Podcasts about Comical

Bryan Cantrill is the co-founder and CTO of Oxide Computer Company. We discuss why the biggest cloud providers don't use off the shelf hardware, how scaling data centers at samsung's scale exposed problems with hard drive firmware, how the values of NodeJS are in conflict with robust systems, choosing Rust, and the benefits of Oxide Computer's rack scale approach. This is an extended version of an interview posted on Software Engineering Radio. Related links Oxide Computer Oxide and Friends Illumos Platform as a Reflection of Values RFD 26 bhyve CockroachDB Heterogeneous Computing with Raja Koduri Transcript You can help correct transcripts on GitHub. Intro [00:00:00] Jeremy: Today I am talking to Bryan Cantrill. He's the co-founder and CTO of Oxide computer company, and he was previously the CTO of Joyent and he also co-authored the DTrace Tracing framework while he was at Sun Microsystems. [00:00:14] Jeremy: Bryan, welcome to Software Engineering radio. [00:00:17] Bryan: Uh, awesome. Thanks for having me. It's great to be here. [00:00:20] Jeremy: You're the CTO of a company that makes computers. But I think before we get into that, a lot of people who built software, now that the actual computer is abstracted away, they're using AWS or they're using some kind of cloud service. So I thought we could start by talking about, data centers. [00:00:41] Jeremy: 'cause you were. Previously working at Joyent, and I believe you got bought by Samsung and you've previously talked about how you had to figure out, how do I run things at Samsung's scale. So how, how, how was your experience with that? What, what were the challenges there? Samsung scale and migrating off the cloud [00:01:01] Bryan: Yeah, I mean, so at Joyent, and so Joyent was a cloud computing pioneer. Uh, we competed with the likes of AWS and then later GCP and Azure. Uh, and we, I mean, we were operating at a scale, right? We had a bunch of machines, a bunch of dcs, but ultimately we know we were a VC backed company and, you know, a small company by the standards of, certainly by Samsung standards. [00:01:25] Bryan: And so when, when Samsung bought the company, I mean, the reason by the way that Samsung bought Joyent is Samsung's. Cloud Bill was, uh, let's just say it was extremely large. They were spending an enormous amount of money every year on, on the public cloud. And they realized that in order to secure their fate economically, they had to be running on their own infrastructure. [00:01:51] Bryan: It did not make sense. And there's not, was not really a product that Samsung could go buy that would give them that on-prem cloud. Uh, I mean in that, in that regard, like the state of the market was really no different. And so they went looking for a company, uh, and bought, bought Joyent. And when we were on the inside of Samsung. [00:02:11] Bryan: That we learned about Samsung scale. And Samsung loves to talk about Samsung scale. And I gotta tell you, it is more than just chest thumping. Like Samsung Scale really is, I mean, just the, the sheer, the number of devices, the number of customers, just this absolute size. they really wanted to take us out to, to levels of scale, certainly that we had not seen. [00:02:31] Bryan: The reason for buying Joyent was to be able to stand up on their own infrastructure so that we were gonna go buy, we did go buy a bunch of hardware. Problems with server hardware at scale [00:02:40] Bryan: And I remember just thinking, God, I hope Dell is somehow magically better. I hope the problems that we have seen in the small, we just. You know, I just remember hoping and hope is hope. It was of course, a terrible strategy and it was a terrible strategy here too. Uh, and the we that the problems that we saw at the large were, and when you scale out the problems that you see kind of once or twice, you now see all the time and they become absolutely debilitating. [00:03:12] Bryan: And we saw a whole series of really debilitating problems. I mean, many ways, like comically debilitating, uh, in terms of, of showing just how bad the state-of-the-art. Yes. And we had, I mean, it should be said, we had great software and great software expertise, um, and we were controlling our own system software. [00:03:35] Bryan: But even controlling your own system software, your own host OS, your own control plane, which is what we had at Joyent, ultimately, you're pretty limited. You go, I mean, you got the problems that you can obviously solve, the ones that are in your own software, but the problems that are beneath you, the, the problems that are in the hardware platform, the problems that are in the componentry beneath you become the problems that are in the firmware. IO latency due to hard drive firmware [00:04:00] Bryan: Those problems become unresolvable and they are deeply, deeply frustrating. Um, and we just saw a bunch of 'em again, they were. Comical in retrospect, and I'll give you like a, a couple of concrete examples just to give, give you an idea of what kinda what you're looking at. one of the, our data centers had really pathological IO latency. [00:04:23] Bryan: we had a very, uh, database heavy workload. And this was kind of right at the period where you were still deploying on rotating media on hard drives. So this is like, so. An all flash buy did not make economic sense when we did this in, in 2016. This probably, it'd be interesting to know like when was the, the kind of the last time that that actual hard drives made sense? [00:04:50] Bryan: 'cause I feel this was close to it. So we had a, a bunch of, of a pathological IO problems, but we had one data center in which the outliers were actually quite a bit worse and there was so much going on in that system. It took us a long time to figure out like why. And because when, when you, when you're io when you're seeing worse io I mean you're naturally, you wanna understand like what's the workload doing? [00:05:14] Bryan: You're trying to take a first principles approach. What's the workload doing? So this is a very intensive database workload to support the, the object storage system that we had built called Manta. And that the, the metadata tier was stored and uh, was we were using Postgres for that. And that was just getting absolutely slaughtered. [00:05:34] Bryan: Um, and ultimately very IO bound with these kind of pathological IO latencies. Uh, and as we, you know, trying to like peel away the layers to figure out what was going on. And I finally had this thing. So it's like, okay, we are seeing at the, at the device layer, at the at, at the disc layer, we are seeing pathological outliers in this data center that we're not seeing anywhere else. [00:06:00] Bryan: And that does not make any sense. And the thought occurred to me. I'm like, well, maybe we are. Do we have like different. Different rev of firmware on our HGST drives, HGST. Now part of WD Western Digital were the drives that we had everywhere. And, um, so maybe we had a different, maybe I had a firmware bug. [00:06:20] Bryan: I, this would not be the first time in my life at all that I would have a drive firmware issue. Uh, and I went to go pull the firmware, rev, and I'm like, Toshiba makes hard drives? So we had, I mean. I had no idea that Toshiba even made hard drives, let alone that they were our, they were in our data center. [00:06:38] Bryan: I'm like, what is this? And as it turns out, and this is, you know, part of the, the challenge when you don't have an integrated system, which not to pick on them, but Dell doesn't, and what Dell would routinely put just sub make substitutes, and they make substitutes that they, you know, it's kind of like you're going to like, I don't know, Instacart or whatever, and they're out of the thing that you want. [00:07:03] Bryan: So, you know, you're, someone makes a substitute and like sometimes that's okay, but it's really not okay in a data center. And you really want to develop and validate a, an end-to-end integrated system. And in this case, like Toshiba doesn't, I mean, Toshiba does make hard drives, but they are a, or the data they did, uh, they basically were, uh, not competitive and they were not competitive in part for the reasons that we were discovering. [00:07:29] Bryan: They had really serious firmware issues. So the, these were drives that would just simply stop a, a stop acknowledging any reads from the order of 2,700 milliseconds. Long time, 2.7 seconds. Um. And that was a, it was a drive firmware issue, but it was highlighted like a much deeper issue, which was the simple lack of control that we had over our own destiny. [00:07:53] Bryan: Um, and it's an, it's, it's an example among many where Dell is making a decision. That lowers the cost of what they are providing you marginally, but it is then giving you a system that they shouldn't have any confidence in because it's not one that they've actually designed and they leave it to the customer, the end user, to make these discoveries. [00:08:18] Bryan: And these things happen up and down the stack. And for every, for whether it's, and, and not just to pick on Dell because it's, it's true for HPE, it's true for super micro, uh, it's true for your switch vendors. It's, it's true for storage vendors where the, the, the, the one that is left actually integrating these things and trying to make the the whole thing work is the end user sitting in their data center. AWS / Google are not buying off the shelf hardware but you can't use it [00:08:42] Bryan: There's not a product that they can buy that gives them elastic infrastructure, a cloud in their own DC The, the product that you buy is the public cloud. Like when you go in the public cloud, you don't worry about the stuff because that it's, it's AWS's issue or it's GCP's issue. And they are the ones that get this to ground. [00:09:02] Bryan: And they, and this was kind of, you know, the eye-opening moment. Not a surprise. Uh, they are not Dell customers. They're not HPE customers. They're not super micro customers. They have designed their own machines. And to varying degrees, depending on which one you're looking at. But they've taken the clean sheet of paper and the frustration that we had kind of at Joyent and beginning to wonder and then Samsung and kind of wondering what was next, uh, is that, that what they built was not available for purchase in the data center. [00:09:35] Bryan: You could only rent it in the public cloud. And our big belief is that public cloud computing is a really important revolution in infrastructure. Doesn't feel like a different, a deep thought, but cloud computing is a really important revolution. It shouldn't only be available to rent. You should be able to actually buy it. [00:09:53] Bryan: And there are a bunch of reasons for doing that. Uh, one in the one we we saw at Samsung is economics, which I think is still the dominant reason where it just does not make sense to rent all of your compute in perpetuity. But there are other reasons too. There's security, there's risk management, there's latency. [00:10:07] Bryan: There are a bunch of reasons why one might wanna to own one's own infrastructure. But, uh, that was very much the, the, so the, the genesis for oxide was coming out of this very painful experience and a painful experience that, because, I mean, a long answer to your question about like what was it like to be at Samsung scale? [00:10:27] Bryan: Those are the kinds of things that we, I mean, in our other data centers, we didn't have Toshiba drives. We only had the HDSC drives, but it's only when you get to this larger scale that you begin to see some of these pathologies. But these pathologies then are really debilitating in terms of those who are trying to develop a service on top of them. [00:10:45] Bryan: So it was, it was very educational in, in that regard. And you're very grateful for the experience at Samsung in terms of opening our eyes to the challenge of running at that kind of scale. [00:10:57] Jeremy: Yeah, because I, I think as software engineers, a lot of times we, we treat the hardware as a, as a given where, [00:11:08] Bryan: Yeah. [00:11:08] Bryan: Yeah. There's software in chard drives [00:11:09] Jeremy: It sounds like in, in this case, I mean, maybe the issue is not so much that. Dell or HP as a company doesn't own every single piece that they're providing you, but rather the fact that they're swapping pieces in and out without advertising them, and then when it becomes a problem, they're not necessarily willing to, to deal with the, the consequences of that. [00:11:34] Bryan: They just don't know. I mean, I think they just genuinely don't know. I mean, I think that they, it's not like they're making a deliberate decision to kind of ship garbage. It's just that they are making, I mean, I think it's exactly what you said about like, not thinking about the hardware. It's like, what's a hard drive? [00:11:47] Bryan: Like what's it, I mean, it's a hard drive. It's got the same specs as this other hard drive and Intel. You know, it's a little bit cheaper, so why not? It's like, well, like there's some reasons why not, and one of the reasons why not is like, uh, even a hard drive, whether it's rotating media or, or flash, like that's not just hardware. [00:12:05] Bryan: There's software in there. And that the software's like not the same. I mean, there are components where it's like, there's actually, whether, you know, if, if you're looking at like a resistor or a capacitor or something like this Yeah. If you've got two, two parts that are within the same tolerance. Yeah. [00:12:19] Bryan: Like sure. Maybe, although even the EEs I think would be, would be, uh, objecting that a little bit. But the, the, the more complicated you get, and certainly once you get to the, the, the, the kind of the hardware that we think of like a, a, a microprocessor, a a network interface card, a a, a hard driver, an NVME drive. [00:12:38] Bryan: Those things are super complicated and there's a whole bunch of software inside of those things, the firmware, and that's the stuff that, that you can't, I mean, you say that software engineers don't think about that. It's like you, no one can really think about that because it's proprietary that's kinda welded shut and you've got this abstraction into it. [00:12:55] Bryan: But the, the way that thing operates is very core to how the thing in aggregate will behave. And I think that you, the, the kind of, the, the fundamental difference between Oxide's approach and the approach that you get at a Dell HP Supermicro, wherever, is really thinking holistically in terms of hardware and software together in a system that, that ultimately delivers cloud computing to a user. [00:13:22] Bryan: And there's a lot of software at many, many, many, many different layers. And it's very important to think about, about that software and that hardware holistically as a single system. [00:13:34] Jeremy: And during that time at Joyent, when you experienced some of these issues, was it more of a case of you didn't have enough servers experiencing this? So if it would happen, you might say like, well, this one's not working, so maybe we'll just replace the hardware. What, what was the thought process when you were working at that smaller scale and, and how did these issues affect you? UEFI / Baseboard Management Controller [00:13:58] Bryan: Yeah, at the smaller scale, you, uh, you see fewer of them, right? You just see it's like, okay, we, you know, what you might see is like, that's weird. We kinda saw this in one machine versus seeing it in a hundred or a thousand or 10,000. Um, so you just, you just see them, uh, less frequently as a result, they are less debilitating. [00:14:16] Bryan: Um, I, I think that it's, when you go to that larger scale, those things that become, that were unusual now become routine and they become debilitating. Um, so it, it really is in many regards a function of scale. Uh, and then I think it was also, you know, it was a little bit dispiriting that kind of the substrate we were building on really had not improved. [00:14:39] Bryan: Um, and if you look at, you know, the, if you buy a computer server, buy an x86 server. There is a very low layer of firmware, the BIOS, the basic input output system, the UEFI BIOS, and this is like an abstraction layer that has, has existed since the eighties and hasn't really meaningfully improved. Um, the, the kind of the transition to UEFI happened with, I mean, I, I ironically with Itanium, um, you know, two decades ago. [00:15:08] Bryan: but beyond that, like this low layer, this lowest layer of platform enablement software is really only impeding the operability of the system. Um, you look at the baseboard management controller, which is the kind of the computer within the computer, there is a, uh, there is an element in the machine that needs to handle environmentals, that needs to handle, uh, operate the fans and so on. [00:15:31] Bryan: Uh, and that traditionally has this, the space board management controller, and that architecturally just hasn't improved in the last two decades. And, you know, that's, it's a proprietary piece of silicon. Generally from a company that no one's ever heard of called a Speed, uh, which has to be, is written all on caps, so I guess it needs to be screamed. [00:15:50] Bryan: Um, a speed has a proprietary part that has a, there is a root password infamously there, is there, the root password is encoded effectively in silicon. So, uh, which is just, and for, um, anyone who kind of goes deep into these things, like, oh my God, are you kidding me? Um, when we first started oxide, the wifi password was a fraction of the a speed root password for the bmc. [00:16:16] Bryan: It's kinda like a little, little BMC humor. Um, but those things, it was just dispiriting that, that the, the state-of-the-art was still basically personal computers running in the data center. Um, and that's part of what, what was the motivation for doing something new? [00:16:32] Jeremy: And for the people using these systems, whether it's the baseboard management controller or it's the The BIOS or UF UEFI component, what are the actual problems that people are seeing seen? Security vulnerabilities and poor practices in the BMC [00:16:51] Bryan: Oh man, I, the, you are going to have like some fraction of your listeners, maybe a big fraction where like, yeah, like what are the problems? That's a good question. And then you're gonna have the people that actually deal with these things who are, did like their heads already hit the desk being like, what are the problems? [00:17:06] Bryan: Like what are the non problems? Like what, what works? Actually, that's like a shorter answer. Um, I mean, there are so many problems and a lot of it is just like, I mean, there are problems just architecturally these things are just so, I mean, and you could, they're the problems spread to the horizon, so you can kind of start wherever you want. [00:17:24] Bryan: But I mean, as like, as a really concrete example. Okay, so the, the BMCs that, that the computer within the computer that needs to be on its own network. So you now have like not one network, you got two networks that, and that network, by the way, it, that's the network that you're gonna log into to like reset the machine when it's otherwise unresponsive. [00:17:44] Bryan: So that going into the BMC, you can are, you're able to control the entire machine. Well it's like, alright, so now I've got a second net network that I need to manage. What is running on the BMC? Well, it's running some. Ancient, ancient version of Linux it that you got. It's like, well how do I, how do I patch that? [00:18:02] Bryan: How do I like manage the vulnerabilities with that? Because if someone is able to root your BMC, they control the system. So it's like, this is not you've, and now you've gotta go deal with all of the operational hair around that. How do you upgrade that system updating the BMC? I mean, it's like you've got this like second shadow bad infrastructure that you have to go manage. [00:18:23] Bryan: Generally not open source. There's something called open BMC, um, which, um, you people use to varying degrees, but you're generally stuck with the proprietary BMC, so you're generally stuck with, with iLO from HPE or iDRAC from Dell or, or, uh, the, uh, su super micros, BMC, that H-P-B-M-C, and you are, uh, it is just excruciating pain. [00:18:49] Bryan: Um, and that this is assuming that by the way, that everything is behaving correctly. The, the problem is that these things often don't behave correctly, and then the consequence of them not behaving correctly. It's really dire because it's at that lowest layer of the system. So, I mean, I'll give you a concrete example. [00:19:07] Bryan: a customer of theirs reported to me, so I won't disclose the vendor, but let's just say that a well-known vendor had an issue with their, their temperature sensors were broken. Um, and the thing would always read basically the wrong value. So it was the BMC that had to like, invent its own ki a different kind of thermal control loop. [00:19:28] Bryan: And it would index on the, on the, the, the, the actual inrush current. It would, they would look at that at the current that's going into the CPU to adjust the fan speed. That's a great example of something like that's a, that's an interesting idea. That doesn't work. 