent to rent HMO model. That’s what we went for. So we did setup our own HMO that we purchased, we just completed it, it was getting it to go live, so that was really exciting time. And then really focused it on rent to rent HMOs — that was what we focused on. Chris: Okay. So I guess that’s kind of natural progression, you bought an asset which is an HMO. You have kind of been through that process, seeing how it works. And so, you know what, I could benefit from a lot of these cash flow without a lot of our capital input by taking on rent to rent. Hitesh: Yeah. Definitely. Didn’t quite go very straight forward though, it took me seven months to get my first rent to rent HMO. Chris: Yeah, I am sure that’s quite a common path; isn’t it. Because here is an interesting thing, people think if they are going to and get, say, three properties. And you won one every two months and then after six months you are having three properties. But it took you seven months to get your first HMO, but, on rent to rent; how many did you get in the kind of six months or so after that? Hitesh: Yeah. Then they started to come through. (They first start to flow) through after that, until we got another four or five, quite quickly after that. Chris: So it’s amazing how that looks; isn’t it. And it is kind of putting the time on it first. And you know when we are working with people in the quick-start program, you have to keep reminding them that okay, you are paying the work, and you are paying the work, and it doesn’t feel like it’s paying back, yeah, but it’s exactly the situation which you found several months of work and after six and a half months you just have been going kind of mental. You know what we are doing. Hitesh: Definitely. That really does reminds me of about pushing a snowball up the hill. Do you know what I mean, this analogy, you know it’s hard work — pushing up the hill. And you think; what am I doing? This is not working. You can see, there is (someone mentioned), but it’s hard sometime to really think, you know what, I am close to doing it. And then all of a sudden something happens, it starts to come together, and you get a break. And then that snowball tips over and it starts to roll down the other side of the hill, and the momentum becomes somewhat self-fulfilling. You know, you still keep the focus, you still got to keep going. But, things starts happening for you, which is really nice. But you have got to do that bit first, of pushing up the hill, and the belief, and to keep going, and all other things. Chris: Absolutely. It doesn’t matter what strategy on a guaranteed rent, for instance, the kind of typical one way. You are having to get around with the agents and explaining what we are doing, you feel like hitting break all of the whole time. And just throughout you are saying, eventually, you kind of hit that critical marks; don’t you. Management is exactly the same. At first you are having to, (it will be out there), kind of trying to find people you might be able to help with it. And then eventually you kind of get to that point where really people are referring people to you, or people are giving you a ring. So, it doesn’t matter what kind of structures you are using, there is a way that kind of critical (mass point); isn’t it. And a lot of effort required beforehand. Hitesh: Yeah. Very much that. Chris: So, if you kind of quit your corporate life and went rent to rent, which presumably a cash flow strategy. So what was it that attracted you to then do another cash flow strategy on top of that, in serviced accommodation? Hitesh: This whole thing was kind of around with rent to rent HMO that you are going to make at least £500 a month. Chris: I was for about a thousand pound a month per property, and I was about to say that sounds very familiar. Often that’s said about SA as well. Hitesh: Exactly. And that was powerful, it got me into the rent to rent HMO. And the reality is that it was really different, quite honestly, really different. My result weren’t like a thousand pound a month, not at all. My first one wasn’t even £500 pound a month. So, actually if you look at it (and) the breakeven point, because you got a furniture. Actually I am still trading at a loss, in the first… As soon as you go live you are trading at loss. You know, that takes at least twelve months to break even. Chris: Yeah, that’s true. Hitesh: So that’s really interesting because I thought, well actually this is not as great as I thought it was going to be. You know, if I was taking five out, which I end up being leveraging so that to finance the outlay for it, but this will take a whole year to break even. Well okay, I have got to hang in there, it’s a waiting game… it will come good, that’s fine. But then I think maybe naively I fell into a similar trap with serviced accommodation. Chris: I was going to say because that sounded very, very familiar to me. Because people do guarantee rent and a cashless strategy, but, you have got to claw back all that cash which you presented in the first place, and that’s usually a six to twelve month period. And of course ironically, most of the people doing this are doing it because they need money now. Hitesh: Yes, that’s right. Chris: So it always depends how you look at it. You can look at the money as well but now we have got the cash flow. But in financial terms if you don’t have the money then you are going to have to borrow the money or come to some arrangement and work with someone else, which means that you are not going to get that cash flow from day one. Hitesh: That’s correct and the other thing that attracted me to serviced accommodation or changing was, I am a sort of person that I write like to, if you like, diversify, so I don’t really want all my eggs in one basket anyway. So, having the HMOs that (will) build up the rent to rent, you know, that was good and I thought to myself, well, I have got a good focus on this but you we have got rooms got rooms that are filling with pushing the market rent, good properties. But, I always worry about tomorrow, (if it’s) going to change. So, having a new strategy and a new property business, if you like, means I am kind of de-risking myself in that regard. So as long as I keep the focus on the other thing and have the focus on this new thing, and I felt it was contradictory, you know, but we had systemized quite well, the rent to rent business, the HMO business. So, I felt the time was right that I could spend some more time now, looking at a new strategy and serviced accommodation was what I wanted to do. Chris: Yeah, I think you are completely right. You need to focus at first, to actually build the business up, but then once you know how everything works, you can put systems and teams in place, you know, leveraging quite (hard). Okay. So you kind of make the position into moving to SA, so did you start looking for deals or…? Hitesh: That’s a foundational kind of trading and stuff like that, reading up and trying to understand how it works and comes together conceptually and theoretically. And then went out and started to look for… Actually, you know what happened was, the first deal was a rent to rent, which originally was going to be an HMO. Yeah, it was going to continue to be an HMO. And the builder who was helping to do the work said, oh, there is a lady –you know, it’s quite close by — that’s operating serviced accommodation. And obviously being fresh in my mind from reading and learning and trading and what’s not. The (word) as an interesting thing, I haven’t originally consider it for this property but (why not) consider it. So, she and I had a really good chat and she has been doing it for about one year, so, she had gotten some good underground experience, and we went through some numbers with what she was doing, and I thought it was really interesting. I have done some further research and felt that this could be a really good opportunity. So, we then went for it and we tried to a serviced accommodation instead of HMO. That’s kind of how the first one started. Chris: Cool. So tell us a little bit about that first property, you said it was like an HMO. So where you kind of doing it as rooms or studios? Hitesh: Studios. So, it’s a rent to rent deal, doing the guaranteed rents deal. And seven units in that whole studio, self-contained units. So you have quite nice, quite attractive proposition for the marketplace. But I thought if I can create a mixture and get an amount of money running a serviced accommodation, it was well worth trying. And the numbers really look like they were going to step up quite well for it. So, that’s what we have done, we went for it. When I say we, that’s really me, but the lady was very much helping me. We basically agree that she would help me with the day to day operation, so it wasn’t very much a (we) operation. She came in and she was absolutely brilliant at helping to get things moving in that property. Really-really good. Chris: Does she have like an interest in anything or was she just being helpful? Hitesh: No. Chris: Was she doing it for free? Hitesh: No. We obviously set things up so that she would be rewarded on a commission kind of basis, so I set it as a commission type basis. Because I really wanted her to over deliver and really help us to… I wanted us to have some skin in the game. Do you know I mean. So, she is not investing any money in the property itself but if she is going to provide money from services if you like. I guess what it was really. And she was pretty much handy with everything, from the initial setting up on the portals and platforms, to the pricing, to the guest experience, the after sales, all that stuff, she was doing all of that. So, we set it on a commission type basis and we started… It flew out of the door, to be honest. It started really-really well. Chris: Yeah. And it started with reasonable scale as well, you are not just like taking (on the)… I think the standard way would be take on a two or three bed apartments, and see how I have got to scale from there, so go in with seven studios. Hitesh: Yeah. Absolutely. Chris: So, what do you think you struggled with the most when you first get started? Hitesh: In terms of that property or like… Chris: Just common, in general. You know coming into SA, it is very different from anything else you might see in property, it’s a real whole business; isn’t it. So there is so many different moving parts to it, from the systems you might have in the background to the end product which people have to get right every time, or they get, you know, you don’t leave guests unclean towels, your (linen) or anything like that, Through to the kind of bookkeeping aspects for it. So it’s such a kind of high arena really, SA. Or was there anything specifically which you kind of struggles with, or it was new to you, or did you feel like it was just a big kind of learning curve but you took it all on board quite easily. Hitesh: To be honest with you, I was terrible. I didn’t get very involved with the business at all. I went for an approach where I had leveraged this lady, because she has the experience, she knew what she was doing, and she was delivering pretty much everything, and I didn’t get involved really with it. I went back to this idea of spending a lot of time with my family and I was quite happy because I have leveraged out the whole function to her. But, in hindsight, I think that’s the bit I struggled with in that… And the e-mist book is such a good book. Early on in that book they talked about delegation by abdication, you know, leveraging by abdication. You give someone a function but you don’t actually set the KPIs and measurable, to track actually how well they are delivering. It’s fine to leverage someone, but if you don’t really know what’s going on then what’s the point. All I could (say is that) in a month money was coming in and I was making profit, (first of all), happy with that. But, by making tweaks and changes you can make that profit even greater, you know that’s the beauty of the business; isn’t it. So, in some ways and it sounds bad, I kind of leveraged someone. But, I didn’t really set anything up in terms of KPIs and measurables, to really understand the business myself in any real detail. So I think I probably struggle with that because obviously at some point things started to change. You know demand changes, or the amount of profit I am making is changing, although I am actually… Chris: And then you have no idea why the income is going down. Hitesh: Yeah, I don’t know why. Because I don’t have a grasp on the business, and then you are really relying on someone to tell you about your business and it’s not even bloody their business. Sorry, I know that sounds a bit ridiculous. Chris: That’s fair enough. It’s easy enough to kind of fall into, but then obviously at some point you kind of identify that risk and started involving yourself a lot more in the day to day operation of the business. Hitesh: Yeah, very much so. And I think that’s probably about the time when you and I got involved because I am really a great believer of kind of working with people to kind of create best practice and systems, and have people that have good experience in what you are trying to do and we had a really great chat and I think (a) really good connection. And it was from then that we started working together and you had helped me to kind of see the whole parts of the business, the different parts of the business, and to get me more involved in it, so that I have got more control — that was it — I think you really helped me to get more control of my business, but at the same time keeping this lady happy. Because (certainly) now I am starting to meddle in what she has been doing. But I have to because it is my business and I have got to get control of it, you know, and (deal) with myself in that regard and actually make sure that we are running a very smooth and profitable business for everyone. So that was the next kind of step, really. Chris: Yeah. And it was taking it from a, you said, leverage by abdication, into the (thing) that we always talk about, the best way to leverage is you build a system get someone into the system and monitor their performance through KPIs. Hitesh: Definitely. Chris: And so, as I said, SA is quite a complex beast; isn’t it. So it’s just getting your head around all the different areas of that aspect and building your own way of doing things. It was what then kind of really built into a business for you as opposed to, essentially, more of a kind of hands off investment before, I’d guess. So, what pointed you to say that you were going to start scaling up your business and from the kind of original units that you took on? Hitesh: So, I always had in my mind… And again I think it’s one thing that we talked about in one of our mentoring sessions. Because I had taken this lady on and I was paying her on a commission type basis. I was quite happy and understood that the concept of leveraging, you know, a staff member. So I was really happy, then I thought well, we definitely got capacity to take on more properties. And if I can do that I still have really good time free, but still making more money, we would be foolish not to do that. So, that was the idea that I really wanted to kind of move that forward and just take on some more properties. Yeah I obviously wanted to take more profit and be more profitable. But going out there and starting to leverage some of the relationship we have been building over for the last two years now, then