Podcast appearances and mentions of david have

As we read this letter we slowly begin to see that St. John is not presenting his reader with a manual for spiritual direction; that is, specific counsels in regard to practices and disciplines. St. John's astute psychological observations and his capacity for discernment reveals a heart that has been transformed by love. Contrary to the old adage love is NOT blind. Love, in fact, sees all things with greater clarity.  One of the things that we struggle with in our day is a tendency to dissect certain realities (as well as personalities) in order that we might see ourselves as understanding them or being able to control them. The desert fathers, however, never allow us to lose sight of the mystery of the human person or the relationship that is at the heart of Christianity. A human person is not the sum of their actions or their opinions any more than God can be reduced to the teachings of the catechism. Love draws us in to the mystery of God and also allows us to see the presence of God in the other. If any Christian, let alone any elder, loses sight of this then our interactions with others are going to become grossly distorted and our view of God myopic. Love must shape our hearts and expand them to the dimensions of God himself.  This may seem to be an absurdity and yet it is the reality that has been revealed to us. God has become man in order that man might become God. Our Lord assumes all that there is in the human experience - our sin, sorrow, failure, weakness and death. He embraces all in order that we might never be in isolation and that his presence within us might also be a source of radical healing. The miracles in the gospel merely show us the desire of God to remove every obstacle in our experience of His life.  Therefore, an elder must have experiential knowledge of this Love; especially how it touches the woundedness of our sin and our experience of hopelessness and isolation. The elder must become that love so as to enter into the sufferings of those who come to him. Whatever guidance he offers, whatever correction he makes, must be rooted in a love that is curative and that seeks to raise up the other. Only one who has encountered the wonder of such Divine Love has the capacity to enter into and take upon himself the vulnerability of the other. In this sense, the spiritual elder and his role cannot be seen outside of his relationship with Christ; for it is only the love of Christ that can possibly bring healing to the human heart. --- Text of chat during the group: 00:04:47 Anna Lalonde: What about them? 00:05:37 Anna Lalonde: I'm in GA. Where are they? 00:15:30 Anna Lalonde: We finally got both books for family gift and we're ordering four volumes too. 00:27:58 Myles Davidson: I know someone who has never owned a computer and goes to the library to use the internet, due to his fear of what it might lead to 00:30:22 Anna Lalonde: We experienced a family friendship break and after saw how we fell into sin or lessened our way of life. Such an awakening experience. 00:31:49 Lyle: His fear may be VERY warranted.  How often does the devil DIRECTLY attack us?  His friend may view something that “appears” very innocent, but it may lead to something very evil. 00:38:04 Anna Lalonde: My sister is a missionary of charity. Love her letters home on guidance to family. 00:42:06 Lyle: A word of ecouragement from a recovering ADDICT. 00:42:23 Andres Oropeza: St. Theophane wrote that we should picture a lazy man sitting in his room. His house is on fire but you wouldn't tell him it's fire, you would let him see the flames. Then he would be roused to look for a way out; an open door, a window. He said the Holy Spirit does this for us. Maybe we can do this for others too, patiently and lovingly help them to see that their way of life is harmful and were it inevitably leads.  Though often times I think we wouldn't try to escape even once we realize our house is on fire. I've experienced this myself! 00:42:33 Lyle: Avoid ANYTHING that appears "questionable". 00:43:58 Lyle: Myles' friend. 01:04:51 David: We often sit back and hope for miracles but all these verbs the Lord uses requiere us to be doing things first before the remedy can be found-“Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 01:09:03 Suzanne Romano: A great confessor I had always used to say, "There's a time for every grace." 01:13:32 MOME hermits: Thank you Fr. David, Blessed Solemnity of Mary and New Year :)! 01:13:40 MOME hermits: Fr. Charbel 01:13:46 Joanne Martinez: Thank you! 01:13:53 Suzanne Romano: Thank you! 01:13:57 Aric B: Thank you Father! 01:13:58 David: Have a blessed 2025! Thank you father 01:14:03 Rebecca Thérèse: Thank you. Happy New Year everyone