'cause that's actually not the temperature. [00:19:45] Bryan: So like that software would crank the fans whenever you had an inrush of current and this customer had a workload that would spike the current and by it, when it would spike the current, the, the, the fans would kick up and then they would slowly degrade over time. Well, this workload was spiking the current faster than the fans would degrade, but not fast enough to actually heat up the part. [00:20:08] Bryan: And ultimately over a very long time, in a very painful investigation, it's customer determined that like my fans are cranked in my data center for no reason. We're blowing cold air. And it's like that, this is on the order of like a hundred watts, a server of, of energy that you shouldn't be spending and like that ultimately what that go comes down to this kind of broken software hardware interface at the lowest layer that has real meaningful consequence, uh, in terms of hundreds of kilowatts, um, across a data center. So this stuff has, has very, very, very real consequence and it's such a shadowy world. Part of the reason that, that your listeners that have dealt with this, that our heads will hit the desk is because it is really aggravating to deal with problems with this layer. [00:21:01] Bryan: You, you feel powerless. You don't control or really see the software that's on them. It's generally proprietary. You are relying on your vendor. Your vendor is telling you that like, boy, I don't know. You're the only customer seeing this. I mean, the number of times I have heard that for, and I, I have pledged that we're, we're not gonna say that at oxide because it's such an unaskable thing to say like, you're the only customer saying this. [00:21:25] Bryan: It's like, it feels like, are you blaming me for my problem? Feels like you're blaming me for my problem? Um, and what you begin to realize is that to a degree, these folks are speaking their own truth because the, the folks that are running at real scale at Hyperscale, those folks aren't Dell, HP super micro customers. [00:21:46] Bryan: They're actually, they've done their own thing. So it's like, yeah, Dell's not seeing that problem, um, because they're not running at the same scale. Um, but when you do run, you only have to run at modest scale before these things just become. Overwhelming in terms of the, the headwind that they present to people that wanna deploy infrastructure. The problem is felt with just a few racks [00:22:05] Jeremy: Yeah, so maybe to help people get some perspective at, at what point do you think that people start noticing or start feeling these problems? Because I imagine that if you're just have a few racks or [00:22:22] Bryan: do you have a couple racks or the, or do you wonder or just wondering because No, no, no. I would think, I think anyone who deploys any number of servers, especially now, especially if your experience is only in the cloud, you're gonna be like, what the hell is this? I mean, just again, just to get this thing working at all. [00:22:39] Bryan: It is so it, it's so hairy and so congealed, right? It's not designed. Um, and it, it, it, it's accreted it and it's so obviously accreted that you are, I mean, nobody who is setting up a rack of servers is gonna think to themselves like, yes, this is the right way to go do it. This all makes sense because it's, it's just not, it, I, it feels like the kit, I mean, kit car's almost too generous because it implies that there's like a set of plans to work to in the end. [00:23:08] Bryan: Uh, I mean, it, it, it's a bag of bolts. It's a bunch of parts that you're putting together. And so even at the smallest scales, that stuff is painful. Just architecturally, it's painful at the small scale then, but at least you can get it working. I think the stuff that then becomes debilitating at larger scale are the things that are, are worse than just like, I can't, like this thing is a mess to get working. [00:23:31] Bryan: It's like the, the, the fan issue that, um, where you are now seeing this over, you know, hundreds of machines or thousands of machines. Um, so I, it is painful at more or less all levels of scale. There's, there is no level at which the, the, the pc, which is really what this is, this is a, the, the personal computer architecture from the 1980s and there is really no level of scale where that's the right unit. Running elastic infrastructure is the hardware but also, hypervisor, distributed database, api, etc [00:23:57] Bryan: I mean, where that's the right thing to go deploy, especially if what you are trying to run. Is elastic infrastructure, a cloud. Because the other thing is like we, we've kinda been talking a lot about that hardware layer. Like hardware is, is just the start. Like you actually gotta go put software on that and actually run that as elastic infrastructure. [00:24:16] Bryan: So you need a hypervisor. Yes. But you need a lot more than that. You, you need to actually, you, you need a distributed database, you need web endpoints. You need, you need a CLI, you need all the stuff that you need to actually go run an actual service of compute or networking or storage. I mean, and for, for compute, even for compute, there's a ton of work to be done. [00:24:39] Bryan: And compute is by far, I would say the simplest of the, of the three. When you look at like networks, network services, storage services, there's a whole bunch of stuff that you need to go build in terms of distributed systems to actually offer that as a cloud. So it, I mean, it is painful at more or less every LE level if you are trying to deploy cloud computing on. What's a control plane? [00:25:00] Jeremy: And for someone who doesn't have experience building or working with this type of infrastructure, when you talk about a control plane, what, what does that do in the context of this system? [00:25:16] Bryan: So control plane is the thing that is, that is everything between your API request and that infrastructure actually being acted upon. So you go say, Hey, I, I want a provision, a vm. Okay, great. We've got a whole bunch of things we're gonna provision with that. We're gonna provision a vm, we're gonna get some storage that's gonna go along with that, that's got a network storage service that's gonna come out of, uh, we've got a virtual network that we're gonna either create or attach to. [00:25:39] Bryan: We've got a, a whole bunch of things we need to go do for that. For all of these things, there are metadata components that need, we need to keep track of this thing that, beyond the actual infrastructure that we create. And then we need to go actually, like act on the actual compute elements, the hostos, what have you, the switches, what have you, and actually go. [00:25:56] Bryan: Create these underlying things and then connect them. And there's of course, the challenge of just getting that working is a big challenge. Um, but getting that working robustly, getting that working is, you know, when you go to provision of vm, um, the, all the, the, the steps that need to happen and what happens if one of those steps fails along the way? [00:26:17] Bryan: What happens if, you know, one thing we're very mindful of is these kind of, you get these long tails of like, why, you know, generally our VM provisioning happened within this time, but we get these long tails where it takes much longer. What's going on? What, where in this process are we, are we actually spending time? [00:26:33] Bryan: Uh, and there's a whole lot of complexity that you need to go deal with that. There's a lot of complexity that you need to go deal with this effectively, this workflow that's gonna go create these things and manage them. Um, we use a, a pattern that we call, that are called sagas, actually is a, is a database pattern from the eighties. [00:26:51] Bryan: Uh, Katie McCaffrey is a, is a database reCrcher who, who, uh, I, I think, uh, reintroduce the idea of, of sagas, um, in the last kind of decade. Um, and this is something that we picked up, um, and I've done a lot of really interesting things with, um, to allow for, to this kind of, these workflows to be, to be managed and done so robustly in a way that you can restart them and so on. [00:27:16] Bryan: Uh, and then you guys, you get this whole distributed system that can do all this. That whole distributed system, that itself needs to be reliable and available. So if you, you know, you need to be able to, what happens if you, if you pull a sled or if a sled fails, how does the system deal with that? [00:27:33] Bryan: How does the system deal with getting an another sled added to the system? Like how do you actually grow this distributed system? And then how do you update it? How do you actually go from one version to the next? And all of that has to happen across an air gap where this is gonna run as part of the computer. [00:27:49] Bryan: So there are, it, it is fractally complicated. There, there is a lot of complexity here in, in software, in the software system and all of that. We kind of, we call the control plane. Um, and it, this is the what exists at AWS at GCP, at Azure. When you are hitting an endpoint that's provisioning an EC2 instance for you. [00:28:10] Bryan: There is an AWS control plane that is, is doing all of this and has, uh, some of these similar aspects and certainly some of these similar challenges. Are vSphere / Proxmox / Hyper-V in the same category? [00:28:20] Jeremy: And for people who have run their own servers with something like say VMware or Hyper V or Proxmox, are those in the same category? [00:28:32] Bryan: Yeah, I mean a little bit. I mean, it kind of like vSphere Yes. Via VMware. No. So it's like you, uh, VMware ESX is, is kind of a key building block upon which you can build something that is a more meaningful distributed system. When it's just like a machine that you're provisioning VMs on, it's like, okay, well that's actually, you as the human might be the control plane. [00:28:52] Bryan: Like, that's, that, that's, that's a much easier problem. Um, but when you've got, you know, tens, hundreds, thousands of machines, you need to do it robustly. You need something to coordinate that activity and you know, you need to pick which sled you land on. You need to be able to move these things. You need to be able to update that whole system. [00:29:06] Bryan: That's when you're getting into a control plane. So, you know, some of these things have kind of edged into a control plane, certainly VMware. Um, now Broadcom, um, has delivered something that's kind of cloudish. Um, I think that for folks that are truly born on the cloud, it, it still feels somewhat, uh, like you're going backwards in time when you, when you look at these kind of on-prem offerings. [00:29:29] Bryan: Um, but, but it, it, it's got these aspects to it for sure. Um, and I think that we're, um, some of these other things when you're just looking at KVM or just looks looking at Proxmox you kind of need to, to connect it to other broader things to turn it into something that really looks like manageable infrastructure. [00:29:47] Bryan: And then many of those projects are really, they're either proprietary projects, uh, proprietary products like vSphere, um, or you are really dealing with open source projects that are. Not necessarily aimed at the same level of scale. Um, you know, you look at a, again, Proxmox or, uh, um, you'll get an OpenStack. [00:30:05] Bryan: Um, and you know, OpenStack is just a lot of things, right? I mean, OpenStack has got so many, the OpenStack was kind of a, a free for all, for every infrastructure vendor. Um, and I, you know, there was a time people were like, don't you, aren't you worried about all these companies together that, you know, are coming together for OpenStack? [00:30:24] Bryan: I'm like, haven't you ever worked for like a company? Like, companies don't get along. By the way, it's like having multiple companies work together on a thing that's bad news, not good news. And I think, you know, one of the things that OpenStack has definitely struggled with, kind of with what, actually the, the, there's so many different kind of vendor elements in there that it's, it's very much not a product, it's a project that you're trying to run. [00:30:47] Bryan: But that's, but that very much is in, I mean, that's, that's similar certainly in spirit. [00:30:53] Jeremy: And so I think this is kind of like you're alluding to earlier, the piece that allows you to allocate, compute, storage, manage networking, gives you that experience of I can go to a web console or I can use an API and I can spin up machines, get them all connected. At the end of the day, the control plane. Is allowing you to do that in hopefully a user-friendly way. [00:31:21] Bryan: That's right. Yep. And in the, I mean, in order to do that in a modern way, it's not just like a user-friendly way. You really need to have a CLI and a web UI and an API. Those all need to be drawn from the same kind of single ground truth. Like you don't wanna have any of those be an afterthought for the other. [00:31:39] Bryan: You wanna have the same way of generating all of those different endpoints and, and entries into the system. Building a control plane now has better tools (Rust, CockroachDB) [00:31:46] Jeremy: And if you take your time at Joyent as an example. What kind of tools existed for that versus how much did you have to build in-house for as far as the hypervisor and managing the compute and all that? [00:32:02] Bryan: Yeah, so we built more or less everything in house. I mean, what you have is, um, and I think, you know, over time we've gotten slightly better tools. Um, I think, and, and maybe it's a little bit easier to talk about the, kind of the tools we started at Oxide because we kind of started with a, with a clean sheet of paper at oxide. [00:32:16] Bryan: We wanted to, knew we wanted to go build a control plane, but we were able to kind of go revisit some of the components. So actually, and maybe I'll, I'll talk about some of those changes. So when we, at, For example, at Joyent, when we were building a cloud at Joyent, there wasn't really a good distributed database. [00:32:34] Bryan: Um, so we were using Postgres as our database for metadata and there were a lot of challenges. And Postgres is not a distributed database. It's running. With a primary secondary architecture, and there's a bunch of issues there, many of which we discovered the hard way. Um, when we were coming to oxide, you have much better options to pick from in terms of distributed databases. [00:32:57] Bryan: You know, we, there was a period that now seems maybe potentially brief in hindsight, but of a really high quality open source distributed databases. So there were really some good ones to, to pick from. Um, we, we built on CockroachDB on CRDB. Um, so that was a really important component. That we had at oxide that we didn't have at Joyent. [00:33:19] Bryan: Um, so we were, I wouldn't say we were rolling our own distributed database, we were just using Postgres and uh, and, and dealing with an enormous amount of pain there in terms of the surround. Um, on top of that, and, and, you know, a, a control plane is much more than a database, obviously. Uh, and you've gotta deal with, uh, there's a whole bunch of software that you need to go, right. [00:33:40] Bryan: Um, to be able to, to transform these kind of API requests into something that is reliable infrastructure, right? And there, there's a lot to that. Uh, especially when networking gets in the mix, when storage gets in the mix, uh, there are a whole bunch of like complicated steps that need to be done, um, at Joyent. [00:33:59] Bryan: Um, we, in part because of the history of the company and like, look. This, this just is not gonna sound good, but it just is what it is and I'm just gonna own it. We did it all in Node, um, at Joyent, which I, I, I know it sounds really right now, just sounds like, well, you, you built it with Tinker Toys. You Okay. [00:34:18] Bryan: Uh, did, did you think it was, you built the skyscraper with Tinker Toys? Uh, it's like, well, okay. We actually, we had greater aspirations for the Tinker Toys once upon a time, and it was better than, you know, than Twisted Python and Event Machine from Ruby, and we weren't gonna do it in Java. All right. [00:34:32] Bryan: So, but let's just say that that experiment, uh, that experiment did ultimately end in a predictable fashion. Um, and, uh, we, we decided that maybe Node was not gonna be the best decision long term. Um, Joyent was the company behind node js. Uh, back in the day, Ryan Dahl worked for Joyent. Uh, and then, uh, then we, we, we. [00:34:53] Bryan: Uh, landed that in a foundation in about, uh, what, 2015, something like that. Um, and began to consider our world beyond, uh, beyond Node. Rust at Oxide [00:35:04] Bryan: A big tool that we had in the arsenal when we started Oxide is Rust. Um, and so indeed the name of the company is, is a tip of the hat to the language that we were pretty sure we were gonna be building a lot of stuff in. [00:35:16] Bryan: Namely Rust. And, uh, rust is, uh, has been huge for us, a very important revolution in programming languages. you know, there, there, there have been different people kind of coming in at different times and I kinda came to Rust in what I, I think is like this big kind of second expansion of rust in 2018 when a lot of technologists were think, uh, sick of Node and also sick of Go. [00:35:43] Bryan: And, uh, also sick of C++. And wondering is there gonna be something that gives me the, the, the performance, of that I get outta C. The, the robustness that I can get out of a C program but is is often difficult to achieve. but can I get that with kind of some, some of the velocity of development, although I hate that term, some of the speed of development that you get out of a more interpreted language. [00:36:08] Bryan: Um, and then by the way, can I actually have types, I think types would be a good idea? Uh, and rust obviously hits the sweet spot of all of that. Um, it has been absolutely huge for us. I mean, we knew when we started the company again, oxide, uh, we were gonna be using rust in, in quite a, quite a. Few places, but we weren't doing it by fiat. [00:36:27] Bryan: Um, we wanted to actually make sure we're making the right decision, um, at, at every different, at every layer. Uh, I think what has been surprising is the sheer number of layers at which we use rust in terms of, we've done our own embedded firmware in rust. We've done, um, in, in the host operating system, which is still largely in C, but very big components are in rust. [00:36:47] Bryan: The hypervisor Propolis is all in rust. Uh, and then of course the control plane, that distributed system on that is all in rust. So that was a very important thing that we very much did not need to build ourselves. We were able to really leverage, uh, a terrific community. Um. We were able to use, uh, and we've done this at Joyent as well, but at Oxide, we've used Illumos as a hostos component, which, uh, our variant is called Helios. [00:37:11] Bryan: Um, we've used, uh, bhyve um, as a, as as that kind of internal hypervisor component. we've made use of a bunch of different open source components to build this thing, um, which has been really, really important for us. Uh, and open source components that didn't exist even like five years prior. [00:37:28] Bryan: That's part of why we felt that 2019 was the right time to start the company. And so we started Oxide. The problems building a control plane in Node [00:37:34] Jeremy: You had mentioned that at Joyent, you had tried to build this in, in Node. What were the, what were the, the issues or the, the challenges that you had doing that? [00:37:46] Bryan: Oh boy. Yeah. again, we, I kind of had higher hopes in 2010, I would say. When we, we set on this, um, the, the, the problem that we had just writ large, um. JavaScript is really designed to allow as many people on earth to write a program as possible, which is good. I mean, I, I, that's a, that's a laudable goal. [00:38:09] Bryan: That is the goal ultimately of such as it is of JavaScript. It's actually hard to know what the goal of JavaScript is, unfortunately, because Brendan Ike never actually wrote a book. so that there is not a canonical, you've got kind of Doug Crockford and other people who've written things on JavaScript, but it's hard to know kind of what the original intent of JavaScript is. [00:38:27] Bryan: The name doesn't even express original intent, right? It was called Live Script, and it was kind of renamed to JavaScript during the Java Frenzy of the late nineties. A name that makes no sense. There is no Java in JavaScript. that is kind of, I think, revealing to kind of the, uh, the unprincipled mess that is JavaScript. [00:38:47] Bryan: It, it, it's very pragmatic at some level, um, and allows anyone to, it makes it very easy to write software. The problem is it's much more difficult to write really rigorous software. So, uh, and this is what I should differentiate JavaScript from TypeScript. This is really what TypeScript is trying to solve. [00:39:07] Bryan: TypeScript is like. How can, I think TypeScript is a, is a great step forward because TypeScript is like, how can we bring some rigor to this? Like, yes, it's great that it's easy to write JavaScript, but that's not, we, we don't wanna do that for Absolutely. I mean that, that's not the only problem we solve. [00:39:23] Bryan: We actually wanna be able to write rigorous software and it's actually okay if it's a little harder to write rigorous software that's actually okay if it gets leads to, to more rigorous artifacts. Um, but in JavaScript, I mean, just a concrete example. You know, there's nothing to prevent you from referencing a property that doesn't actually exist in JavaScript. [00:39:43] Bryan: So if you fat finger a property name, you are relying on something to tell you. By the way, I think you've