it was good because some of the good properties were coming and we thought, okay well we can leverage this. Get more properties on, we have got the capacity to deliver and the expertise now, to deliver on a product. And that was just really a no-brainer to try that. And then obviously with us working together, Chris, having more systems and controls in place, meant that I could be more kind of strategic, in terms of my involvement with the business and make sure that we are steering in the right way, and that we were really focusing on creating a very nice, really good customer experience, product, that was good for them, good for us as well. Chris: Yeah. And that focus on the end product, which I think when you have got one property your first one and you are setting up you have such focus and attention to detail around it. And as you have started to scale this property, the biggest thing and the most important thing, which can kind of get lost along the way. Is that you have got people in all this different mechanical aspects of the business but you did have to be keeping an eye on the end product. You know, in the guest experience, (multiple) customers actually going in and experiencing. Very important for sure, very easy to get lost. So when you were kind of going from that point and to scale up the business; what kind of models where you looking out for that? Hitesh: Rent to rent. That was it, that’s all I knew, to be honest. That was it. Chris: You had a bit of a false start with that really; didn’t you? Hitesh: Yeah. And no one ever told me about something called VAT. Chris: Until we spoke. Hitesh: Until we spoke. And you said to me… are you joking; are you kidding me. Because that’s really a game changer, and not in a good way. You know that’s life. Chris: Not a kind of positive impact really. Hitesh: No. Chris: So we kind of have a look at your portfolio and I have to look at the different methods around it. In fact I think yours was genuinely the first review I ever did, you know, a couple of years back. And we have kind of been introducing you to some of the other modules and management was certainly one of those modules. And I seem to remember when we kind of looked over it. You went well, this is kind of a no-brainer; why am I doing this when I could be doing management, taking a similar amount of money and not having to put any capital (in); right. Hitesh: Yeah. Absolutely. And it’s also interesting because, you know, going back to like owning your own assets, this kind of obsession of, sometimes you want to buy into that property, we want our own assets and we get a yield that comes off it, Actually a management module… You know, you don’t have the assets but the yield, and it’s fantastic, you know, you get a great amount of money from an asset that you are just managing but you don’t have any of that necessary (recycled) with it. You know all the capital outlay (actually) get going either. And it’s a really scalable module as well, which when you opened my eyes to. Chris: Yeah. And I think we were looking at your financial targets, and we went okay so you need X many management properties to achive that andyou were off then, going straight to find these properties. Hitesh: That’s right. Chris: Okay. So, you started to scale the kind of management module, so how has that been going for you now? Hitesh: It has gone really great, really-really well, it has been really game changing. We have taken on some pretty quite diverse properties, we have got some one bed property, we have got quite a few two bed properties, we have also gotten really interesting units that, you know, quite a large scale, and the management fee on those have been really great. So, it has been a really enjoyable journey, to move up from. And then also with our rent to rent properties, we have also restructured that — you helped me with restructuring that. So moving away from rent to rent to become a more management property. By selling them as investments to other people but retaining the management on them. So, which have helped me from that capital perspective, in terms of paying off on my capital debt that I secured into the business to get going in the first early days, helped me to get rid of some of that. But I retained the management fee on that as well, which was really-really nice. That’s very scalable than to do it that way. Chris: (I remember) because of that impact, stepping away from that and taking it below the VAT threshold, actually making very similar amounts of money, but you are also getting this nice capital input from having sales and deals. So, how many guaranteed rentals do you operate now? Hitesh: Now we have two. Chris: So kind of scaled it all team way back to below the VAT threshold and all the rest of your business is around the management module. Hitesh: Yeah. Chris: And so, obviously you have scaled your management business to a reasonable level now, and that’s kind of the point that this series of interviews is really talking to people and seeing how they have scaled up. Because I know there is, to some degree, a sentiment now around scaling up in SA, though it can be very tricky, and very hard; so what do you feel were the most important elements to you kind of scaling your business up to the level that it is now? Hitesh: It’s really good question. I think there are few things… When you say there is one thing — there is a few things. I think when you start to scale up it can be quite daunting, you know when you are taking on more and more and more, it can be quite daunting. And actually you come to this kind of feeling, I don’t know if it’s a psychological feeling. And when you think oh crikey, things are moving quite fast now, and wow… You already probably can actually do it, you start to have a little bit of self doubt. There is also responsibility, you always have responsibility to the landlord that you are representing. And you know as management, you have a lot of responsibility to your staff as you scale up and take more people on. You have a responsibility to the customers that are going to experience the product, and try to get that. And all that combined, for me, it starts to create anxiety and worry. So the mind-set stuff was really important for me, very-very important, I really went back to my (ways) to always do, which was running in the morning, doing a really early morning routine, I am very much a morning person. And starting my day with time for myself, to really get my mind-set in the right place so that I can really perform on my business. That was honestly so important. It’s hard because sometimes you can’t directly attribute what you are doing today to your mind-set or some other things that you do on a day to day basis, but for me I am convinced it’s helping me to perform and do really well. Chris: So do you feel that a routine and it’s very important to kind of bring structure to an entrepreneur’s life. Hitesh: Yeah, I do. Chris: You know, on the basis that you have not go to be in the office at 08:30 or 09:00 and you have not got someone looking over your shoulder to see if you are working or not and that type of thing. Hitesh: Yeah, I think so. I am very much a quite structured near kind of person, anyway, organised. So for me it’s very important. I mean I do think it is, you can easily lose days, weeks on end, if you are not careful and you can get so easily dragged into things you shouldn’t be doing. You know as you scale up and get more involved, you know, you can easily get dragged into organizing the cleaning rota. Fielding the calls for the customers that are not happy or really happy. And actually you have got to really be very disciplined to what you want to do with your day that’s going to deliver and add more value to the guest, or your business, or your staff, or whatever it might be. I mean that’s definitely one, the psychology mind-set side of things. That was massive for me. The second thing was really your numbers and your accounts, and your profit and loss, and that sort of thing. For me, it’s a very critical area, such a critical area. I think there is many of us, me included, would go on this journey and have no clue whatsoever about that business. And I don’t mean in a harsh way… But honestly it’s such a major problem, I think that we go up there and we are so focused on getting more sales and bringing more properties, just go and get them, just go and get them, set them up, just go, go, go. But actually when you measure them, some of them could be performing not very well, or with some small changes you can make them perform really-really well. You know, with some, you got a cull and say this is not the right way I am doing things, get rid of them. But you only know that, for me, you only know that through your numbers, and you have to be (so) on your numbers, also setting up KPIs, I never had KPIs. My only KPIs was the kind of occupancy (rate). Chris: And we both say what a great gauge that is. Hitesh: Having KPIs in place, having your accounts, and actually looking at them all the time, like all the time, and making all your decisions based on it, you know, it’s very-very important. I think for me, scaling up, that’s a massive part of it. Chris: Yeah. Definitely. Because otherwise, it’s very focus on scaling and lose the performance aspect of it. And realizing you are not really performing where you need to be. And actually it’s part of growth, and that’s always going to happen to various degrees. But like you say that, what you found certainly is that the biggest impact you can have on that is by having focus around the KPIs, having focus around the reports, and checking in with them a couple of times a week to see where you are at, what can you do to impact things, make a difference, etcetera. Hitesh: Yeah, definitely. And you can become very busy otherwise, just running around as you grow; but is good running. Good way of measuring. So that was very-very crucial for part of scaling up. I think also really embracing and leveraging people, systems, technology — huge — and what can be done with technology is just (depending on that)… But so powerful because it can give you really low cost, automation, much smarter way of doing things, and then we have talked about… And low cost can really make a difference to a business. You know leveraging people, very important, you know, part of scaling up as well. You can’t do everything, you are going to have the right people in place. Chris: You wouldn’t want to be there Hitesh: No, you wouldn’t… Chris: It’s very hard; isn’t it? It’s very hard to let go of various aspects, you know, controlling the business. Hitesh: Yeah. A hundred percent. And then also having peers, people that are operating similar business to you and being in the right network of people, I think it’s really important too. You know, regular meeting up with people, having contact with other people. You know, having people around you that have best practice, and are operating best practice, that know their stuff, you know, it’s really crucial to surround yourself with people like that as well. Then the part of the mentoring and the coaching that we do together for this few years that we have been working together, Chris, it’s been really vital, because it’s part of that network. And when you are not sure, because you don’t ever have all the answers when you are not sure, you got to better ask somebody. And get answers to that instead of reinvesting the wheel, you can implement things that other people have done that have served them and worked really well for them. You know, you put it into your business and yeah, great, you are seeing almost immediate results. Chris: And it’s also a kind of motivation as well; isn’t it. I was talking with Graham, he is also a member of the boardroom, and he was saying how when he comes each month, it’s like if someone has come along and they have taken on an extra block, and he is like, okay I better get my ass in gear, I feel like I want to come back… He sees someone else and they have implemented a system which (is working) really well in their business, he is like okay, I am actually going to do that. So there is a lot of that kind of peer driving your business forward as well, in terms of healthy competition, if you like. Or getting ideas and kind of wanting to do that. And if I can put words into your mouth, I think probably the element in your case was just scaling, and we have already kind of touched on it really with just getting the strategy right, because obviously if you continue to scale using the (guarantee rent) around what you are doing, then that would have ended quite badly. And so it was (all the) things are fundamentally important but getting that strategy right, I think without getting that in the first place, there is no foundations to build off. Chris: Very true. And that is a great way, Chris. Again I think if you try and fly on your own — somehow you would be aware of some of this stuff. And when you surround yourself with people that are doing same business, operating a similar way, ahead of you then you can learn, you can learn and you can review things and go, do you know what, this is not quite working, this is the reason why it’s not working, you know let’s change approach, let’s try something new, something different. And then you can explore it, and then implement it and try and see what happens. But the strategy — that was a real big game changer, that whole VAT thing, changing the module, going in the management module, and scaling upwards, it was a really game changer for me. It’s a very massive thing, thank you Chris. Hitesh: So we talked about (build) to a scale module, and we heavily recommend to people that (are often) just scaling up straight away. You build a module, say two bed properties using half (mile) of your city center, targeting trades, and (tourists)… Whatever your module might be, on each specific module you test that module and make sure it works in the way you expect before scaling up. So if you are talking to someone who have maybe been through that process, who have been operating it, you know, two or three properties for six and twelve months and now they are looking to really push forward and scale their business in the same way that you have; what kind of advice would you give to them? Hitesh: Set up your KPIs, early (days), really early (days). Get your measurables in place and how you are going to measure it — your growth — I think that’s really crucial. I would say get up your game, kind of like mind-set psychology wise, you know, really, when you go to any level, it is very (testing) of the mind; do you know what I mean. And I think you are going to be prepared for that, and I think that’s a big thing. And make sure you got the right kind of structure in place, strategy and support in place for that next phase. You know people that you can turn to, work with, (help) with, and have the right systems, and process, and people in place. That’s what I would say. Chris: Thank you. Thanks for joining us today Hitesh. I hope everyone found that very interesting and also very useful. Hitesh: Thank you Chris so much for your help. And thanks for inviting me today, I appreciate it. Chris: Cool. Taking you. Hitesh: Fantastic.   Don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast. To hear the latest on serviced accommodation. If you are looking to start, systemise or scale your serviced accommodation business, visit www.thesapodcast.com to see how we could help you further.          