misspelled this because there is no type definition for this thing. And I don't know that you've got one that's spelled correctly, one that's spelled incorrectly, that's often undefined. And then the, when you actually go, you say you've got this typo that is lurking in your what you want to be rigorous software. [00:40:07] Bryan: And if you don't execute that code, like you won't know that's there. And then you do execute that code. And now you've got a, you've got an undefined object. And now that's either gonna be an exception or it can, again, depends on how that's handled. It can be really difficult to determine the origin of that, of, of that error, of that programming. [00:40:26] Bryan: And that is a programmer error. And one of the big challenges that we had with Node is that programmer errors and operational errors, like, you know, I'm out of disk space as an operational error. Those get conflated and it becomes really hard. And in fact, I think the, the language wanted to make it easier to just kind of, uh, drive on in the event of all errors. [00:40:53] Bryan: And it's like, actually not what you wanna do if you're trying to build a reliable, robust system. So we had. No end of issues. [00:41:01] Bryan: We've got a lot of experience developing rigorous systems, um, again coming out of operating systems development and so on. And we want, we brought some of that rigor, if strangely, to JavaScript. So one of the things that we did is we brought a lot of postmortem, diagnos ability and observability to node. [00:41:18] Bryan: And so if, if one of our node processes. Died in production, we would actually get a core dump from that process, a core dump that we could actually meaningfully process. So we did a bunch of kind of wild stuff. I mean, actually wild stuff where we could actually make sense of the JavaScript objects in a binary core dump. JavaScript values ease of getting started over robustness [00:41:41] Bryan: Um, and things that we thought were really important, and this is the, the rest of the world just looks at this being like, what the hell is this? I mean, it's so out of step with it. The problem is that we were trying to bridge two disconnected cultures of one developing really. Rigorous software and really designing it for production, diagnosability and the other, really designing it to software to run in the browser and for anyone to be able to like, you know, kind of liven up a webpage, right? [00:42:10] Bryan: Is kinda the origin of, of live script and then JavaScript. And we were kind of the only ones sitting at the intersection of that. And you begin when you are the only ones sitting at that kind of intersection. You just are, you're, you're kind of fighting a community all the time. And we just realized that we are, there were so many things that the community wanted to do that we felt are like, no, no, this is gonna make software less diagnosable. It's gonna make it less robust. The NodeJS split and why people left [00:42:36] Bryan: And then you realize like, I'm, we're the only voice in the room because we have got, we have got desires for this language that it doesn't have for itself. And this is when you realize you're in a bad relationship with software. It's time to actually move on. And in fact, actually several years after, we'd already kind of broken up with node. [00:42:55] Bryan: Um, and it was like, it was a bit of an acrimonious breakup. there was a, uh, famous slash infamous fork of node called IoJS Um, and this was viewed because people, the community, thought that Joyent was being what was not being an appropriate steward of node js and was, uh, not allowing more things to come into to, to node. [00:43:19] Bryan: And of course, the reason that we of course, felt that we were being a careful steward and we were actively resisting those things that would cut against its fitness for a production system. But it's some way the community saw it and they, and forked, um, and, and I think the, we knew before the fork that's like, this is not working and we need to get this thing out of our hands. Platform is a reflection of values node summit talk [00:43:43] Bryan: And we're are the wrong hands for this? This needs to be in a foundation. Uh, and so we kind of gone through that breakup, uh, and maybe it was two years after that. That, uh, friend of mine who was um, was running the, uh, the node summit was actually, it's unfortunately now passed away. Charles er, um, but Charles' venture capitalist great guy, and Charles was running Node Summit and came to me in 2017. [00:44:07] Bryan: He is like, I really want you to keynote Node Summit. And I'm like, Charles, I'm not gonna do that. I've got nothing nice to say. Like, this is the, the, you don't want, I'm the last person you wanna keynote. He's like, oh, if you have nothing nice to say, you should definitely keynote. You're like, oh God, okay, here we go. [00:44:22] Bryan: He's like, no, I really want you to talk about, like, you should talk about the Joyent breakup with NodeJS. I'm like, oh man. [00:44:29] Bryan: And that led to a talk that I'm really happy that I gave, 'cause it was a very important talk for me personally. Uh, called Platform is a reflection of values and really looking at the values that we had for Node and the values that Node had for itself. And they didn't line up. [00:44:49] Bryan: And the problem is that the values that Node had for itself and the values that we had for Node are all kind of positives, right? Like there's nobody in the node community who's like, I don't want rigor, I hate rigor. It's just that if they had the choose between rigor and making the language approachable. [00:45:09] Bryan: They would choose approachability every single time. They would never choose rigor. And, you know, that was a, that was a big eye-opener. I do, I would say, if you watch this talk. [00:45:20] Bryan: because I knew that there's, like, the audience was gonna be filled with, with people who, had been a part of the fork in 2014, I think was the, the, the, the fork, the IOJS fork. And I knew that there, there were, there were some, you know, some people that were, um, had been there for the fork and. [00:45:41] Bryan: I said a little bit of a trap for the audience. But the, and the trap, I said, you know what, I, I kind of talked about the values that we had and the aspirations we had for Node, the aspirations that Node had for itself and how they were different. [00:45:53] Bryan: And, you know, and I'm like, look in, in, in hindsight, like a fracture was inevitable. And in 2014 there was finally a fracture. And do people know what happened in 2014? And if you, if you, you could listen to that talk, everyone almost says in unison, like IOJS. I'm like, oh right. IOJS. Right. That's actually not what I was thinking of. [00:46:19] Bryan: And I go to the next slide and is a tweet from a guy named TJ Holloway, Chuck, who was the most prolific contributor to Node. And it was his tweet also in 2014 before the fork, before the IOJS fork explaining that he was leaving Node and that he was going to go. And you, if you turn the volume all the way up, you can hear the audience gasp. [00:46:41] Bryan: And it's just delicious because the community had never really come, had never really confronted why TJ left. Um, there. And I went through a couple folks, Felix, bunch of other folks, early Node folks. That were there in 2010, were leaving in 2014, and they were going to go primarily, and they were going to go because they were sick of the same things that we were sick of. [00:47:09] Bryan: They, they, they had hit the same things that we had hit and they were frustrated. I I really do believe this, that platforms do reflect their own values. And when you are making a software decision, you are selecting value. [00:47:26] Bryan: You should select values that align with the values that you have for that software. That is, those are, that's way more important than other things that people look at. I think people look at, for example, quote unquote community size way too frequently, community size is like. Eh, maybe it can be fine. [00:47:44] Bryan: I've been in very large communities, node. I've been in super small open source communities like AUMs and RAs, a bunch of others. there are strengths and weaknesses to both approaches just as like there's a strength to being in a big city versus a small town. Me personally, I'll take the small community more or less every time because the small community is almost always self-selecting based on values and just for the same reason that I like working at small companies or small teams. [00:48:11] Bryan: There's a lot of value to be had in a small community. It's not to say that large communities are valueless, but again, long answer to your question of kind of where did things go south with Joyent and node. They went south because the, the values that we had and the values the community had didn't line up and that was a very educational experience, as you might imagine. [00:48:33] Jeremy: Yeah. And, and given that you mentioned how, because of those values, some people moved from Node to go, and in the end for much of what oxide is building. You ended up using rust. What, what would you say are the, the values of go and and rust, and how did you end up choosing Rust given that. Go's decisions regarding generics, versioning, compilation speed priority [00:48:56] Bryan: Yeah, I mean, well, so the value for, yeah. And so go, I mean, I understand why people move from Node to Go, go to me was kind of a lateral move. Um, there were a bunch of things that I, uh, go was still garbage collected, um, which I didn't like. Um, go also is very strange in terms of there are these kind of like. [00:49:17] Bryan: These autocratic kind of decisions that are very bizarre. Um, there, I mean, generics is kind of a famous one, right? Where go kind of as a point of principle didn't have generics, even though go itself actually the innards of go did have generics. It's just that you a go user weren't allowed to have them. [00:49:35] Bryan: And you know, it's kind of, there was, there was an old cartoon years and years ago about like when a, when a technologist is telling you that something is technically impossible, that actually means I don't feel like it. Uh, and there was a certain degree of like, generics are technically impossible and go, it's like, Hey, actually there are. [00:49:51] Bryan: And so there was, and I just think that the arguments against generics were kind of disingenuous. Um, and indeed, like they ended up adopting generics and then there's like some super weird stuff around like, they're very anti-assertion, which is like, what, how are you? Why are you, how is someone against assertions, it doesn't even make any sense, but it's like, oh, nope. [00:50:10] Bryan: Okay. There's a whole scree on it. Nope, we're against assertions and the, you know, against versioning. There was another thing like, you know, the Rob Pike has kind of famously been like, you should always just run on the way to commit. And you're like, does that, is that, does that make sense? I mean this, we actually built it. [00:50:26] Bryan: And so there are a bunch of things like that. You're just like, okay, this is just exhausting and. I mean, there's some things about Go that are great and, uh, plenty of other things that I just, I'm not a fan of. Um, I think that the, in the end, like Go cares a lot about like compile time. It's super important for Go Right? [00:50:44] Bryan: Is very quick, compile time. I'm like, okay. But that's like compile time is not like, it's not unimportant, it's doesn't have zero importance. But I've got other things that are like lots more important than that. Um, what I really care about is I want a high performing artifact. I wanted garbage collection outta my life. Don't think garbage collection has good trade offs [00:51:00] Bryan: I, I gotta tell you, I, I like garbage collection to me is an embodiment of this like, larger problem of where do you put cognitive load in the software development process. And what garbage collection is saying to me it is right for plenty of other people and the software that they wanna develop. [00:51:21] Bryan: But for me and the software that I wanna develop, infrastructure software, I don't want garbage collection because I can solve the memory allocation problem. I know when I'm like, done with something or not. I mean, it's like I, whether that's in, in C with, I mean it's actually like, it's really not that hard to not leak memory in, in a C base system. [00:51:44] Bryan: And you can. give yourself a lot of tooling that allows you to diagnose where memory leaks are coming from. So it's like that is a solvable problem. There are other challenges with that, but like, when you are developing a really sophisticated system that has garbage collection is using garbage collection. [00:51:59] Bryan: You spend as much time trying to dork with the garbage collector to convince it to collect the thing that you know is garbage. You are like, I've got this thing. I know it's garbage. Now I need to use these like tips and tricks to get the garbage collector. I mean, it's like, it feels like every Java performance issue goes to like minus xx call and use the other garbage collector, whatever one you're using, use a different one and using a different, a different approach. [00:52:23] Bryan: It's like, so you're, you're in this, to me, it's like you're in the worst of all worlds where. the reason that garbage collection is helpful is because the programmer doesn't have to think at all about this problem. But now you're actually dealing with these long pauses in production. [00:52:38] Bryan: You're dealing with all these other issues where actually you need to think a lot about it. And it's kind of, it, it it's witchcraft. It, it, it's this black box that you can't see into. So it's like, what problem have we solved exactly? And I mean, so the fact that go had garbage collection, it's like, eh, no, I, I do not want, like, and then you get all the other like weird fatwahs and you know, everything else. [00:52:57] Bryan: I'm like, no, thank you. Go is a no thank you for me, I, I get it why people like it or use it, but it's, it's just, that was not gonna be it. Choosing Rust [00:53:04] Bryan: I'm like, I want C. but I, there are things I didn't like about C too. I was looking for something that was gonna give me the deterministic kind of artifact that I got outta C. But I wanted library support and C is tough because there's, it's all convention. you know, there's just a bunch of other things that are just thorny. And I remember thinking vividly in 2018, I'm like, well, it's rust or bust. Ownership model, algebraic types, error handling [00:53:28] Bryan: I'm gonna go into rust. And, uh, I hope I like it because if it's not this, it's gonna like, I'm gonna go back to C I'm like literally trying to figure out what the language is for the back half of my career. Um, and when I, you know, did what a lot of people were doing at that time and people have been doing since of, you know, really getting into rust and really learning it, appreciating the difference in the, the model for sure, the ownership model people talk about. [00:53:54] Bryan: That's also obviously very important. It was the error handling that blew me away. And the idea of like algebraic types, I never really had algebraic types. Um, and the ability to, to have. And for error handling is one of these really, uh, you, you really appreciate these things where it's like, how do you deal with a, with a function that can either succeed and return something or it can fail, and the way c deals with that is bad with these kind of sentinels for errors. [00:54:27] Bryan: And, you know, does negative one mean success? Does negative one mean failure? Does zero mean failure? Some C functions, zero means failure. Traditionally in Unix, zero means success. And like, what if you wanna return a file descriptor, you know, it's like, oh. And then it's like, okay, then it'll be like zero through positive N will be a valid result. [00:54:44] Bryan: Negative numbers will be, and like, was it negative one and I said airo, or is it a negative number that did not, I mean, it's like, and that's all convention, right? People do all, all those different things and it's all convention and it's easy to get wrong, easy to have bugs, can't be statically checked and so on. Um, and then what Go says is like, well, you're gonna have like two return values and then you're gonna have to like, just like constantly check all of these all the time. Um, which is also kind of gross. Um, JavaScript is like, Hey, let's toss an exception. If, if we don't like something, if we see an error, we'll, we'll throw an exception. [00:55:15] Bryan: There are a bunch of reasons I don't like that. Um, and you look, you'll get what Rust does, where it's like, no, no, no. We're gonna have these algebra types, which is to say this thing can be a this thing or that thing, but it, but it has to be one of these. And by the way, you don't get to process this thing until you conditionally match on one of these things. [00:55:35] Bryan: You're gonna have to have a, a pattern match on this thing to determine if it's a this or a that, and if it in, in the result type that you, the result is a generic where it's like, it's gonna be either the thing that you wanna return. It's gonna be an okay that contains the thing you wanna return, or it's gonna be an error that contains your error and it forces your code to deal with that. [00:55:57] Bryan: And what that does is it shifts the cognitive load from the person that is operating this thing in production to the, the actual developer that is in development. And I think that that, that to me is like, I, I love that shift. Um, and that shift to me is really important. Um, and that's what I was missing, that that's what Rust gives you. [00:56:23] Bryan: Rust forces you to think about your code as you write it, but as a result, you have an artifact that is much more supportable, much more sustainable, and much faster. Prefer to frontload cognitive load during development instead of at runtime [00:56:34] Jeremy: Yeah, it sounds like you would rather take the time during the development to think about these issues because whether it's garbage collection or it's error handling at runtime when you're trying to solve a problem, then it's much more difficult than having dealt with it to start with. [00:56:57] Bryan: Yeah, absolutely. I, and I just think that like, why also, like if it's software, if it's, again, if it's infrastructure software, I mean the kinda the question that you, you should have when you're writing software is how long is this software gonna live? How many people are gonna use this software? Uh, and if you are writing an operating system, the answer for this thing that you're gonna write, it's gonna live for a long time. [00:57:18] Bryan: Like, if we just look at plenty of aspects of the system that have been around for a, for decades, it's gonna live for a long time and many, many, many people are gonna use it. Why would we not expect people writing that software to have more cognitive load when they're writing it to give us something that's gonna be a better artifact? [00:57:38] Bryan: Now conversely, you're like, Hey, I kind of don't care about this. And like, I don't know, I'm just like, I wanna see if this whole thing works. I've got, I like, I'm just stringing this together. I don't like, no, the software like will be lucky if it survives until tonight, but then like, who cares? Yeah. Yeah. [00:57:52] Bryan: Gar garbage clock. You know, if you're prototyping something, whatever. And this is why you really do get like, you know, different choices, different technology choices, depending on the way that you wanna solve the problem at hand. And for the software that I wanna write, I do like that cognitive load that is upfront. With LLMs maybe you can get the benefit of the robust artifact with less cognitive load [00:58:10] Bryan: Um, and although I think, I think the thing that is really wild that is the twist that I don't think anyone really saw coming is that in a, in an LLM age. That like the cognitive load upfront almost needs an asterisk on it because so much of that can be assisted by an LLM. And now, I mean, I would like to believe, and maybe this is me being optimistic, that the the, in the LLM age, we will see, I mean, rust is a great fit for the LLMH because the LLM itself can get a lot of feedback about whether the software that's written is correct or not. [00:58:44] Bryan: Much more so than you can for other environments. [00:58:48] Jeremy: Yeah, that is a interesting point in that I think when people first started trying out the LLMs to code, it was really good at these maybe looser languages like Python or JavaScript, and initially wasn't so good at something like Rust. But it sounds like as that improves, if. It can write it then because of the rigor or the memory management or the error handling that the language is forcing you to do, it might actually end up being a better choice for people using LLMs. [00:59:27] Bryan: absolutely. I, it, it gives you more certainty in the artifact that you've delivered. I mean, you know a lot about a Rust program that compiles correctly. I mean, th there are certain classes of errors that you don't have, um, that you actually don't know on a C program or a GO program or a, a JavaScript program. [00:59:46] Bryan: I think that's gonna be really important. I think we are on the cusp. Maybe we've already seen it, this kind of great bifurcation in the software that we writ

*= Improvised BitCOLD OPEN - "Comedy...tonight!"*  "Why Does He Get To Be Tron?"MUSIC OPENINTRO & WELCOMELIVING ROOM-STYLE BANTERThe "Sellout Club"We could re-brand this* "The Jesties Podcast After Dark"Alex reacts to Chris's reaction to Dawn's pun* "Co-Cheerleaders"Ever fall asleep during a movie?* "Fletch Bohansky Enjoys Skat"Alex, do you know what SKAT means?Dawn, do you know about SKAT?* "Dawn Doesn't Get It"* "Tron, Come Here"Did anyone do anything special for the holiday?* "Sounds Of The Universe"You guys ever get a hole in your tongue?* "If Keanu Does Anything, It's Cool"What if Keanu rode the bus in The Matrix* "Lawrence Fishbourne Opines On Matrix IV"What if Matrix was mashed up with John Wick movies?* "I'll Give You The Finger And You Give Me My Dog Back"So Chris, what's new? How was your holiday?What was your favorite gift, Tron?How bout you, Alex?What about you, Dawn...favorite gift?Chili and waffles? Doin lines of eggs?What's happening 2026 at JEST?  Thank you for listening. LIke what you hear? Want to hear something more? Drop us a comment at https://www.jestimprov.com/podcast Let us know if you want a mention in our episode, we'll do our best to give you a shout-out.Visit us anytime at https://www.jestimprov.com to find out more about us in Ventura, CA - including when to drop-in for classes and shows!