Chris: Yeah, yeah we're rolling. Yeah? Kat: Is there enough light? Okay, no that was already on. I think I'm becoming addicted to light. Chris: You've got it down. All right. Kat: Okay, we're live already. Chris: Yeah ... what? Kat: What, mother fucker- I get ... Chris: You're gonna have to redo it. Kat: I can't redo it. I'd have to- Chris: [crosstalk 00:00:30] Oh, no. No, that one's done. Yeah that's- Kat: This is live. We're already live. What you're saying is being heard. What I'm saying is being heard. Chris: That is so funny. Kat: I think people have heard it before. What's up? Chris: Yes, it's working. Kat: We are technological geniuses. Chris: We just did have it take off a certain [crosstalk 00:00:50]. Kat: We've made ... They didn't do much. Hey, I managed to get the internet working for a second and a half. Chris: Oh my God. Kat: Can we kick this off by telling people the quotes of the day, Chris? Chris: All right we can share this. Yeah, all right. Kat: So should I tell them one from the other day or is it gonna off our buyers? Chris: No, no, no, we share. We're truly authentic [crosstalk 00:01:08] Kat: We're here for authenticity. We are literally about to fu- ... We are about to launch. Am I allowed to swear? Chris: No. Kat: No? Chris: No swearing. Kat: Okay, sorry. We are literally about to launch our supplement. We get to that in a moment but first I'd like to tell you three very informative and important quotes that I've been noting down. Chris just ... This is a man who, when you meet him or you see him, even online, you'll see that he is one of the most genuine good guys in the world. Kat: He is the nicest man in the world. He's one of my closest friends. I love him to death, he is the nicest, sweetest, person. Would never hurt anything and yet he just comes out and then he seems very like ... Wow, that was quite rude. Chris: Sorry, that is true. Kat: So the other day we're like "What should we call our livestream for our prelaunch live stream which shoots on Friday?" And I'm like thinking of creative titles cause I'm awesome at that and he's like, "Can we just call it-" Chris: Headlines are key. Kat: "This is why you're fat and we're not." And I'm like, "Wow." Chris: Because within context as well, we were talking about ... Kat: Please explain. [crosstalk 00:02:12] Chris: How we used to do diets before we used to be massive carbophobes and then over lunch we were talking about how we're just been loving eating carbs but doing it the right way. And how much better in shape we are now. And it's just- Kat: Well this leads me into the next quote which i that well ... Chris: Yeah, nicely done. Kat: Which is that we set up the lighting, and I'm like "Damn, that lighting's good." And Chris goes "Damn, it's good." And he goes, "Or is it just cause we look so good?" I'm just like "Wow, just be matter-of-fact about it." Oh, do you need to share that to your page? Do you need to share that to your personal page? Chris: Yeah. I can, with you. Kat: Okay, so we are ... oh and what was the third quote? Chris: What was the third one? Kat: Damn it, there was another really good one from just a second ago. So there was the one about "This is why you're fat and we're not." There was "Is this lighting really good or it just cause we look really good?" And then there was another one that just happened just then and it was so funny. I nearly wrote it down and then I was like "No, there's no way I would forget that." It will come back to us divinely. Chris: Not sure. Kat: Welcome, welcome, welcome to the show. Chris: We've got some big news. Kat: We have huge news, I think we're not even allowing ourselves to be ... Chris: So exciting. Kat: As excited as we are. I know I think we're not letting ourselves be as excited as we really could or should be about this. I think we're excited and we're like this is a big deal, and I'm just like "No, but do you understand what a big deal it is?" Chris: This is a big deal. This is a really big deal. Kat: Two plus years in the making? Chris: It's even longer. Kat: I think it's three years [crosstalk 00:03:49] ... Chris: We can put this dick ends downs. Kat: I think it's like pre ... dick- really? We started to formulate this before time began in our souls. Chris: Yeah, exactly. Kat: That's how good we are. I got to the quote book, the intelligence was coming through divinely from generations before but in a physical human sense, maybe three years. Chris: [00:04:07] Particularly there's star dust in there. Kat: Well it's actually ... Yes. And gold dust. You get a little piece of my soul. That's some powerful stuff. Look what I've created. Chris: That's really funny. Don't worry about the lighting. We're good. Kat: Yeah, we're good. We're good with the lighting. So we might be a little bit excited. We might be coming across as a little bit extra hysterical than normal, but it is such a huge deal. And welcome, welcome, welcome to everybody. I'm so happy and grateful that you're here with us. Kat: Hello over on our business page and hello on our personal page, and hello wherever else you are. I am either going to talk excitedly in a hilarious or just randomly crazy way for now, or I'm going to just stop and let Chris present with deep profound wisdom. Chris: I'll chime in as well. Oh, always. Kat: All the things. But let's just quickly say ... Okay, Lisa just summed up the whole entire situation. Chris: Wee. Kat: He says, "Wee." That's exactly right. We have an amazing founding deal. Chris: Founding special. Kat: But we're not going to tell you about that now, because we've got too many other exciting things to say. Chris: Yeah, we've got some more important news. Kat: Okay, I'm done. Chris: Okay. Kat: For now. Chris: Well we haven't decided on everything at this moment. So we need to do this together. So this is actually like ... Kat: Co-creation. Chris: Exactly. We all need to come together right now and actually sort this out. Kat: Yeah. So just stop what you're doing, put it down. Chris: Because this is literally the only time you are ever going to get this special at this product, this price, ever. Kat: Ever. Obviously if you've been following Kat for any time and even myself, you'll know that we want to celebrate. Actually, you know what's really interesting? This little bit random, I actually went through the ... See, Kat you're looking gorgeous. Chris: Yeah, I'm all right as well. Kat: No, I think that's definitely for you, sorry. Not me. Oh, thank you. I'm going to take that. I'm taking it from here. Thanks, Lonny. Chris: Kat, how high can you go. Random segue, we actually just reviewed the ... With my other coaching business, reviewed what the key parts of what the most accessible coaches are doing right now. What was ... What have they done? There was two things that was actually really interesting. Chris: One was how long they've been in the programme and why they're succeeding. So it's a common factor, and two, was they always jumped on the programme as fast as possible. Kat: Of course. Fast action takers. Chris: I know, but it was actually really interesting for me to actually see it. Kat: Oh, it was actual research. Chris: Yeah, we actually went through everything. Kat: That's gold. I say that all the time. Chris: The most successful people. No, it's legit. Kat: Oh, hello. Yeah. Chris: Yeah, well, exactly. Fair enough. Kat: We literally became business partners over cauliflower. Chris: Cauliflower and chicken? Kat: I could have make that some more exciting. Well, there was one. But it was a two-second decision, wasn't it? Chris: Yeah, it was. Kat: It was. Oh, then you came around and we talked about it the next day again, but it had already obviously ... Really we're just joking around nothing. We did a hilarious life show together. Chris: Yeah. Kat: But that is so true, and I say that all the time when I'm working with high level badass entrepreneurs and creators. I always say, "I want to work with the people who say 'yes' straight away." Because that's like me, and those are the people who get awesome freaking results. So we're really here today not just to ... With such excitement and gratitude and passion launch our product, finally. Kat: But we're also here ... There it is. We're also here to really honour those people who already know that they want one of our ... Oh, look at Ryan. You couldn't have product placed him any better than the hat. Ryan says, "Is this the one I tried last year at your place? It tasted amazing." I think my second one did have vodka in it. All right, just hold the final ... Let's save the shenanigans part of what you can do with this for later. Kat: Let's just talk pure. In fact, it was very healthy in the process of my training. But yes. So we didn't even prepare that little bit of testimonial earlier at all from Ryan who says it tastes amazing. It tastes freaking amazing. Okay, I'm getting distracted again. Continue on. Chris: Okay. There's a few things that we've all got to sort out right now. One, when you actually have to get onboard these founders special. Two, we're going to share with you actually how much of a discount that you're going to get and that's a lifetime discount as well. So we're going to make this as much of a no brainer as possible. Kat: Oh, I just remembered the other quote. Chris: Oh, what was the other quote? Kat: It was I said to you, "Is that really sneaky?" And you said, "Yeah." I really like it. Chris: Okay, just kind of side note, that was ingenious business strategy that we actually did when you just said we ... Kat: Because I'm a ninja. As I proved to you earlier. Chris: We share that later. We share that later. Keep business strategies coming down on this as well. It's all working. So two things we're going to work out. One, when you actually have to get on board by, because this can only last so long and we're going to have to cut it right now. So this, it's actually going to be pretty limited. Because we can only take so many people on board. Kat: Yeah. Chris: Two, the discount you get, which is a lifetime discount. And you know what? Three, we actually just added in. Sorry, for the first 100. First 100? Kat: Oh, I thought it was going to be 50. You're seriously pulling this up for 100 people? Chris: I want to be really nice, because I wore my give shirt today. Because I want to give. Kat: Oh, I want to cut it off really. I like to make people jump on board or work for it. Chris: No, we'll do 100, because there's a lot of ... Yeah, okay. No. Kat: All right, that means I have a point saved for later to make a decision about something. Chris: All right. You got one brownie for later. One video for later. Kat: I'll get to be in charge of something later. Chris: First hundred people that are going to be coming on board, you're going to get a copy of my book, "Craving the Truth", which is actually the book where I show you how to be able to get into the best shape of your life, and how to not do it by doing depriving diets, which we have right here. Tada. Kat: There it is. Fabulous book. Chris: So you'll get a copy of "Craving the Truth" as well coming on board in this, but we can only do that for the first hundred. Kat: For free. Extra fast action, take a bonus. On top of the crazy discount. Oh, wait. Do we make them pay full price if they're getting a book? Chris: I don't want to have to make them pay full price. Kat: All right. Why not? I was just trying to be funny. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's fine, because my lighting's fabulous. Chris: Yeah. You look good, life is good. So if you want a copy of the book for free, where I give you the diets. We talk work outs. We talk actually what Kat and I are doing. You're going to have to get on board really quick as well, but also, lifetime discount. Can we tell them how much the discount is? Kat: No, make them work for it. Send a love heart shower. Chris: Oh, yeah, I love how you do this. Kat: A load of love hearts, and we're just going to tell them the office straight away. Just like that? Chris: Melissa. Kat: Hi. Chris: Thanks, Mel, appreciate that. Kat: Yeah, there you go. Chris: It's a great pull. Kat: Let's. So we just give ... Whoa, you guys loving the love heart shower. Thank you. Chris: Whoa. Kat: Do you want a comment something hilarious or just comment get on with it already? Chris: Let's have best comment. I will just give you a copy of the book straight away. Kat: I can't talk through this offer, because I'm going to get too giggly and excited like a little kid at Christmas, and I'm not going to get the details right. I'm trying very hard to restrain myself here, but I'm so excited. So Chris is going to tell you the deal with it. It's literally more crazy than what we thought we were going to do. We dropped down an extra ... We actually dropped down an additional ... Chris: No, let's prepare for lunch. Kat: Over an additional 20 percent on what was already the reduced founding members price. Chris: Yeah, it was. Kat: Wait, did you just say they get to lock it in for life? Chris: Yeah, it's lifetime. Kat: I thought we were just giving that for the first month. Chris: Lifetime. This is exactly. Kat: What? Chris: When you get on board, but here's the thing. When you get on board, you get it for life. If you ever leave. Kat: You're out. Chris: Never get it again. Kat: We're never talking to you again. Chris: No. We'll talk to you, but you just want to get the discount again as well. Kat: If you buy us a drink. Chris: You've got to ... You actually get the discount for life. Kat: Yeah, that makes sense. Chris: That's a bit of a no brainer. Kat: That is a no brainer. Couple of no brainers. I'll eat anything that tastes delicious, especially if it helps me look that pretty. Thank you. Chris: Oh, that's really sweet. Kat: That's all the alignment. I'm reverse ageing. When you ordered this product, you will reverse age