*= Sound-enhanced Improvised SketchesOpening Warm-ups - the mayhem begins* PARODY TOWN "What are you talking about, Willis?"IntroductionsPost-mortem of 100th episodeReminiscing past episodes* Plans for 150th episode "ATM Robot""I love you guys" - "Kittycat Mewww"* "Hello, Princess""I hiked and then I babysat till 2-in the morning"* Baby has a job, bein a baby -- "Hey, Tony!" Names that end in the, "Eeee" sound* Men chewingWhat would you rhyme with "aide?"* "You gotta say the "dirty words" softly"Just do that whiney voice that you do* "The fellas are over""Gene Simmons" gives marriage advice and other opinionsDo you do any voices at home?* Tron' dog - "Charlie's voice"Alex and Carly like to annoy each other with the "me-me-me-me" voice* "Barly" at the coffee shop"I wanna talk to the "me-me-me-me" voice* Tron calls "Miss Barly," of the "me-me-me-me" voiceChris should do a show with his voices* Alex etches on the headstoneUpcoming for JEST"OK! That's a wrap." Thank you for listening. LIke what you hear? Want to hear something more? Drop us a comment at https://www.jestimprov.com/podcast Let us know if you want a mention in our episode, we'll do our best to give you a shout-out.Visit us anytime at https://www.jestimprov.com to find out more about us in Ventura, CA - including when to drop-in for classes and shows!

Let Me Tell You Something about Diabetes | Ep 203 (CLEAN)In a light-hearted and candid conversation, Actress Jen Bartels and Comedian Isaac Abrams explore various topics, emphasizing the importance of love, connection, and self-acceptance. Jen expresses her desire for everyone to unite in kindness, while humorously asking for a specific Gucci bag as a personal wish. Their banter touches on aging, feeling youthful despite physical ailments, and the challenges of maintaining health and well-being, particularly in relation to diabetes management and its daily implications.The discussion shifts to personal experiences with fashion and consumerism, reflecting on how material desires have evolved over time. Jen and Isaac share anecdotes about gift-giving, the significance of thoughtful presents, and the sometimes humorous yet disappointing reality of unreciprocated efforts. They also delve into the challenges of balancing career aspirations with the necessity of rest and self-care, recognizing the pressure to constantly achieve and produce within creative fields.Ultimately, the conversation underscores the value of authenticity and human experience, with a reminder that amidst the hustle, it's essential to allow oneself moments of rest and enjoyment. They conclude with a playful nod to their earlier topics, leaving the audience with a sense of camaraderie and light-heartedness, while also acknowledging deeper life lessons learned along the way.Welcome to our comedy podcast, where we engage in funny conversations and bring you the best of stand-up comedy discussions. Join us for hilarious anecdotes and laugh-out-loud moments as we delve into comedic storytelling and share entertaining interviews with top comedians. Get ready for a dose of humor with our improv comedy highlights and humorous banter. We'll entertain you with comedy skits and sketches, offer satirical commentary, and bring you the best of the comedy talk show format. Our comedic guest appearances and witty observations will keep you engaged throughout. If you're looking for a light-hearted entertainment experience, filled with clever jokes and humor, our comedy podcast is a must-listen. Join us for comedic analysis and commentary, and don't miss our recommendations for the top comedy podcasts in the industry.Comedy podcast, Funny podcast, Humor podcast, Stand-up comedy podcast,Comedian interviews, Comedy sketches, Improv comedy, Hilarious podcast, Laugh-out-loud podcast, Top comedy podcast, Best comedy podcast, Popular comedy podcast, Weekly comedy podcast, Comedy talk show, Comedic banter,Comical commentary, Pop culture comedy, Current events comedy, Satirical comedy,Sarcastic humor, Witty humor, Raunchy humor, Adult comedy podcast,Niche comedy podcast, Musical comedy podcast, Funny interviews, Humorous storytelling, Comedic anecdotes, Entertaining humorLet Me Tell You Something about Diabetes,Diabetes,type 1 diabetes,type 1 diabetes day in the life,type 1 diabetes humor,diabetes joke,Funny podcast,hilarious podcast,comedian Isaac Abrams,Actress Jen Bartels,The Isaac Abrams show,Jennifer Bartels,comedy podcast,funny,comedy,stand up comedians,stand up comedy podcast,clean podcast.,clean humor,funny clean videos,funny clean comedians,funny clean comedy,clean comedy podcast