from between two and five years in the first 10 days. Chris: We can't say that. Kat: Hashtag disclaimer. I just it. Chris: The FDA does not agree with that at all. Kat: Shut up. Chris: I have to be legitimate with this stuff. Kat: I mean it. I mean it, because I decided, and I get what I decide. Can we just bring the mindset side into it? It's fine. When you sign up I'll get you a special training for free on the reverse ageing. How's that for a bonus? Chris: All right. Kat: Oh, let's have that in as a top 100 bonus. I will do a training on how I reverse age for free for the first 100 people, and I'm not kidding. Chris: I'll buy that. Kat: Look at this skin. I'm nearly 50. Chris: That's very funny. Kat: Well I'm 38. I'm nearly 39. But I'm reverse ageing at the speed of light. Everybody knows that. Chris: No, actually ... This gets really good. What we haven't actually said as well is if you get on board this offer today, you will be able to join the tribe. So what we're starting in part is our private tribe, yeah. Kat: Oh, yeah. We're getting to our programme. Chris: It's going to be a little bit ... It's probably something we should talk about right now as well. Kat: Wait, do we actually? No, this is for real now. I'm not pretending. Are we actually giving them that? Chris: Yeah, they get a private group. It's already set up. Kat: Oh, of course. Yes, all right, fine. Onward then. Chris: This is stupid. Kat: Okay, I'm done. I'm done with my talking. I've got the entertainment, and now Chris is going to tell you the deal. The deal is about to drop. We are going to give you a link. You're going to click it, you're going to buy, and you're going to have a glass of water to celebrate, since you don't have the product yet. I'm waiting. Chris: Well you do have to wait. Kat: But we'll drink something in your honour. Chris: You do have to wait. So let's break this on down. Number one, first 100 people, I'll give you a copy of the book and I'll send it straight to you. Number two, you get the discount for life, and it's over 40 percent the discount as well. So that's a bit of a no brainer as well. Kat: We want to make it crazy no brainer for sure, legitimately of course. Chris: Yeah, I know. Three, you get access into ... whilst you have your membership, whilst you're getting this each month sent to you, you have access into the tribe, which is where Kat and I are going to be sharing with you what we do with our food, with our diets, with our training. I'm going to be in there giving you as well, because I've got literally 12 months worth of training, nutrition and lifestyle coaching ready to rock 'n' roll for you. Chris: So you'll get access into that private community where it's members only in there, and then ... Kat: That's got content from both of us, which is combining over 30 years of experience and knowledge and application and results. If you can, have some brain power. Chris: We literally needed a team member to go through how much content we had. Kat: It was several staff members who had to go through that and have been doing it for nine months. Chris: I feel so sorry for Jess actually. Kat: And Mim, shout out to Mim. And Jess too. Chris: And Mim. Yeah, sorry, too. Bingo. Kat: And shout out to Ash and Bron as well who've had so much to do with this launch and does so much work on that. Chris: I wish they were here. I got a notification on my page. Kat: I just was reading it over actually. Really. Chris: Okay, awesome. So you get the book. You get 40 percent discount and that's for life. You get access into the tribe as well. Now what we're going to do ... Kat: We were going to ... Sorry. I know I'm just terrible at cutting you off. I'm the worst at that. But we were going to charge for the tribe. We were going to do it as a separate. Chris: No, we are going to charge for the tribe. Kat: Yeah, but we were going to make it like you would pay a bit extra to get the coaching platform, as well as the product, and then it would be extra, extra for people who just wanted the coaching, which is basically means stupid people, because why would you not buy this? Then we decide to give it for free. Chris: So if we actually boil this down right now. Kat: Yeah. Chris: What the offer is is the super food blend will actually be recommended retail for $97. The tribe, our coaching community that's private for members only, that's actually priced at $50 a month for that. So obviously that's $150 a month, but if you get on board now, can we say it? Kat: Let's just do it. We've dragged it out long enough. They've been waiting and wanting. Chris: If you get on board now, you will get everything, which is sent to you each and every month, and your monthly membership into the tribe, and it's only going to be for $59. So we're cutting off $90 every month, and that's a life time discount going into it. So literally, there's a massive discount. So that's something like ... It's a gigantic discount. Kat: Whatever it is. Chris: First 100 people, I'll send you a copy of the book for free. Kat: And you'll get my reverse ... And you'll get my training on reverse ageing if you're in the first 100 people as well, which is completely serious. Chris: All right, Ricky. So Ricky asked a really good question. Can you consume it if pregnant? Now with supplements, you do technically have to say and you'll see on the back here, "Caution, if pregnant or nursing or taking medication, consult your health care practitioner before use." Kat: It's required to say that. Chris: My Lauren, wife, she has been pregnant with two children whilst taking this and my daughters have this as well. So when they ask for chocolate, they're actually asking for this bad boy. Kat: Yeah, I give this to my kids as well. Who are young as you know. It's required to say that. It's required to obviously that you've got to consult with your medical adviser that. Chris: Yeah, good question. Kat: I would take it. Lauren took it, etc. I just want to also clarify, really we had it locked in that launch offer ... That the retail price, the price that we will be selling it at. It's not just like what we're saying is retail. We will be selling it at $97. We were going to do the founding members offered at I think $79. That was locked in, and that was decided. Even up until last Friday. Kat: We did the pre-launch video and had some fun with that on Friday. You might have jumped on on that. Oh, we were supposed to notify people. I will send them a link after this, yeah. Chris: Yeah, we'll send them. Kat: I can't even remember why we decided to drop it down so much more. I think we just ... We get so excited. We are so proud of this and so excited and it's been so much work and blood and sweat and tears that's gone into this on Chris' behalf. I really just want to honour him. He's an amazing business partner and friend, and the work that he's put in. Literally travelling the Earth to create pharmaceutical great product in the world. Kat: It is literally the most exceptional formulation that you could come up with. Digestive health, probiotics, all this good stuff, but then also, working together with somebody that you're obviously good friends with, that's not automatically enough to make a great business partnership as I know a lot of people know. Chris: Mm-hmm (affirmative). Kat: So it's just been amazing to have a shared vision for something that we're both so excited to bring to life. It's been a little painstaking at times to get to where we're already, but like any amazing vision brought to life, you've got to be willing to go through those periods where it's things are going slow than you want or you thought something was just going to work, and then it didn't. Kat: So it's been quite the journey, and it's been one that's been heavily supported by the people we just mentioned and shouted out earlier as well. So there's a lot that's going into this and it really is. It's such a big deal. It's something that we know that we're going to take for life, be proud of for life. We really trust and belief that when you start to take this, firstly, the taste of it is incredible. It just tastes amazing. It's chocolate flavoured greens powder. It's flavoured naturally with cacao. Kat: It tastes incredible. Every single person who tried it is like, "Holy crap, where can I get this? I want to take this forever." So we know you're going to love the taste, but the benefits and the health side of it, the brain power side of it. The mineral focus side of it. The fact that you're just getting all these good things covered for yourself and your family in one hit. We know that you're going to be part of this for life as well. Kat: So this is something that for long haul it's not just business on the side of our respective empires that we already have. We really see it as a vision for the community that we want to build of like-minded individuals, like us, like you who are committed to being about us in every aspect of life. In business we brain function, and looking and feeling hot AF as well of course. Kelly says can you use it if diabetic. Chris: Yeah, you can. It actually says on here "diabetic safe". Where did I actually have to say that? Here. Last bullet point. No, extras. No extra added sugar. It is diabetic safe. It is only flavoured with stevia. So you only use the really good stuff. Please post the ingredients out. Yeah, Angela if you click the link that you'll get access to ... Kat: We could give the link. Chris: I will give you the link. If you click the link, you'll get access to the page which has the full ingredients on there for you. So you can actually read this rather than me sticking this up to the camera. It's still not being readable as well. Now, what we also have done is we put a 60-day guarantee on this. So we want you to taste it. Kat: That's how confident we are. Chris: We want you to use it. Exactly. That's how much we ... We're a little bit cocky when it comes to this. Because we know it's that good. We've been using it for that. Angela, you're absolutely welcome. So we want you to get your hands off it ... On it. When you get your hands on it, and you start using it, you'll see. You'll actually notice the difference as well. So what you want to be able to do is number one, it's not about supplements. Chris: Now let's just talk right now. I want to jump in and talk about ... Yeah, sorry, go. Kat: Should I give the link or should we give them preparation that I'm going to give you the link, because we are doing this first hundred thing. Chris: Oh. Kat: Let's tell you what we want to tell you, so that you're paying attention, and then we're going to drop the link. Chris: Okay, let's do that. Kat: Yeah. Chris: We'll jam real quick, and then we'll give you the link so that you can get access to all this stuff right now. So I want it in my mouth right now. Kat: All right. Well, it's a sensory experience, and you can tap into the collective energy. That's right here in this space and place. Here is some we prepared earlier. Chris: Jaya, can you put your email below and I will literally send you a copy of my book, because that was the best comment so far. Kat: Comment of 2018 award. We're adding that to our book of hilarious quote. But we will drink some in honour of everybody. You can tap into our collective energy. Chris: Right, cheers. So I'll answer Theo's question. So this is what we're doing. Because we're doing the very first batch, for all of our members with this super food blend, it's going to take between three to four weeks for everyone to get there. So that's why we're doing this founders special. So we want everybody to come on board. Now, and this is what I want to say and this is why it's so important. Kat: Yeah. Chris: It's not about supplement. Kat: That's why we're doing a huge discount. Chris: It's not about the supplements. Jaya, thank you so much. Can someone remind me to send Jaya a copy of that? Kat: Yes, I'll email you right now. Chris: Or just ... perfect. It's not about supplements, okay? So why are we actually talking right now? Why are we starting a health and fitness company? Why are we wanting to help you with this stuff? It's because you want to be able to look, feel, and function great. You want to be a part of the one percent of the one percent. You want to look great. You want to feel great. You actually want to perform really well, and that's not just the body performing on a biochemical level. It's how your brain performing as well, and you're actually enjoying it. Chris: How do we actually do this? It's not just by taking a supplement. Supplement's the cherry on the top, and we're going to be the first people that now run a supplement company to tell you it's not abut the supplements. This is why we're doing the tribe. So we help you, we show you, we teach you. We're giving you actually what's needed when it comes to, what to eat, how to eat, how to set up your lifestyle. What about when it comes to your work outs? When it comes to your movement as well. Chris: So especially when I break it down in the book, I show you the actual workouts and there's a yang and a yin philosophy. So like a yang, this is going to be a white training. A yin, it's going to be a walking. It's going to be your saunas, your ice punch pools, your meditations, all these kind of things. Kat: Yoga. Chris: Yoga. All these things we need to be able to put together. So it's a holistic approach to giving you exactly what you need. That's why when I first ... One of the reasons, our first conversation, we're like, "Hang on, there's a lot of 'supplement companies' out there and they're doing sometimes great products, sometimes crappy products. Let's not even go down that path." What's missing right now? No one's giving you both. No one's giving you here's the great ... Literally world best formulations, raw products, and manufacturing process. Kat: And taste. Chris: And taste. Which is kind of the most ... It's not technically the most important thing. But it's the most important in the sense that you're not going to take it if it doesn't taste amazing. It tastes so good that you just ... You want to have more. You just want more. I was crying when mine ran out. My samples that I had at home. Kat: Yeah, I had to get more for Kat. Chris: I had to have a massage to get over it. Kat: And a meditation, and some prayer. Some prayer. Then I may have harassed him over what's happened. I literally once was tapping in from every city around the world going, "So can you send some to New York? How about Florida? How about Texas? How about LA?" Chris: I tried to send it to her in two different cities. Kat: But I kept moving too quickly. Chris: And it kept missing. Kat: Come in San Diego, take me around. Chris: Obviously what I want to get across to make sure that we do this right is while we're doing the tribe is so literally Kat and I can give you what's needed to be able to make sure that you look, feel and function the way that you want. It is literally like that. Then when you want to put the cherry on top, when you want to perform. Because this is the thing and I talk about this. Chris: Number one, that our food quality that get isn't as good as it should be. You're not getting all the nutrients. You're not getting everything that you really need at the end of the day to be performing your best. We have high stress levels in our modern lifestyle. We have a lot of chemicals in our environment that help us become toxic. So we want to be able to become un-toxic. We want to be able to get rid of that stuff. Chris: So this is why we started with literally a greens formulation. But it's not a greens formulation. This is ... Kat: So much more. Chris: A super veggie type antioxidant blend. It's got a fruit antioxidant blend. It's got digestion support, and it's got a probiotic blend in here as well. So this is why we want to try and you come at this, because the thing at the end of the day is I don't want you to have a covered or room full of supplements. You want a handful of things, and that's what we're going to be doing, Kat and I together. We're going to be coming together. Kat: There would be new products. Chris: And are really doing a few products that give you the biggest bang for your bucks. So you can actually get on with your life. Because what I don't like is trying to do so many different things, that when we have more important things to do, I don't want to be worrying about my diet, or my work outs, or I'm not looking as I good as I feel like I should be. Or all that kind of shit. Chris: I'm a dad. I am running businesses. I want to be able to enjoy life. I want to be able to have us come together and just have fun. I don't want to be absolutely hating life because I'm doing a dive. Kat: You want to look and feel your best and be your best, and be fitting everything in but doing it just with ease and flow as well. We both, this is another thing. We've both done the hustle life before. I love the word hustle by the way. For me that means something powerful and flow based, but what I mean is we've both done business and life and fitness in way where it was kind of burning yourself out or pushing beyond a healthy limit and that's nothing I look back on and regret, because it made me into who I am now. Kat: But at this point in my life, and for both of us as well, it gets to be about having it all whilst operating at a level of excellence. Feeling your best, looking your best, being at your best, and having it jus be flow and ease. So there's already so many things that each of us do and support our communities to do that create that just through lifestyle and the way we choose to live our lives and live according to our values and so on. Kat: This just takes it to that next level. It's about enhancing a way of life. So that's again another reason why we've created the tribe to go with this to support you with the education, the information, and the empowerment, to get the results that you need. So we will be giving you the nutritional information literally over 30 years or at least over 25 years of combined experience between us. Chris: Over 24 years. Kat: At a really high level as well, where both of us really dedicated our money and our time to learning and studying with the best people in the world, and that's how we met. Through classes around the world. We're bringing you the most cutting edge, real nutrition information, hormone information, fat loss information, digestions, stress management, sexual energy and libido as well. All ties in together. Sleep quality. Kat: Mindset, of course, right? The ins and outs of the trainings side of it as well as the nutrition side of it, and we're teaching from a standpoint of full life in a way that feels amazing. It's not a freaking diet. It's not a quick fix. It's not do this for six weeks or 12 weeks. We're bringing to you our combined experience of well over two decades, and where we can look back and go, "We did all that crazy stuff and maybe you did as well." Kat: It is what it is. Now we actually have a way of living where we get to look and feel and function at a standard of excellence 24/7 always. It's just how it is. We don't sacrifice anything in order to look our best and feel our best. We know that you don't have to as well. So this is not come on board, our magical diet that's going to fix you, and then you're left floundering afterwards, rebounding back. Kat: This is make some small simple adjustments that are going to immediately feel amazing for you. You're going to be immediately be elevated internally and in your energy and your emotions, and even dare I say spiritually, because of course it heightens everything. You're going to see those physical shifts and changes as well. I get asked all the time. I know Chris gets asked all the time, "How we can be such busy, successful entrepreneurs both with our own families and small children, and still get to have ... be in great shape and be legitimately healthy and brimming with energy, and have the energy to do all those things?" Kat: That's so easy. We let it be so easy. It's such a small amount of time or energy that creates such a massive return on that. So everything that this is about. Like Chris said, it's not just a supplement. It's you get this amazing supplement and you get everything that since ... Yes, hold it up. Everything that's inside of us that we've taken all this time and effort and working with literally tens of thousands of clients between us over the past, decade plus, in order to just know what works for life. Kat: So I said at the start of this that I feel like I can't fully express what a big deal it is, and I feel like maybe I'm now starting to express what a big deal it is. But should we? Do you want to add something there or should we give them this link? Chris: I think we should give them the link. Kat: I don't know why I feel nervous. So hang on. Chris: It's good. Kat: Should we give them the link to the Facebook group as well or we just give them this link? Chris: No. Kat: No. Chris: The what? Kat: No, the one from the other day I meant. All right. We'll figure that out later. Chris: Oh, no, give them that link. Kat: Okay, so now, are you ready? Are you excited? Are you eager? Are you going to send me another love heart shower? Are you ready to click by pull out your credit card, get it at the ready, and here's what you're going to do. In about 19.5 seconds or however long it takes me to stop talking, I'm going to ... Which could be 19.5 years. I'm going to put this thing into the comments here. Kat: You are going to click the link. You are going to grab your credit card. You're going to run to the back of the room, and you're going to purchase this product. Chris: All right, hang on. Kat: Hang on. You're only supposed to say three things. That's what I'm telling from this stage, wait. Get your credit card, click the link, buy the product, be in our top 100, get Chris' book for free. For being a fast action taker badass, just like we are, you know your life is going to change for life, and you get a free book as well. It is amazing. And you get my free training on reverse ageing. Chris: I'm really excited for that. Kat: Me too. Yeah. I'll give you the link. I'm ready. This is it. This is it. This is the moment of truth. Chris: They just want us to getting it taken out really quick. I would literally be ... Kat: Yeah, I'd be running to the back of the room or to wherever your credit card is. Chris: Oh, God. Oh, shit. Just happened. Kat: We just? Did we just break the internet. Boom, boom, boom. Okay, I feel like we needed to prepare the drummer as a roll sound. I could have played when I did that. I actually feel like I need to take a breath. Chris: Oh, that's good. Oxygen's really good as well. To set fire. Kat: Can I just add that to quotes? Quotes from Chris. Oxygen is really good for you. Okay, what else are we going to say? Chris: Oh. Kat: Oh, did you tell them to comment there? Or are they just saying how it is over there for the fun of it? How did that just start happening? Chris: I don't know. Kat: Is it because they clicked this? Chris: I have no idea. Kat: What happens? Chris: Yes, it is. Kat: Oh. Chris: Oh, we can see everyone coming through on this one. Kat: We can see who's signing up. Chris: Going up. Kat: Go, go, go, go, go. Oh, we can see all the notification. Chris: I didn't ... This is ... Kat: Tamara's in. Michelle clicked the link. Sarah clicked the link. Chris: That's really funny. Kat: Come on, keep going. All right, and oh, when is this? Ooh, Thalika. She's on it. Just on it. Chris: Laura. Kat: All right. This is so exciting. Chris: This is so fun. Can I share? This is more exciting. I remember when I did my very first online fitness launch. Kat: Laura can't click. Chris: I had the PayPal app on my phone. And when I did the launch, it was like my PayPal app on my phone make a little ding noise. Or no, like a payment would have gone through. This is more exciting because it's a hell of a lot more people coming through. Kat: Sage says, "I can't click." You might have to try different device, because people are definitely clicking. And it's working. So how's this, though? It is so exciting. Last night I was out with a friend, and she's like, "So, what are you doing tomorrow? I'm like, "Oh, yeah. I'm doing whatever and whatever." Then I'm like, "Oh, and I'm just launching a supplement company with my friend Chris till 11:45. Kat: It's like, "Wow, this is huge." That would be huge. We're just quickly launching a supplement company that we're going to take. Angela says, "I can't click on iPad." What can we do about that if people can't click on some devices? Do you have it? Because this is the mo ... Do you have a different link? A longer one? Chris: Can you comment back then or? Kat: No. Chris: PM them? Kat: Do we have a different version of that link? Chris: No. Kat: No, I don't know what to do about that. Ash and Bronwyn, are you on? Chris: What's your problem? The request to the group. Theo. Did you click the link Theo, that Kat has just given you? Kat: Okay, one second. We tested this 1600 times. We will not be swayed. I'm clicking it now. Chris: It's definitely working. We're seeing people still coming through. Kat: Okay, so when I click that, it goes me to Facebook messenger. Chris: Don't worry, Theo. We'll get your link. IPhone can, iPad can't. Kat: It's taking me to Facebook messenger when I click it. Is that right? Chris: Yeah. Kat: Then where is the link that they're going to get that message to them? Chris: The link to ... Yeah. So we'll send you to Facebook messenger, and then Bronwyn said type it in. Kat: Then you've got to press get started. Chris: Then I should maybe put zero admin. Yeah, see, there you go. Kat: Okay. So when you ... We thought we tested it all, whatever. So when you click it, it's going to take you to Facebook messenger. It may not work on the iPad. Then it's going to ... Then you're going to click get started, and then it's going to start, "This is MBB Bot. The My Body Blend's Messenger System." Chris: Oh, my God. Kat: It will say it in that voice. Then it will say, "Do you really want access to a secret launch of Super Food Blend?" It will say it in that voice. Then you'll press "hell yes," which I'm doing now. Hell yes, I just did it. Now it says, "Awesome Katrina, click the prelaunch of verboten below to get our one-time only freelance offer for ..." Okay, I feel that we're being repetitive. For our brand new Super Food Blend. Kat: Plus, if you think there's anyone else who might need to know. I mean why would you take him in unless you want them in the top 100? So now I'm clicking that link, wait for it. Shana says, "Get started." I see you guys on it, just on it. Chris: It's really cool how I can see you from one and then comes through to the other one. Kat: This is a genius. Chris: Theo, you figured that out, great job. Kat: This is a genius strategy. I just got through the sales page. Chris: Can't believe this works. Kat: Right here, live, on this live stream. There it is. Chris: So this is only for the private launch. So obviously once this gets closed down, you're not going to get ... Kat: Take it out. You can't get in on this deal again. Chris: Yeah, you can't get access to this, because we can't keep this up forever. Kat: So talk them through what are they going to receive once they then signup and purchase. Chris: Cool. Kat: Because just a reminder that the product is going to come. Explain all that. Chris: Yeah. So obviously the founders special with what we're doing today is we're doing our very first batch, and you're going to be a part of this. So it's going to take three to four weeks for you to get your actual first Super Food Blend delivered. We're going to be sending it straight to you, but that's why we also have the MBB tribe. So the tribe is going to be where Kat and I are going to be in there making sure that you get access to what's going to be the right meal plan, the right workouts. Chris: I'm going to be in there doing live streams, answering your questions. Kat's going to be talking about anti-aging. Plus, if you get in first 100, which honestly it might be taken up already. I don't know, you're going to have to just get on board. Kat: Just go, go, go. Chris: I'm going to give you a copy of "Craving the Truth". That's going to break down literally what you need to be doing with your meals, with your workouts and lifestyle, and what we're also going to be doing is this special that you get access to today is for life. If you stay on board with this, that means you get this lifetime discount. Chris: So normally Super Food Blend. This has got the RLP of $97 just for one. The actual tribe, that sells for $50 a month. That's $150, but you get access to it today for only $59. So that's a massive discount. I don't know percentage was, what it is, because I'm horrible at math and that's okay. Melissa. Yay, got my confirmation email. So there we go. Kat: Yay, celebrate. Chris: It's coming through already. So that's fantastic. So we want to make sure that everybody come on board because we've got a couple wait up our sleeve. Like tomorrow I'm going to be jumping on board doing a live show, walking you through how we actually get the right meal plan, because what we start with, this is a little bit of secret sauces, how I kick start fat loss is what I do is we do a 14-day metabolic restart. Chris: So what we do is actually in the first 14 days we actually get your body to learn to burn body fat. Now most people are trying to talk about how do I speed up my metabolism? That's actually the wrong question I believe, because let's think about the analogy of driving a car. People are saying, "How do I speed up my metabolism?" They're just thinking about, "How can I drive my car faster?" But what if your car is actually heading in the wrong direction? Chris: So you just say, "Going in the wrong direction faster." So what we got to do first is make sure that you go in the right direction, which is how do you get your body to actually tap into body fat stores, how do you actually burn body fat for fuel. Then we talk about actually speeding our fat loss. But what we do is once we actually get your body tapping into body fat stores effectively, then we actually start talking about stress. Chris: So what the biggest problem is to me people are stressed. They've got too high cortisol levels. They started throwing other things like testosterone, pregnenolone, all these ... Actually, let's not go down the whole monogram, because that's going to be too complicated right now. But what we're going to do is we turn your body into actually being able to burn body fat for fuel first, then we talk about actually being able to lower stress. Chris: So what you'll find is most people when first getting the guides and plans I'm going to be sending through to you, think it's too easy and there's not enough. But you'll find that your body will actually be able to lose weight faster, because we're doing things easier. Because what's the biggest problem so many people fall into and I know we've done it before is you decide that you're going to lose weight. So what do you do? Chris: You cut your foods down, you ramp up your workout. Kat: Do some drastic random stuff. Chris: You do more, more, more, more, more, and then what happens when you hit the plateau? Because you will hit hit the plateau. Kat: What happens is you crack it and eat a freaking container of cookies. Chris: Yeah, exactly. Kat: If you're a woman. Chris: If you're a man as well. Kat: I never did this. Chris: I did. Kat: Okay. Chris: That's the big problem. So you wind up crack it, and you start binge eating, and then you feel guilty, and that's bad. So mentally that's bad. Or you actually have to start eating less and less and less, because you're trying to get to that deficit. So what we do is we say, "Let's actually do a bottoms up approach." So let's start from the bottom and we actually build your food, so you'll see that we actually increase your food intake. So you're actually eating more and losing weight, because the whole just eat less move more scenario, it's a myth. Kat: Boring. Chris: I wrote a freaking book about the myth of it, and it's not fun at all. Kat: Yeah. I just love everything you said. I love how you're just on a ... Did this stuff just comes out of you because you're so passionate about it and you know it so well? Chris: I know I did it wrong for so long. Kat: It is what we live and breathe. It is just ... I think you can see your passion coming through right, and you're just going to continue to get so much more of that and all of our knowledge and learning and support and accountability through being part of this tribe. So originally we will ... completely keep them two separate products. The coaching platform versus the product. Kat: Then we're like, "No, of course we're going to honour the people who buy this amazing thing, and really are committed to change their lives, not just to taking a supplement." The thing is I don't know. There's so many more things that I probably could say. But I think we've kind of covered the best of it, and we're just so excited to welcome you. We can see people ... Thank you and it says thank you. Kat: We can see people over on ... So we've got Chris. My friend here and Chris' friend here. Chris' friend is hooked up to the My Body Blend's page. So that's where you go when you click the link, you'll go to the Facebook messenger of the My Body Blend's page which is our joint business page. You'll then follow the prompts there, and you'll jump on to the sales page that way. So we can see people's responses that are coming up on his phone, which is super cool. Kat: So this is ... It's just huge. It's the bringing to life of something that's been several years in the making in the physical sense. 10 plus years of friendship in the making, decades of learning and knowledge in the making, something I always wanted to do. Something I know Chris always wanted to do, and what an incredible thing to be able to do this with somebody who you have such a close friend in your life, but who you know is also going to deliver the level of support and empowerment for your tribe, that you would do yourself. Kat: That's just such a huge big deal when being in business is somebody else to know that their work ethic and how they shop and their level of passion and commitment to change people's lives is the same. So this is the beginning of an amazing journey for you. If you are joining us, how long will we be keeping the founders special open for? Chris: I only wanted to do ... Kat: We had a little fight about it. Chris: Yeah. That's all right. We're allowed. But what about if we do for just 24 hours? Kat: What? Chris: No, we don't do it in 24 hours. Come on, I'm not the queen of scarcity. I'm making people move fast, but I feel like we could give them. But it doesn't matter, because you would just click and buy it now anyway, otherwise you would have been in the top 100, and you'd be a crazy person. Kat: Well how long do we let this video run for then? Because we have to take this video down. Chris: I feel like I don't know what the answer is that I'm supposed to say now. I feel like we didn't rehearse this properly. That is because we didn't rehearse it. Kat: We didn't. Chris: Yeah. I didn't really walked in and be like, "Let's do it with the camera on." Kat: Let's just turn the camera on and see what happens, apart from running down funny quotes. Chris: What do you want to say to them? Kat: Did you see that I've written down your quotes over here? I've saved it. I've written down the three quotes so far from Chris if you missed the quotes earlier. The quotes were this. He wanted to call our live show "this is why you're fat and we're not". That was one of my quotes of the year from Chris. Another one is that really sneaky? Me asking about a little Ninja trick. He's like, "Yeah." Chris: We just don't cover a really good Facebook ad strategy. Kat: That is good. Chris, that lighting is so good, Kat. Wait, no, it's just because we look so fabulous. That's my personal favourite. Chris: I'm so happy with that. Kat: Well, I think this is it. Chris: All right. We're going to get busy. Kat: Okay, is this? This is? Chris: Yeah, I know. I just saw these already gotten on board. Kat: I didn't ... See, that didn't happen for me. But if you have any issues or concerns at all, or anything doesn't work for you, maybe test it on a different device. Some people did say it doesn't. Didn't work on iPad. I'm not sure why that would be, but it's definitely working for me on my laptop. It's working on the phone. Of course you compare either of us. Or the My Body Blend's page as well, which is probably the best place to go, because then you'll get supported by our team as well and get answer as quickly as possible. Kat: Seeing infomercial broker, I feel like we got so much gold content. You know what's going to happen now. My team will chop up this live stream, get some clips out of it, caption them up, and we'll just be promoting and having a hilarious time. Shouldn't business and life just get to be fun as well? So that's part of our philosophy and part of what we're here to show you. Chris: You're not having fun, you don't enjoy the life. Kat: You can bet your bottom dollar we're going to be having all sorts of shenanigans in that group once you're in there. Because it's how it should be. That's how it gets to be. All right. Chris: Oh, good. Theo got ... Kat: Oh, you're on. Perfect, Theo. Chris: Confirmation done. Kat: Yay, I'm so excited. Chris: All right, awesome. So we've actually got to get to work, because we've got a lot of members. Kat: Just casually launched a supplement company on a Monday morning in Bali. All right, we're going to go hangout with our members. We're going to see what's up. We're going to see you on the inside, click the link, do the thing, be in the thing. We'll see you in the thing. We love you. Chris: Ciao. Kat: Bye.

In this week's not-so-weird-when-you-really-think-about-it episode, Magnus once again joins forces with Chris "Not guilty, Your Honor" Honeywell to fight off frostbite and talk about somwe weird stuff. But not really. You see, boys and girls, CGI isn't all that weird. At least not anymore. But it's come a pretty long way and considering the subjects that Magnus and Honeywell have talked about in the past, something that doesn't require wearing asbestos underwear seemed like a really good idea. No more pop songs for a while, no touchy subjects and no unnecessary fits of temper. This week it's just snow, ice, Dr. Bourbon and friendship. So what more do you need? Download this show right now before the Snowpocalypse comes looking for you. Due to the avalanche of awesomeness, there's just no time for listener feedback this week. But Magnus has slowly been getting caught up lately. There's been some feedback recently and there's more coming soon! So don't be left out! You too can offer your feeble effort at tribute whenever you want! Yes indeed, you humble serfs are always welcome to kiss your benevolent leader's ring. Corrupt DiManzocorp interns are ready, willing, able and eager to accept your bribe to present your meager missives to your wise emperor. The email address to use is trentusmagnus@gmail.com as the other seems to be having technical problems. In an another sublime act of truly ball-shriveling magnanimity, your emperor permits you lowly rabble to suggest topics for a future episode. Thus, requests may be sent to trentusmagnus@gmail.com for the aforementioned corrupt DiManzocorp interns (who probably lack souls) to review, whereupon your leader might consider thinking about the possibility of potentially discussing whatever you have in mind some day. And that's a promise!

In this week's not-so-weird-when-you-really-think-about-it episode, Magnus once again joins forces with Chris "Not guilty, Your Honor" Honeywell to fight off frostbite and talk about somwe weird stuff. But not really. You see, boys and girls, CGI isn't all that weird. At least not anymore. But it's come a pretty long way and considering the subjects that Magnus and Honeywell have talked about in the past, something that doesn't require wearing asbestos underwear seemed like a really good idea. No more pop songs for a while, no touchy subjects and no unnecessary fits of temper. This week it's just snow, ice, Dr. Bourbon and friendship. So what more do you need? Download this show right now before the Snowpocalypse comes looking for you. Due to the avalanche of awesomeness, there's just no time for listener feedback this week. But Magnus has slowly been getting caught up lately. There's been some feedback recently and there's more coming soon! So don't be left out! You too can offer your feeble effort at tribute whenever you want! Yes indeed, you humble serfs are always welcome to kiss your benevolent leader's ring. Corrupt DiManzocorp interns are ready, willing, able and eager to accept your bribe to present your meager missives to your wise emperor. The email address to use is trentusmagnus@gmail.com as the other seems to be having technical problems. In an another sublime act of truly ball-shriveling magnanimity, your emperor permits you lowly rabble to suggest topics for a future episode. Thus, requests may be sent to trentusmagnus@gmail.com for the aforementioned corrupt DiManzocorp interns (who probably lack souls) to review, whereupon your leader might consider thinking about the possibility of potentially discussing whatever you have in mind some day. And that's a promise!