Fluent Fiction - Swedish: Impressing Elin: Sven's Comical Tour in Ancient Rome Find the full episode transcript, vocabulary words, and more:fluentfiction.com/sv/episode/2025-10-27-07-38-20-sv Story Transcript:Sv: I den kalla höstluften svepte Sven händerna nervöst över sin jacka.En: In the cold autumn air, Sven nervously swept his hands over his jacket.Sv: Gjorde han rätt?En: Was he doing the right thing?Sv: Kunde han verkligen imponera på Elin genom att leka turistguide i Roms gamla Forum?En: Could he truly impress Elin by playing tour guide in the ancient Forum of Rome?Sv: De höga kolonnerna reste sig runt dem som tysta jätteväktare från en svunnen tid.En: The tall columns rose around them like silent giant guardians from a bygone era.Sv: Löven prasslade under deras fötter i gyllene nyanser.En: The leaves rustled under their feet in golden hues.Sv: Elin hade alltid varit fascinerad av antik historia.En: Elin had always been fascinated by ancient history.Sv: Hon stannade ofta för att beundra varje detalj på de gamla stenarna.En: She often stopped to admire every detail on the old stones.Sv: Sven hade hört någon gång att imponerande fakta kunde vinna hjärtan.En: Sven had heard once that impressive facts could win hearts.Sv: Därför bestämde han sig för att leda en egen liten tur med hopp om att imponera på Elin.En: Therefore, he decided to lead his own little tour in the hope of impressing Elin.Sv: "Titta här," sa Sven och pekade mot ruinerna.En: "Look here," said Sven pointing at the ruins.Sv: "Här är det gamla biblioteket... nej, jag menar, teatern där gladiatorerna spelade... nej, jag menar mötte... andra gladiatorer."En: "Here is the old library... no, I mean, the theater where gladiators played... no, I mean met... other gladiators."Sv: Elin rynkade pannan men log ändå åt hans försök.En: Elin frowned but smiled at his attempt.Sv: "Verkligen?En: "Really?Sv: Jag trodde att det var en offentlig byggnad."En: I thought it was a public building."Sv: På avstånd såg Kajsa, Svens bästa vän, vad som höll på att hända.En: In the distance, Kajsa, Sven's best friend, saw what was happening.Sv: Hon försökte hjälpa honom utan att höras.En: She tried to help him without being heard.Sv: Hon hostade och gjorde små diskreta signaler.En: She coughed and made small discreet signals.Sv: Sven förstod och försökte snabbt ändra ämnet.En: Sven understood and quickly tried to change the subject.Sv: "Och här," fortsatte han självsäkert och pekade mot Senaten, "använde gladiatorerna som ett omklädningsrum."En: "And here," he continued confidently, pointing at the Senate, "the gladiators used it as a dressing room."Sv: Det blev helt tyst en sekund.En: It went completely silent for a second.Sv: Sedan brast Elin ut i skratt.En: Then Elin burst into laughter.Sv: Kajsa skrattade också och Sven, med kinderna röda som mogna äpplen, insåg sitt misstag.En: Kajsa laughed too, and Sven, with cheeks red like ripe apples, realized his mistake.Sv: "Ja, kanske jag blev lite förvirrad," erkände Sven generat.En: "Yes, maybe I got a little confused," Sven admitted sheepishly.Sv: "Men jag ville bara göra det intressant."En: "But I just wanted to make it interesting."Sv: Elin slutade skratta och tittade på honom med ett varmt leende.En: Elin stopped laughing and looked at him with a warm smile.Sv: "Det gör inget, Sven.En: "It's okay, Sven.Sv: Jag uppskattar verkligen din ansträngning.En: I really appreciate your effort.Sv: Kanske vi kan lyssna på den riktiga guiden nästa gång?En: Maybe we can listen to the real guide next time?Sv: Lär vi oss något nytt tillsammans."En: We'll learn something new together."Sv: De gick vidare genom Forumet, Sven fortfarande rodnande men lättad.En: They continued through the Forum, Sven still blushing but relieved.Sv: Han insåg att han inte behövde låtsas vara någon han inte var.En: He realized he didn't need to pretend to be someone he wasn't.Sv: Hans sanna jag, med alla sina överträdelser och misstag, verkade vara mer än tillräckligt.En: His true self, with all its trespasses and mistakes, seemed to be more than enough.Sv: De tre vännerna gick tillsammans, skrattande och njutande av den riktiga guiden som fyllde deras huvuden med korrekta, spännande berättelser om det gamla Rom.En: The three friends walked together, laughing and enjoying the real guide who filled their heads with accurate, exciting stories about ancient Rome.Sv: Sven insåg att hans bästa egenskap var hans äkthet, och det gjorde honom tillräckligt imponerande exakt som han var.En: Sven realized that his best quality was his authenticity, and that made him impressive enough just as he was. Vocabulary Words:nervously: nervöstjacket: jackaancient: gamlacolumns: kolonnernaguardians: väktarebygone: svunnenrustled: prassladefascinated: fascineraddetails: detaljimpressive: imponeranderuins: ruinernafrowned: rynka pannandiscreet: diskretasenate: senatenrealized: insågsheepishly: generatrelieved: lättadpretend: låtsastrespasses: överträdelserauthenticity: äkthetimpressive: imponerandetour: turconfidently: självsäkertblushing: rodnandeaccurate: korrektaexciting: spännandetraits: egenskapappreciate: uppskattargladiator: gladiatorernapublic: offentlig

Tom Elliott has once again highlighted the ongoing troubles he's having with Telstra, after the "very strange" encounter he had last week.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to the Celestial Insights Podcast, the show that brings the stars down to Earth! Each week, astrologer, coach, and intuitive Celeste Brooks of Astrology by Celeste will be your guide. Her website is astrologybyceleste.com.  

John Maytham speaks to Andy Kay | Author about his refreshingly offbeat take on the crime genre, “A particularly nasty case” — a story that unfolds in the sterile halls of a hospital but throbs with human chaos, humour, and heart. Presenter John Maytham is an actor and author-turned-talk radio veteran and seasoned journalist. His show serves a round-up of local and international news coupled with the latest in business, sport, traffic and weather. The host’s eclectic interests mean the program often surprises the audience with intriguing book reviews and inspiring interviews profiling artists. A daily highlight is Rapid Fire, just after 5:30pm. CapeTalk fans call in, to stump the presenter with their general knowledge questions. Another firm favourite is the humorous Thursday crossing with award-winning journalist Rebecca Davis, called “Plan B”. Thank you for listening to a podcast from Afternoon Drive with John Maytham Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 15:00 and 18:00 (SA Time) to Afternoon Drive with John Maytham broadcast on CapeTalk https://buff.ly/NnFM3Nk For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/BSFy4Cn or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/n8nWt4x Subscribe to the CapeTalk Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/sbvVZD5 Follow us on social media: CapeTalk on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@capetalk CapeTalk on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ CapeTalk on X: https://x.com/CapeTalk CapeTalk on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CapeTalk567 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Can I kick it? w/ Comedian Malib B | The Isaac Abrams Show Ep 199#comedypodcast  ⁨@Malikbazillecomedy⁩  #theisaacabramsshow #standupcomedians In a lighthearted discussion between Host Isaac Abrams and Guest Malik B, they explore various humorous and philosophical topics, primarily focusing on personal experiences and preferences regarding comedy, life choices, and hypothetical situations. The conversation begins with a reflection on the evolution of comedic style, with one speaker noting how they have grown more comfortable with their own humor over time, emphasizing the importance of authenticity over forced antics. They also touch on the nuances of physical comedy and the balance between engaging with the audience and maintaining one's comedic integrity.The guys delve into the complexities of personal and professional relationships, particularly when it comes to the dynamics of living with a partner. They share anecdotes about the comforts of home life, expressing a mutual appreciation for solitude and the small joys of domesticity, such as spending time with pets or enjoying the simplicity of being at home. The conversation shifts to the humorous aspects of navigating responsibilities within a relationship, highlighting the importance of compromise and understanding in maintaining a happy partnership.As the dialogue progresses, they transition into a more playful segment, discussing hypothetical scenarios such as being locked in a candy shop versus a theme park or choosing between being captured by pirates or a wild tribe. The lighthearted nature of these scenarios allows them to explore deeper themes of adventure, survival, and the human experience, ultimately leading to a discussion about the absurdity of certain life choices. The speakers utilize these hypotheticals to illustrate their differing viewpoints, showcasing their comedic chemistry and ability to riff off one another.The implications of these discussions reveal how humor serves as a coping mechanism for navigating life's unpredictability. By engaging in playful banter about serious topics such as survival and relationship dynamics, the speakers create a relatable narrative that resonates with audiences. They reflect on the absurdities of modern life, often using humor as a lens to examine societal norms and expectations, which adds depth to their seemingly lighthearted exchanges.In conclusion, the conversation encapsulates a blend of humor, introspection, and camaraderie, illustrating how two individuals can navigate the complexities of life through laughter. Their ability to engage in thoughtful yet comedic dialogue highlights the importance of friendship and shared experiences in understanding oneself and the world. This exchange not only entertains but also invites listeners to reflect on their own life choices, relationships, and the value of humor in everyday situations.Comedy podcast, Funny podcast, Humor podcast, Stand-up comedy podcast,Comedian interviews, Comedy sketches, Improv comedy, Hilarious podcast, Laugh-out-loud podcast, Top comedy podcast, Best comedy podcast, Popular comedy podcast, Weekly comedy podcast, Comedy talk show, Comedic banter,Comical commentary, Pop culture comedy, Current events comedy, Satirical comedy,Sarcastic humor, Witty humor, Raunchy humor, Adult comedy podcast,Niche comedy podcast, Musical comedy podcast, Funny interviews, Humorous storytelling, Comedic anecdotes, Entertaining humorcan i kick it yes you can,Comedian Malik B,The Isaac Abrams Show,Niche comedy podcast,Comedy podcast,Funny podcast,Stand-up comedy podcast,Comedian interviews,Comedy sketches,Hilarious podcast,Top comedy podcast,Popular comedy podcast,Weekly comedy podcast,Comedy talk show,Comedic banter,malik bazille,malik bazille stand up,malik bazille boxing,malik bazille creed,malik bazille interview,malik bazille skits,comedian isaac Abrams

Ep. 96: Too Many Things! - Too many things about DawnAdmiral Ackbar, "It's a trap!" *Admiral (Josiah) Ackbar - actual it's Gial Ackbar - Improvised SketchStar Wars loreJJ Abrams styleWhat should we do for Episode #100?Tron and Alex get married?Chris's New & GoodNew StandUp ProgramLove Wolf's album sales - Streaming Residuals*Trick Them Into Doing This - Improvised SketchAlex's New & GoodOpen MicToo many things...Have you seen John Cena?Correlation & Causation*Have you been punched in the face? - Improvised SketchMr. Johnson and his 5-gal bucketRighteous GemstonesWalton GogginsTron's New & GoodOak's dogOld dogs vs Young dogsSounds like something Aries would say...Harry Potter video gameAlex to Chris: "Have you ever walked out of a movie?"Vampires are dumb as shit*Date with a Vampire - Improvised SketchAnybody watch...?AND MORE!  Thank you for listening. LIke what you hear? Want to hear something more? Drop us a comment at https://www.jestimprov.com/podcast Let us know if you want a mention in our episode, we'll do our best to give you a shout-out.Visit us anytime at https://www.jestimprov.com to find out more about us in Ventura, CA - including when to drop-in for classes and shows!

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/systems-and-cybernetics

When does comedy become more than a laugh? Ben Mangrum of MIT joins RtB to discuss his new book, The Comedy of Computation: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Obsolescence (Stanford UP, 2025), which in some ways is organized around “the intriguing idea that human knowledge work is our definitive feature and yet the machines we are ourselves made are going to replace us at it.” Comedy has provided a toolbox (Charles Tilly calls them "collective repertoires") for responding to the looming obsolescence of knowledge workers.John's interest in Menippean satire within science fiction leads him to ask about about the sliding meanings of comedy and its pachinko machine capacity; he loves the way Ben uses the word and concept of doubling,; Ben explains how the computer may either queer (in an antisocial way) or get assimilated into romantic heteronormative pairings. John asks about Donna Haraway's 1985 A Cyborg Manifesto and teh way it denaturalizes gender roles and the way new technological affordances (from the Acheulean axe that Malafouris discusses to the Apple watch) redefine human roles. Ben delves into the minstrelsy pre-history of the photo-robots going as far back as the late 19th century. They unpack the distinctively American Leo Marxian optimism of The Machine in the Garden (1964) that spreads back as far as the proto-robots like The Steam Man of the Prairies(1868) and good old Tik-Tok in the Wizard of Oz novels. John asks about double-edged nature of Ben's claim that comic “genericity provides forms for making a computationally mediated social world seem more habitable, even as it also provides Is for criticizing and objecting to that world." First you get description says Ben--and then sometimes critique. John asks about the iterability of the new: how much of what seems new actually New New (in the sense of that great 1999 Michael Lewis book, The New New Thing)? Mentioned in the episode: The Desk Set a play William Marchand and a movie starring Katherine Hepburn. How might a computer be incorporated into the sociability of a couple? Her (Spike Jonze,, 2013) computer meets human makes the rom-com into a coupling machine. WarGames (1983( ends with Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy (not Ione Skye—silly John!) paired. But also with Broderick and the formerly deadly computer settling down to “how about a nice game of chess”? Black Mirror as the 2020's version of the same dark satire as the 1950's Twilight Zone. John asks about Stanislaw Lem's Cyberiad, and the comic coupling of Kirk and Spock and the death-as-computer comedy of Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979). Leo Marx, The Machine in the Garden (1964). Dave Eggers: the joke structure as critique in The Circle and The Every. John Saybrook wrote in the New Yorker about an eye-opening conversation with Bill Gates in 1994. Istvan Csicsery-Ronay's Seven Beauties of Science Fiction on the “fictionalization of everyday life" Recallable Books: Elif Batuman The Idiot (2017) Richard Powers, Plowing the Dark (2000) Sally Rooney, Conversations with Friends (2017) Listen and Read here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Jon takes another look at the Charlie Kirk memorial service, Gov. Walz makes calls to supporters, and Jon offers up his opinion on the State's handling of fraud cases. Jon looks at a few local headlines with political ties.

Fluent Fiction - French: A Comical Souvenir Hunt at Mont Saint-Michel Find the full episode transcript, vocabulary words, and more:fluentfiction.com/fr/episode/2025-09-22-22-34-02-fr Story Transcript:Fr: Étienne était un touriste enthousiaste en visite à Mont Saint-Michel.En: Étienne was an enthusiastic tourist visiting Mont Saint-Michel.Fr: La cité médiévale était magnifique en automne.En: The medieval city was beautiful in the fall.Fr: Le ciel était clair, l'air frais, et les feuilles tombaient doucement autour de lui.En: The sky was clear, the air fresh, and the leaves gently fell around him.Fr: Étienne voulait absolument visiter l'abbaye et rapporter un souvenir pour sa grand-mère.En: Étienne absolutely wanted to visit the abbey and bring back a souvenir for his grandmother.Fr: Alors qu'il se promenait dans la rue principale, Étienne regardait les boutiques de souvenirs.En: As he wandered down the main street, Étienne looked at the souvenir shops.Fr: Il chercha des mots en français, mais il avait souvent du mal à les prononcer correctement.En: He sought out words in French, but often had trouble pronouncing them correctly.Fr: Il entra dans une petite boutique pleine de choses colorées.En: He entered a small shop full of colorful things.Fr: C'est à ce moment-là qu'il vit Sophie.En: It was then that he saw Sophie.Fr: « Bonjour !En: "Bonjour!Fr: Je peux vous aider ?En: Je peux vous aider?"Fr: » demanda Sophie avec un sourire.En: asked Sophie with a smile.Fr: Étienne était soulagé.En: Étienne was relieved.Fr: Il tenta de dire qu'il voulait acheter un souvenir, mais il mélangea les mots.En: He attempted to say that he wanted to buy a souvenir, but he mixed up the words.Fr: Sophie pensa qu'il parlait de quelque chose d'autre.En: Sophie thought he was talking about something else.Fr: Elle sourit poliment et essaya de l'aider à comprendre.En: She smiled politely and tried to help him understand.Fr: Jacques, un ami de Sophie, était aussi présent.En: Jacques, a friend of Sophie, was also present.Fr: Il écoutait la conversation en riant doucement.En: He listened to the conversation, chuckling softly.Fr: Il décida de jouer un peu avec la situation, histoire de rendre ce moment plus léger.En: He decided to play along with the situation, just to make the moment lighter.Fr: Sophie tenta de comprendre ce qu'Étienne voulait dire, tandis que Jacques faisait quelques commentaires amusants.En: Sophie tried to understand what Étienne meant, while Jacques made some amusing comments.Fr: Étienne essaya de mimer ce qu'il voulait.En: Étienne tried to mime what he wanted.Fr: Il fit de grands gestes avec les bras, un peu embarrassé.En: He made big gestures with his arms, a bit embarrassed.Fr: Les gens autour commencèrent à s'intéresser à la scène, formant un petit cercle autour de lui.En: People around began to take interest in the scene, forming a small circle around him.Fr: Tout le monde riait, mais toujours dans le respect et la bonne humeur.En: Everyone was laughing, but always respectfully and in good spirits.Fr: Tout à coup, dans une tentative désespérée de se faire comprendre, Étienne imita un geste qu'il pensait être une légende locale sur Mont Saint-Michel.En: Suddenly, in a desperate attempt to be understood, Étienne mimicked a gesture he thought was a local legend about Mont Saint-Michel.Fr: Il ne savait pas comment, mais il capta l'attention de toute la foule.En: He didn't know how, but he captured the attention of the entire crowd.Fr: Sophie et Jacques se mirent à rire franchement, voyant qu'Étienne tentait de rejouer une scène célèbre.En: Sophie and Jacques burst into laughter, seeing that Étienne was trying to reenact a famous scene.Fr: Sophie expliqua finalement à Étienne ce qu'il avait fait.En: Sophie finally explained to Étienne what he had done.Fr: Ils firent une pause pour récupérer.En: They took a break to recover.Fr: Étienne était un peu rouge de timidité, mais très amusé par la situation.En: Étienne was a little red with shyness, but very amused by the situation.Fr: Jacques glissa quelques mots humoristiques, aidant à alléger encore plus l'atmosphère.En: Jacques slipped in a few humorous words, helping to lighten the atmosphere even more.Fr: Quelques minutes plus tard, après avoir reçu l'aide de Sophie qui parlait lentement et clair, Étienne trouva finalement le bon souvenir.En: A few minutes later, after receiving help from Sophie who spoke slowly and clearly, Étienne finally found the right souvenir.Fr: C'était une petite réplique de l'abbaye, parfaite pour sa grand-mère.En: It was a small replica of the abbey, perfect for his grandmother.Fr: Étienne remercia Sophie et Jacques.En: Étienne thanked Sophie and Jacques.Fr: Grâce à eux, il avait appris quelque chose de précieux : le sourire et l'humour peuvent vaincre les barrières linguistiques.En: Thanks to them, he had learned something valuable: a smile and humor can overcome language barriers.Fr: Les trois repartirent, heureux de cette aventure cocasse au cœur de Mont Saint-Michel.En: The three left, happy with this comical adventure in the heart of Mont Saint-Michel. Vocabulary Words:the tourist: le touristeenthusiastic: enthousiastethe abbey: l'abbayeto wander: se promenerthe main street: la rue principaleto pronounce: prononcerthe gesture: le gesteto burst into laughter: rire franchementthe replica: la répliquethe legend: la légendeto capture: capturerthe crowd: la foulethe atmosphere: l'atmosphèreto be amused: être amusévaluable: précieuxthe souvenir: le souvenirto chuckle: rire doucementpolitely: polimentrespectfully: respectueusementthe medieval city: la cité médiévaleabsolutely: absolumentto execute: réaliserto reenact: rejouera humorous comment: un commentaire amusantshyness: timiditélighten: allégerto seek out: chercherto mix up: mélangerto take interest: s'intéresserthe small shop: la petite boutique

Welcome to the place where we get to let our geek flags fly and talk about all things geek. Basically a fuzzy guide to life, the universe, and everything but mostly geek stuff. This level of the podcast is what happens when you talk vampire movies and somehow don't mention Blade. Boy howdy am I glad we did because the result was all the monsters and horror vibes from comic book movies and shows. It's a big list and includes:BladeSpawn - 59 - 18 episodes & 30 moviesConstantineHelstromCloak & DaggerTales from the CryptDeath NoteThe New MutantsJustice League DarkMoon KnightHellboyAlien vs PredatorDoom PatrolThe CrowIZombieLuciferThe Walking DeadSwamp ThingFrom HellMy Friend DahmerMorbiusVenomWerewolf by NightMan-ThingRIPDAgatha All AlongBatman: Gotham by GaslightI, Frankenstein Locke & KeyLeague of Extraordinary GentlemenVampirellaChilling Adventures of SabrinaThe Addams Family / WednesdayGhost RiderHulk: Where Monsters DwellWhat If?!... Zombies - Marvel: ZombiesThe SandmanAgents of SHIELD - Ghost Rider/Darkhold stuffDr Strange in the Multiverse of MadnessWandaVisionLegionBatman: The Long HalloweenThe Doom that Came to GothamAvengers: Age of UltronThor: Love and ThunderSpider-Man 1 & 2BrightburnGuardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3The Dark KnightX-Men: Days of Future PastSpider-Man: No Way HomeCongrats on completing Level 461! Feel free to contact me on social media (@wookieeriot). You can also reach the show by e-mail, laughitupfuzzballpodcast@gmail.com. All other links are easily findable on linktr.ee/laughitupfuzzball for merch, the Facebook group, etc. I'd love to hear from you. Subscribe to the feed on Spotify, Apple podcasts, Google podcasts, or any of the apps which pull from those sources. Go do your thing so I can keep doing mine. If you feel so inclined, drop a positive rating or comment on those apps. Ratings help others find the madness. Tell your friends, geekery is always better with peers. Thank YOU for being a part of this hilarity! There's a plethora of ways to comment about the show and I look forward to seeing your thoughts, comments, and ideas. May the force be with us all, thanks for stopping by, you stay classy, be excellent to each other and party on dudes! TTFN… Wookiee out!