Chris Chuter: @Chris_Chuter Show Notes: 00:47 - Peeple: What is it? Why? 02:59 - Iterations and User Testing 13:32 - Complexity of Installation 17:26 - Device Integration 22:15 - Setup and Installation 25:35 - Laws and Building Codes 26:39 - Getting Started in this Space 31:29 - Ensuring Quality, Integration Testing, and Deployment Pipelines 33:18 - The Manufacturing Process Resources: If This Then That (IFTTT) Transcript: CHARLES: Hello, everybody and welcome to The Frontside Podcast, Episode 82. My name is Charles Lowell, a developer here at the Frontside and your podcast host-in-training. With me is Elrick Ryan. Hello Elrick. ELRICK: Hey, hello. CHARLES: And today, we are going to be continuing our series on the Internet of Things and we have someone on the podcast today who's going to talk to us about the Internet of Things. His name is Chris Chuter and he is the CEO, inventor and founder of Peeple. Hey, Chris. CHRIS: Hey. How is it going? CHARLES: It's gone well. Thanks for coming on the program. Peeple, what is it? Why don't you give us a quick overview of the product? Obviously it pertains to IoT, what is it and how did you become involved with it? Let's delve into that. CHRIS: Yes, sure. Let me give you the elevator short version first then we can dive deeper. Peeple is caller ID for your front door. The idea is when you get a phone call and you don't answer the phone, what happens? It goes to your voicemail. You know someone called you. But today, if someone comes to your house, you have no idea that they came unless you're there. This is the central problem that we solved with Peeple. It's a little device, a hardware device, an Internet of Things device that fits over the peephole in your door in the inside of your house. When someone knocks or doors open, you get a push notification on your phone. You can open up the phone and you can see a live view of your peephole. In a nutshell, Peeple is a smart peephole. CHARLES: Is it more for the case when you're not home at all or do you find the people use it for what you would traditionally use a peephole. CHRIS: It depends on the person. Now, my personal use case is for keeping track of wandering kids and that's actually inspiration for this invention. I have two boys and when one of my boys was three years old, he managed to open the door, walk out, go on to the street and walk down to the end of the street. Now, I live in Austin and I live right off the edge of a very busy street. Now, my kid didn't die or anything like that. It's not a really sad story but a neighbor brought my kid home and it was one of those moments as a parent where you're like, "Oh my God. I'm a terrible parent." But being an inventor and an engineer, I was like, "I'm going to hook something up that just tells me when my door is opened or closed," and it morphed into this invention. We showed it to people at South by Southwest almost three or four years ago. That's when we realized we were on to something that didn't exist. It was just a little camera on the door. CHARLES: Tell me about those first versions. I'm so curious. It sounds like there's a lot of layers of functionality that you've been through, a lot of iterations so I'm curious about that. What's was that zero iteration look like? CHRIS: Version 0 was made in 24 hours. It was a hackathon for... I can't remember the name of it. There was a hackathon group that recently imploded and we won this hackathon. The hackathon thing was to make something... I'm not sure if this is for Internet of Things but we were all making that kind of stuff. I made this little Raspberry Pi demo with a little mini door and I had talked to my wife and this is how I was able to make this invention, to keep track the kid as I was busy doing other stuff but I talked her into giving me 24 hours to make this one thing. Then me and another guy, David we won this hackathon. We were like, "We've got to turn this into a real thing," because one of the awards of the hackathon was you go to Silicon Valley, you show this off and you do all this cool stuff with it. We were like, "We've got to actually turn this into something that's presentable." That was Version 0. It was just a little Raspberry Pi. CHARLES: Now, what were you doing to detect the state of the door? CHRIS: That's the crazy thing. The first version of the device had more sensors on it than the final version. The first version had everything. It had a doorbell, it had a knock sensor, it had a motion, it had a speaker that played Paul McCartney's 'Someone's Knockin' At The Door,' but it had an accelerometer. I threw everything in there the first thing and half of it worked for the hackathon demo but it was good enough to win. This is something that, I guess I could call wisdom now but the real thing I learned is you start with everything and then you narrow and get it more tuned and highly focused and more precise as a device, like the difference between the iPhone and the Samsung phones. One of them is to throw everything into it and then the iPhone is just really specialize into a few things really well. The next three years, we're pulling stuff out. CHARLES: What are some examples of that calling that you're describing where you're saying, "I'm to take this out? I'm going to take this out. I'm going to take that out." CHRIS: We got rid of things like the doorbell and some of the other sensors, mainly because it was just a wiring issue and as well as we wanted to keep track when the door was opened and closed. It didn't make sense to have the speaker on there at the time so we really focused more on the accelerometer and the knock sensor for the first version of Peeple. CHARLES: That is not the final version. Is it mostly just the accelerometer? What if someone doesn't knock? I assume there's some sort of detection that goes on with the camera. CHRIS: That's the next version. That's something that we've been working on right now, what we're going to be delivering. We have delivered our first, I would say Version 1.0 of Peeple devices to our customers. There's a thousand of these or so in the wild, all around the world and the next version we have added -- and I guess this my first real announcement of this -- a motion detection module. It's not a camera-based. It's more or less magic and it just works through the door. That's the most I'm going to say on it right now because we're probably the first hardware device that it's actually using this technology. ELRICK: That's an excellent pitch. Everyone loves magic. CHRIS: Yes, it's basically magic. It works through the door. ELRICK: As you were going to these iterations, were you doing like user testing to see what users wanted? Or did you internally say, "This doesn't make sense. Let's just take this out." CHRIS: Absolutely. That's the second part of this story. After this hackathon happened, we prepared to go on the road show to go and show it off to Silicon Valley but in the meantime, this hackathon group, I think it was called AngelHack, it imploded. One of their founders made all these disparaging comments about homeless people and what essentially happened is we lost the award. They said, "We're sorry. We can't give you the award," but we had spent about three months fine-tuning, making something pretty and putting a pitch together. I went in and I pitched at a TechCrunch Meetup in Austin and we came in second at that but during that meetup, I met one of the reporters and said, "You really need to talk to these guys in San Francisco called Highway1," so I did. We eventually ended up moving to San Francisco. Now, the reason I mentioned that to answer your question is they understand this idea of user testing, I think better than a lot of people. Even though they were focused on working on hardware and getting an IoT device that works out there, they were drilling it into our heads is, "You have to get this in people's homes now. I don't care how bad it is. I don't care if you have to hire people, to sit at a peephole and just look through it and pretend like there are hardware device. You got to do this and you have to find out what the problems are, what works. I want you to look at your biggest fears of this thing and you quash them and you do that before you put any Silicon down," so we did that as best we could. CHARLES: So you did that with the Version 0 and Version 1 devices? CHRIS: Exactly, just a Version 0, I have all these pictures. We put them in about 12 to 20 homes and we have these long extension cords powering this thing because we didn't have the batteries to figure out. We had these huge lag problems. It would take like 30 seconds to a minute before something would happen. We had all these issues but in the end, people were still like, "It had these issues. You couldn't do this," but the fact that I had a door log, a door diary as what we're calling it now, that's something I never had before. That's where your secret sauce is so we ran with that. CHARLES: Yeah. That's the kind of thing it never even occurs to you. CHRIS: Exactly. In the app, or at least the early versions of the app, is you have these versions like a calendar that are like, "Okay, I got 10 visits yesterday. I got 20 visits today. No one came to visit me today. I'm so sad," but I have a calendar of, I think it was May of last year when I got visited by three or four magazine salesman in one week so you could correlate that with, "Did we have any break ins?" or something like that. CHARLES: Yeah, it would be interesting to be able to share that data with your neighborhood or somehow coordinate that. one of things I'm curious about too is you did this user testing you were talking about, doing the wiring and the installation, it's a conversation that always comes up when you're talking about custom hardware because there's always the drive to be small, there's always the drive to be have a small form factor and then you have challenges of power like how do you power this device. How cumbersome is the installation onto someone's door? CHRIS: Yeah, we had it all. That's a big difference, I think between San Francisco or Silicon Valley and other towns is there's this acceptance and there's this readiness to participate in the tech scene. We did a call out for volunteers and we had no problems finding them. They didn't mind us coming to their house and hooking up these big, bulky things and just being real intrusive. The fact that we found these people and they were the key to this early stage of, "Do you become a product or do you not?" We were only there for four months but by the end of this time that we were there, there was this legitimate tangible feeling of we're not a prototype anymore. We're a product and we didn't have a product. It was just prettier but we could see the light at the end of the tunnel. I don't think that would have happened had we not gone through this very painful experience with all these poor people that we inflicted our device on. CHARLES: This actually is fascinating because obviously, you're back in Austin now and I never heard of programs like that, like sign up to have someone come up and test it at some alpha stage prototype in your home. That sounds crazy and yet, it sounds like they were just going out of the woodwork. CHRIS: In San Francisco, it's not a problem. If I put the call out now, I probably have to really like, "Here's an Amazon gift card." I have to start doing a little bit of bribery. ELRICK: I think I would sign up just to see the cool tech. CHRIS: Yeah and those people exist. I think we don't have the means to really find them. That infrastructure already exists. In Silicon Valley, you just go down to Starbucks. CHARLES: There ought to be some sort of meetup for people who want to experiment with very early stage IoT devices here in Austin. Maybe, we'll have to look at it. If that doesn't exist, I would love being a guinea pig. I actually think there is an untapped willingness here but there's just not -- CHRIS: I think you need a critical mass of hardware people and hardware devices that are ready to be put in doors or put in the houses. There's definitely some in there. I have a lot of friends and there are hardware meetups that we go to but this stuff takes so long and it's so hard as hardware is hard. There's that small window of, "We got this little idea of a water sprinkler. Do you think anyone want to try it out?" or something like that and then the moments gone. Then six months later, there's another one. CHARLES: Yeah. I wonder if there's a way to really decrease that iteration cycle so that you can get feedback more quickly. I guess the problem is when you need a physical device, you just needed a physical device. CHRIS: We're talking about the Maker Movement and the MakerClub. If you're part of those, these people are hard to find. People that go to Maker Faires, that's the people you're looking for. CHARLES: Right. Now, transitioning because ultimately your target customer base is not makers, not people who are willing to put up with wires and cabling and people doing protracted installation. What does the kind of 1.0 product look like? Because what I'm curious is what immediately jumps to mind is this thing sounds like it's going to probably consume a lot of power. How do you get the power to that and what are the challenges and what are the tradeoffs that you have to make to try and get that power consumption down or get the installation complexity down? How complex is it today to install? CHRIS: I guess, I'll toot my own horn a little bit but I think we have one of the easiest IoT devices on the planet to install. You can possibly not even need tools. You can use your fingers but the biggest challenge for any IoT device is getting that home network connection. If there's been a few technologies through the years in which they've tried to fix this problem, basically just like self-pairing or things like that, like how Bluetooth can sometimes be really cumbersome. Now imagine that with Wi-Fi, it's the same thing but now you've got a password you've got to throw in there. That's really the only real hiccup with the installation on our device and we tried a few things. We went through about three different Wi-Fi chips before we settled on what we were using now. The first Wi-Fi chip was a TI one, which offered this nice pairing capability but it just didn't work half the time. Then we switched to a Broadcom chip, which was really solid and stable but turned out to be the most expensive component in the whole device so we had to get rid of that. The Wi-Fi issue was something we had to solve early because it goes also toward your power consumption. We have a camera and a Wi-Fi chip and both of those take up to 140 to 200 milliamps of juice when they're on. We had to be really smart of when this thing was going to be on and that's essentially when we went in parallel with the knock accelerometer. This device stays asleep most of the time and that's how we get the many months of battery life out of it. We put a rechargeable battery inside, it only turns on when it needs to and it's just hanging around waiting for an event for the rest of the time. Those were the things we were solving to get the Version 1. CHARLES: Now, it's waiting for some event but in order to receive the event, doesn't the accelerometer need to be on? Or is there some motion detector that --? CHRIS: That's a solved problem. good news was that accelerometers are extremely low power in the nano or picoamps but that's also another reason why the motion detection was going to be a hard problem because that is not, unless you're using what's called a PIR that is not a low power solution. CHARLES: Acronym alert. What is a PIR? CHRIS: It's an infrared proximity detection. That's how almost all motion detection cameras work. They have one hole for the camera and another hole for the PIR. The problem with these are is they don't work well in sunlight, outdoor-light and things like that in one of our use cases so we were kind of stuck. That's why we've recently come up with this new motion solution that doesn't rely on that technology -- the magic solution. CHARLES: All right. When we're going to find out about the magic solution? CHRIS: As soon as I ship this next version because it is being used in a few products but it's not really stateside yet and I want to save my thunder but it's something that I think is really cool. It really is magic. It's just amazing to me that it works. CHARLES: Well, I'm eager to see it. You were talking about Wi-Fi being one of the biggest challenges. That's a perfect segue. The connection to the network for something that we're always curious is discovering a new and interesting device is always a pleasure and then the next thought that almost funnels immediately after is how can I integrate this with other strange and wonderful devices to make something even more wonderful? A question we ask everybody is have you thought about how this might be a participant in an ecosystem so if there were other devices around the home, how would they even talk to the people? How might it offer information to someone looking to, maybe do some custom integration in their home? CHRIS: That's a lot of questions in one. Essentially, there's two ways of looking at it. You can look at it from your customer's perspective, what kind of customer do I think is going to have this or is going to use this the most. Back when we came up with this, there were a lot of do-it-yourself types and If This Then That protocol was out there but we really wanted to focus on something that was incredibly easy to use and didn't require you to program anything. I was really frustrated with the whole idea of Internet of Things because it almost implied that you had to be a programmer to use it. I didn't like that at that time. I've since come around to it because there's all these great tool kits out there. We initially looked at integrating with HomeKit. We thought they'd be perfect but what a lot of consumers don't realize is early HomeKit -- I don't believe it does that anymore -- made you modify your hardware to put in this special Apple hardware. When you're making a device, it is so hard just to get the hardware down. It's so expensive. To add anything or to put anything else in there, it's a huge friction point. It's really something that small startups just can't afford to do. A big Nest or a company like that have no problem but when you're making a one device, this is a big deal so we weren't able to really leverage something like HomeKit for an API. But we do have our own cloud-based API. We're RESTful API but it's just not documented and put out in a way where we want to have people programming it. But the good news is we did leverage several APIs when we were making things like the app and doing things like the push notifications and things like that. Now, it turns out that a lot of the case we used are now integrating with things like Alexa and other device protocols so we essentially get those for free. This whole ecosystem is forming around us. Just most important is to get your device out there because you have a vision for what the device will be used for. But then your customers tell you what the device is really useful for and that's when the real work starts. CHARLES: Right. I guess, it's true you have your first line of customers and I guess the use case what I was thinking of is me being a developer. I'm thinking what products could be built then using this as a component, so to speak. Have you'd given any thought to that or have anyone had approached you to say, "This is amazing. I'd like to build this meta product that integrates that," or is it kind of early days? CHRIS: Early on, that was the approach of the Internet of Things and it merged away from that in my experience. Early on, it was all about building blocks. You got to understand, these are old Zigbee Z-Wave programmers and that was the whole concept. Then it got turned on its head by, "I really have this problem that I need to solve and I don't want to have to make a bunch of building blocks to do this." For attacking it from the other side, like you're saying, building up into pieces, I really recommend you talk to the Twine guys -- super mechanical -- they're here in Austin as well. A year or so before, we came out with Peeple. They put out this device which was exactly what you're talking about. An Internet of Things type hub where you just add in all the pieces and then you integrate with everything. They can better give you a story of how that lifeline goes. CHARLES: Yeah, because it's always something you think about because you've got all these wonderful things. CHRIS: Yeah, some would say, an Internet of Things. CHARLES: Yup, or at least a floor plan. ELRICK: When someone gets a Peeple device, what is the full installation story and set up? What is the walkthrough for that? CHRIS: We have a little video of that. What you essentially do for Peeple when you're installing it on the peephole in your door, you unscrew the peephole. Now, the way Peeple's work is they need to handle doors that are variable width, depending on where you live. There's no real standard. All of the Peeple's work by having a shaft that you screw onto another side so it's basically two pieces. Now, one of those shafts holds this bracket that we include in the package. You screw that onto your door with the peephole holding it to the door, then you turn on the Peeple device and you connect it to your home Wi-Fi and then you're ready to go. That's it. CHARLES: That's the hardware side of the onboarding and then what about the software? How do I go and look at my door diary? CHRIS: You do this during the installation. You go to My.Peeple.io and there's a little button to add your Peeple device. UI-wise, it's one user interface among all the platforms whether your Android, iPhone or on a browser. You just go to that webpage and associate your account to your Peeple devices. You will have to log in. You can log in with Gmail, Facebook or just a regular email. Then you add your device and any time you go back to that page, it will show you only the videos from your device so you have a list of all the events from your Peeple device on that page or in that app. CHARLES: That is interesting. I'm looking at the videos right now online. Although my problem actually is I've got a glass door. CHRIS: Yes, we got you covered as well. CHARLES: You do? CHRIS: Yes. The reason you have a glass door or a peephole and many people don't realize this is it because it's required by law. If you ever plan to have run out your house as a multi-family unit, you have to have a peephole or a window surface to where people can look out. Once we figured that, that's when we realized we were onto something. The first versions of Peeple came with these little adhesive pads that we called gecko skin and this is where we learned a valuable lesson. No matter how sticky you make your stickers, they're not sticky enough. We included three of these little tabs in every device to put on a glass door, if you had glass so the Peeple device would work the same way for glass door, except that you would use a sticker, instead of unscrewing the peephole. The only problem with the stickers were is they were not sticky enough. If there was condensation or a weather event or something like that, these things would fall off so we made a modification. We found better stickers and I mailed those out to all the people. But this is why hardware is hard. You're going to make these mistakes. In all our testing, we didn't find this but of course, once you have a thousand testers, you find a little more. ELRICK: That's interesting that you brought up the laws about the peephole. Were there any particular building codes or anything of that nature that you guys had to be concerned about when having Peeple installed things on their doors that you had to figure out before shipping them out? CHRIS: Not really. The Texas property code is more geared among making landlords do the right thing. In case you're wondering, I think it's Texas Property Code 94-152 that covers this. There must be an external viewable portion for all multi-family units to the front entryway. Now, this is just the Texas law. We had to look this up in a few other states and it turns out there's one in San Francisco, there's one in Virginia but they're all different. But so far, we haven't had any issues with any property codes or building code issues. CHARLES: This has been an almost four-year odyssey for you that you've been on, right? CHRIS: Right. CHARLES: You've been involved in this scene and working with hardware probably for a long time even before that, it sounds like. For people who are just getting into it, because I feel like there's this wave cresting now, where these types of startups and these types of side projects and hobby projects are just starting to enter the mainstream. Do you have any advice for anybody who would want to get into this space? CHRIS: Well, that's a great question. Of course. Now, contrary to what you just stated, I didn't have much of a hardware background. I'm a software guy. I can personally attest to the pains of becoming a hardware guy. Now, the irony of this is I do have a master's degree in electronics engineering but electronic engineering is so huge. It's such a big field that you can spend your entire career not doing much hardware. But I always had the ability to go back and build some circuits but I would say the number one thing, if you're not a hardware guy is go to some of these meetups or get involved in a community and find yourself one, someone who has experience doing hardware because coming from the software room, you're used to this flexibility of changing a few lines of code and being everything changing. Now, when you get a hardware guy onboard and our hardware guy's name is Craig, when he comes to work -- CHARLES: Or gal. CHRIS: Yeah, or gal, of course. When they look at the same problems you're looking at, they're like, "Hold on a second. Let's step back. Let's test this." There's this quantitative slowing which you need to have as hardware because once you build a PCB, a circuit board, you are now stuck with that board for the next month or so because it takes a while to make another one so get that right before you jump around and do all these changes. My first advice would be is get help. There's no shame in going out there and you might be surprised. There are so many people out there that want to join in. If you have a good idea, there's plenty of people who want to contribute. CHARLES: Would you say that there are communities out there like the software communities where you have meetups? Some of the software meetups are just fantastic, where people are so welcoming and they're just so excited to share the information that they themselves are so excited about. CHRIS: Yes and there's the same thing as on the hardware side. You would definitely go to a few hardware meetups, there are several in Austin. There's at least one every week and it's a great chance for people to tell these kinds of stories. This is a maker type community so they welcome these ideas because that's what fuels their enthusiasm. Every time someone is doing something new, they want to hear it. That's the change now. This decade has happened to where you can go out and buy a few modules and make your little device. Then there's the next big step of turning it into going from prototype to hardware but you can get all those kinks out without having to make your own printed circuit boards, without having to have a huge firmware background. Just knowing a little bit of tech and a Raspberry Pi, you can test out your inventions at this early stage without having to invest all this money and these other things. There's never been a better time to do it. I would leave your listeners with is if you got something swirling around your head, get a Pi, get a little Arduino and do it. There's nothing stopping you. CHARLES: Yeah, it's shocking how affordable they are. CHRIS: I don't even touch on China, by the way but that's the next step. CHARLES: That's the great thought that I want to leave everybody with but I actually have more questions so we won't leave everybody with that. We'll keep on going because I want to talk about China and I want to talk about something that was in there. You've touched on it a couple of times when telling your story how you go from this just do it, get it out there, get it into people's homes, just get the Version 0 out, just buy an Arduino, slap together something terrible, that is at least one millionth of the dream that you have and you've taken your first step on that odyssey. That's a very common story in software. The way that we develop software too is have these agile methodologies and these techniques to reinforce them, testing, continuous integration, continuous deployment. How does that play out? A fascinating subject to me personally is how do you do that in the context of hardware. A question that I love to ask is how do you do things like ensure quality? How do you do integration testing? How do you have a deployment pipeline if you've got these Peeple devices out there on tens of thousands of doors globally? How do you push out a bug fix or a feature update? What's the automation around that look like? CHRIS: The over-the-air updates are your friend. If you're going to make a hardware device, I recommend making a Wi-Fi enabled device because then your firmware is not locked, then you can do over-the-air updates. That has been a lifesaver. We've done maybe a dozen software updates to our device to date, sometimes little changes, sometimes big changes. But what happens is any time the Peeple device wakes up, it says, "Hello, server," and the server says, "I got an update. First, let me give you all these images." Give me the code. The devices are constantly upgradable, just like you'd expect with software. Now, with some of these Bluetooth devices, you can't do that. You've got to go out the door being ready to go with no issues. It's a friction point to tell someone, "Your headphones can't work now. You need to plug it into a computer. You need to download this firmware upgrade. You need to update the firmware doing it by hand." That just isn't going to fly in today's consumer market so I would recommend if you can, make your device a hardware Wi-Fi device, get a Wi-Fi module in there and that opens up the world to you on doing a lot of these updates, to answer the last part of your question. CHARLES: You mentioned China, since you're touching on the manufacturing process or just the market over there or --? CHRIS: Yeah, be ready to fully commit. I've been to China, maybe four times now. I have a 10-year visa. It took a while to find the right partner and you've got to be boots on the ground in the factory for a couple of weeks just getting the whole line up. It's a whole another product when you're at the manufacturing stage. You're making all these little test things, they've got to hook up the boards to certain devices, they've got to put the firmware on it, they've got to do these things. It's a whole another job. That's why when you do these Kickstarter. They say, "We're going to be out in three months," and then six months later, "We're still working on it." I have a lot of empathy for this because I've lived it. You think, "I've got everything done. My hardware works. All I have to do is team up with someone to just make it and with them, we'll ship it." There's a whole another level to just a manufacturing piece and you can't really learned. There's no real textbooks to learn this because every factories are different. Our factory is right north of Shenzhen and we talked to some US manufacturers but they just weren't competitive to be in the discussion so you pretty much have to go overseas and then you have to sit down with them and just a little bit of communication difficulties can bring down a whole manufacturing line so it's very important that you're very hands on and you see your product all the way to package. ELRICK: That's interesting. I know of it but I never really thought about it because I was really not in that position. What are some of the higher level of things that you should look out for when evaluating a manufacturing partner? CHRIS: We talked to about a half a dozen before we decided on our manufacturing partner. The big one for me was cultural fit. I talked to some of the big ones like the one that makes the Apple phones, we talked to them for a while and I just found that I would say, "We would like to do this or we need this," and then the next week, they'd be asking a question, "What about this?" and I'm like, "Oh, you didn't understand what I was really asking," so you would lose weeks just by tiny misunderstandings. I found a manufacturing partner that has a subsidiary here in the US and my main contact grew up in the United States but he also goes to China every other week. Having that kind intermediary made everything so much easier. The communication was never an issue. I was able to get things done almost twice as quick with the other manufacturers I was talking to. In the end, they also came up with a great price so it turned out to be a win-win. I would recommend talking to the bigger manufacturers but spend a lot of time on the smaller ones and really figuring out is the communication up to snuff to really make your product. It's huge. CHARLES: What a story. I'm really glad that we got to have you on the podcast, Chris because you have the story that starts from literally slapping a Raspberry Pi and an accelerometer and speaker and apparently a bunch of other things on your front door and with an extension cord and walking a continuous path to where you're flying back and forth between China and Austin to inspect and ensure your assembly line and making a real product. It demonstrates that it can be done by the fact that you have done it so I think it serves as an inspirational case for a lot of people out there who might think that this is something that they might want to do. Or think that they're capable of. Thank you so much for coming and talking about Peeple. Everybody, you can go ahead and check it out. It's Peeple.io, right? CHRIS: That's correct. CHARLES: All right. Also, is there anything else that you'd like to announce other than the magic, which you're going to keep a lid on? CHRIS: Yes, I know I'd appropriately teased everyone about that but you can go to our website. If you go to Shop.Peeple.io, we're taking preorders for this next magical version, the Peeple Version 1.1, I guess I'll call it. I would like to add just before we go is if you're going to endeavor to do something like this, make sure you have a very understanding family because they couldn't have done it without a wife and kids that understood my craziness and allowed me to have just a complete mess of our house for, I guess, for three years now. CHARLES: Thanks again and thanks everybody for listening to this episode. You can get in touch with us on Twitter. We're at @TheFrontside and you can always find us on the web at Frontside.io and there's a contact form and we'd love to hear from you, for any reason whatsoever. Thanks, everybody and we'll talk to you next week.