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony debate whether one partner has the right to move the other's stuff.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony speak with guest Solomon Pratt, an executive health coach and author, about how enhancing your health and caring for your body can positively impact your relationships and career.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss the pros and cons of tracking others' locations.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss whether surprise visits are ever a good thing.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss the factors that indicate it's a good time to move elsewhere.   

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss whether family road trips are still a thing.  

Sean “Diddy” Combs is now attempting to reframe his public image as that of a domestic abuse prevention advocate, presenting the shift as part of a broader redemption arc ahead of his sentencing. His legal team has outlined a plan for him to work with domestic violence programs, counsel abusers, and speak directly to youth about the consequences of such behavior. They are pitching this not just as personal growth but as a way for Combs to give back to the community, portraying him as a figure who can use his own mistakes as a cautionary example. This strategy is being positioned as evidence of rehabilitation in hopes of swaying the court toward a lighter sentence.In prison, Combs has enrolled in therapy and self-improvement programs, including those designed to address sexual and domestic violence, alongside substance abuse treatment. But critics—especially those connected to his alleged victims—see the rebrand as nothing more than a calculated PR move. They argue that positioning himself as a counselor without first showing genuine accountability is manipulative and disingenuous, serving the optics of the courtroom rather than the needs of survivors.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's Bid to Avoid Prison: He'll Become a Domestic Abuse Counselor - Business InsiderBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss adults returning to school.

 In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony commemorate their 300th episode and ask their audience whether they have a problem with people they perceive to be overachievers and whether anyone can actually overachieve. The hosts also request that the audience sign up and vote, by July 31,  for their podcast in the "People's Choice" and "Society-Culture" categories at podcastawards.com.

On Friday's Football Daily, Phil Egan brings you reaction to St. Pats' and Shamrock Rovers' wins in the Conference League. We hear from Ger Nash and John Russell ahead of tonight's live Premier Division clash on OTB Sports Radio. As part of our full LOI preview we also speak to Tiernan Lynch, John Coleman and Stephen Elliott. Bruno Guimaraes has gone full Comical Ali when discussing Alexander Isak. And Newcastle's miserable transfer window continues.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony ask their audience whether they are being their most authentic selves in their relationships. The hosts also ask the audience to sign up and vote, by July 31,  for their podcast in the "People's Choice" and "Society-Culture" categories at podcastawards.com.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss sidepieces and homewreckers. Are they the same? The hosts also ask the audience to sign up and vote, by July 31,  for their podcast in the "People's Choice" and "Society-Culture" categories at podcastawards.com.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony take a stance on office romances. They also ask the audience to sign up and vote, by July 31,  for their podcast in the "People's Choice" and the "Society-Culture" categories at podcastawards.com.

Jeffrey Epstein story is one of the most comical political lies ever told. Why isn't the would be Trump assassin as much a part of history as other political shooters? Mexico City residents complain that American tourists are ruining their culture. Johnny Heidt with guitar news.Heard On The Show:Father of Manny Collins arrested in connection with his son's deathSen. Hoffman out of intensive care, now in transitional careImpostor uses AI to impersonate Rubio and contact foreign and US officialsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony laugh and discuss how memorable gatherings can be when an ex shows up. They also ask the audience to please sign up and vote for their podcast in the "People's Choice" and the "Society-Culture" categories at podcastawards.com.

Welcome to another episode of Death Don't Do Fiction, the AIPT Movies podcast! The podcast about the enduring legacy of our favorite movies! It's June, so that means it's time for our “Junesis” series! Where we cover movies based on/revolving around video games! In this week's episode, Alex, Tim, and returning guest K-Tron discuss Jean-Claude Van Damme and Capcom's misguided 1994 attempt to capitalize off the 90s video game craze, Street Fighter!Comical shirt-removal! Unpaid Russian labor! Bison bucks! Bisonopolis! Food court design! A playful arms deal! DNA Mutagens! Godzilla sound effects! Fake chest hair and poorly drawn-on tattoos! Serial Killer artwork! A bone chandelier and a skull fireplace! Cool looking evil soldiers! Bizarre Capcom product placement! Clever use of arcade game buttons! Questionable Hawaiian music! A hostage pit! A fascist dictator attempting to be seductive! Not that much street fighting! An early example of an antagonistic Zoom meeting! A scenery-chewing cast that includes Ming-Na Wen, a hilarious Andrew Bryniarski, Byron Mann, Kylie Minogue, Wes Studi, a blonde Jean-Claude Van Damme, and Raul Julia in his final film role! A troubled production where most of the budget was spent on its two main stars, that ends with one of the most awkward freeze frames in movie history!In addition, K-Tron shares some spoiler-free thoughts on V/H/S/Beyond, 1959's Some Like It Hot, and 1965's Faster, Pussycat! Kill!, while Alex does the same for 28 Years Later, Predator: Killer of Killers, 1991's Naked Gun 2.5, and the 2012 Tom Cruise action-thriller, Jack Reacher!You can find Death Don't Do Fiction on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. As always, if you enjoy the podcast, be sure to leave us a positive rating, subscribe to the show, and tell your friends!The Death Don't Do Fiction podcast brings you the latest in movie news, reviews, and more! Hosted by supposed “industry vets,” Alex Harris and Tim Gardiner, the show gives you a peek behind the scenes from three filmmakers with oddly nonexistent filmographies. You can find Alex on Twitter, Bluesky, or Letterboxd @actionharris. You can follow K-Tron on Letterboxd @puddingtaco. Tim can't be found on social media because he doesn't exist. If you have any questions or suggestions for the Death Don't Do Fiction crew, they can be reached at aiptmoviespod@gmail.com, or you can find them on Twitter or Instagram @aiptmoviespod.Theme song is “We Got it Goin On” by Cobra Man.

Today we jump back 15 years to two back-to-back episodes of the PWTorch Livecast from June 18 and 21, 2010.On the June 18, 2010 episode, PWTorch's James Caldwell and Brian Hoops discussed with live callers the previous night's TNA Impact, the big Jay Lethal and Ric Flair angle, TNA's build-up to a four-way match at the next PPV vs. WWE's build-up to the Fatal Four-Way PPV, John Cena's almost comical comments in media interviews, why Cena is endorsing Bryan Danielson and why he didn't endorse Mr. Anderson in WWE, possible plans for the Money in the Bank PPV involving the NXT Rookies, Will John Cena and Jack Swagger have lengthy title runs, is TNA disciplined enough to stretch out Kurt Angle's #1 quest?, and much more. In the previously VIP-exclusive Aftershow, they discuss the Four-Way PPV and whether it's worth ordering, Batista's potential MMA transition, Grizzly Smith, the Pro Wrestling Hall of Fame, a scoop on an upcoming Nostalgia podcast interview, and more.Then on the June 21, 2010 episode, PWTorch's James Caldwell and Greg Parks includes discussion with live callers on the previous night's WWE Fatal Four-Way PPV, the major angles from the PPV covered including Rey Mysterio's World Title victory, Sheamus's WWE Title victory, WWE hot-shotting title changes, Jack Swagger's future, the NXT angle invasion at the PPV & follow-up on Raw, anything for Money in the Bank on Raw, backstage politics in WWE, the ROH Internet PPV, and more.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/wade-keller-pro-wrestling-podcast--3076978/support.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony recall their life's most embarrassing moments.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Tony offer their take on what it takes to date in the digital age.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Tony talk to their special guest, sexologist/ podcaster Dr. Diane Mueller, about desire, self-care, and maintaining your passionate relationship. 

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony talk to Dr. Nicole D. Bradford about her book, MY SOUL IS NOT FOR SALE, which identifies workplace issues and details how to navigate corporate America. We also discuss maintaintheflame.net, which she founded.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss the times they've had to deal with liars.

On this episode of FRM the Refs talk about what pisses them off about the wrestling Industry, the marks and promoters who run "Pay to Play" Shows. All that and a lot more! It's a ridiculus show, and we like it that way! Sit back and enjoy the insanity!

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony debate whether working while you're sick is a good idea.

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss the times they wanted to purchase something they couldn't afford.

COMEDIAN ARYAN AZIZIAN | The Isaac Abrams Show | Ep 177

In this week's episode, hosts Jill and Anthony discuss telling people “no" and whether it's hard for them to do. 

Welcome back for another episode of Critiquing Comic Comics, your favorite podcast for all things comics! This week we've got a special surprise episode: Join our befuddled host in trying to guess the subject! 

Mitchell Green is the Founder and Managing Partner of Lead Edge Capital. Mitchell has led or co-led investments in companies including Alibaba, Asana, Benchling, ByteDance, Duo Security, Grafana, Mindbody, and Xamarin, among several others. In Today's Episode We Discuss: 04:31 How Bessemer Taught Me The One Golden Rule of Investing 06:48 Why AI Infrastrcture is the Worst Investment to Make 08:51 Why it is Comical to think there will be $BN one person companies? 09:26 WTF Happens To The Cohort of SaaS Companies With Slow Growth, Not Yet Profitable and $50M-$200M in Revenue 16:12 What is the Biggest Problem with the IPO Market 23:24 When is the Right Time to Sell in VC and How a Generation F******* it Up 27:37 Biggest Advice to Smaller Emerging Managers 40:13 The One Question That Tells You if a Business is Good 43:01 Why LPs are More Important than Founders 45:03 One Question Every LP Should Ask Their VCs 46:03 Why TikTok Does Not Matter to ByteDance and It Is a Screaming Buy 51:30 Why We Drastically Underestimate the Power of Chinese AI? 55:18 Why Social Media is the Most Dangerous Thing in Society 01:00:07 Quick Fire Questions  

Aaaaaaand we're back. Episode 1 of season 14 of the Dana Gould Hour Podcast. Has anything of interest happened since the last episode? Don't think so. Certainly not here in Los Angeles, or America. Okay. Great. Let's get at it!  Drew Friedman is here. Drew Friedman is one of the premiere illustrators and cartoonists in America. You know his work from The New York Observer, the New Yorker, his books, Warts And All, Old Jewish Comedians, More Old Jewish Comedians, Still More Old Jewish Comedians, Too Soon, Drew Friedman's Sideshow Freaks, Heroes Of The Comics, More Heroes Of The Comics, the list goes on and on. In 1987 I discovered his book Any Similarity to Persons Living Or Dead is Purely Coincidental and it quite literally redefined my sense of humor. It is hard to articulate the impact the book had on me. No kidding. Drew has a new book out called Schtick Figures, portraits of people important to Drew. And me. People he refers to as The Cool, The Comical and The Crazy. Portraits of people like Gilbert Gottfried, #2 and #3 as only Drew can draw them. Drew is also the subject of a new documentary that's about to be released entitled The Vermeer Of The Borscht Belt, Drew Friedman is here.  Kurt Sayenga is a writer, director and producer. We first met when Kurt ran the series Eli Roth's History Of Horror. Kurt now has a series on Shudder called Horror's Greatest. Season #2 just dropped, with guests like Davi Dastmalchian, Joe Hill, Jonah Ray, Alex Winter, Mick Garris, yours truly and many, many more. Kurt's here to talk about the show and the topics covered this season as it continues to explore our fascination with all things cinematically horrific.  Cinematically horrific. If you want to examine the realistically horrific, True Tales From Weirdsville takes a deep dive into the 1957 classic A Face In Crowd, starring Andy Griffith, written by Budd Schulberg and directed by Elia Kazan. It tells the cautionary tale of what happens when a corrupt, amoral grifter gains a position of power and influence in America. It was made in 1957 and it was a FREAKISHLY predictive film.  https://www.DanaGould.com