November 16, 2024Today's Reading: Introit for Pentecost 26 - Ps. 48:11-14; antiphon: Mark 13:13bDaily Lectionary: Jeremiah 31:1-17, 23-34; Revelation 16:1-21; Matthew 27:1-10Let Mount Zion be glad! Let the daughters of Judah rejoice because of your judgments! Walk about Zion, go around her, number her towers, consider well her ramparts, go through her citadels, that you may tell the next generation that this is God, our God forever and ever. He will guide us forever. (Psalm 48:11-14)In the Name + of Jesus. Amen. Zion is the city of David. It's the city of promise. The Lord promised David that his throne would not end. The promise goes not just to David but to all Israelites, for from David's lineage will come forth the Messiah, the Savior. In this way, the Canaanite woman, pleading to Jesus to help her daughter, rightly addresses Jesus as Son of David: “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon” (Matthew 15:22).Psalm 48 gives us to rejoice, “Let Mount Zion be glad, let the daughters of Judah rejoice … consider her ramparts, go through her citadels … tell the next generation that this is God, our God, forever and ever.”The promise to Zion is “forever and ever.” We don't reduce the Zion promise to a political action of establishing a powerful government in Jerusalem. The promise is that Mt. Zion will be the everlasting throne of David's greater Son, and He will be the everlasting King of Mercy for every sinner. The promise of a “forever and ever” Zion is the promise, then, of the cross. At the cross, Jesus establishes His Throne of Grace for all those who, like the Canaanite woman, turn to the Son of David for mercy. Jesus is the Son of David. Those who belong to His cross are His “city of Zion,” the city of the Living God. When Jesus called you into his Church, He gathered you into the assembly of all those who belong to Him. That is the promise of Zion brought to you and me and our families.But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable angels in festal gathering, and to the assembly of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the judge of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, and to Jesus, the mediator of a new [testament], and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel (Hebrews 12:22-24).In the Name + of Jesus. Amen.Dear Jesus, Son of David, bless your holy Church on Earth. Let us be glad in the Gifts of your Church and rejoice in your judgments of salvation by which you justify us. According to your promise, keep us in the assembly of your people gathered to your Name to receive your blood of the new testament for the forgiveness of sins. Amen.-Rev. Warren Graff, pastor of Grace Lutheran Church in Albuquerque, NMAudio Reflections Speaker: Pastor Jonathan Lackey is the pastor at Grace Lutheran Church, Vine Grove, KY.Spend time reading and meditating on God's Word throughout the Church Year with the Enduring Grace Journal. Includes scripture readings, prayers, prompts, and space for journaling. The Church Year Journal, Enduring Grace, now available from Concordia Publishing House.

Today on the IC-DISC show, join us for an insightful discussion with Laurie Barkman, a renowned CEO and author of The Business Transition Handbook. As the acclaimed Business Transition Sherpa, Laurie sheds light on the reality that all business owners will exit someday. We explore the challenges of selling a business, like why most small businesses don't sell successfully and the potential pitfalls of an exit. We also discuss relying on experienced advisors and how understanding taxes and markets can aid planning. Laurie shares invaluable advice on navigating this critical phase successfully. This episode is a must-listen for any business owner planning to navigate their business transition.   SHOW HIGHLIGHTS Laurie and I discuss her journey as a CEO and author of The Business Transition Handbook, providing insights into the realities of business transition. She highlights the hard truth of selling a business and how eight out of ten small businesses fail to do so successfully. We talk about the common pitfalls of business transition, the five "D's" that can disrupt a business, and the value of creating a satisfied client base. Laurie explains the unique challenges law firms face during business transition and offers her strategies for a smooth transition. We delve into the importance of a clear exit plan and the different options business owners have when transitioning their business. Laurie advises focusing on three primary goals during business transition: business, personal, and financial. We discuss the analogy of business transition planning to having a sherpa guide you through a treacherous terrain, making the process seem less daunting. Laurie emphasizes the significance of accountability in business and the benefits of having industry expert conversations during transition. We explore the upcoming online course based on Laurie's book that she plans to launch in the first quarter of 2024, aiming to reach a wider audience of entrepreneurs. We discuss the importance of having an experienced network of professionals to help businesses reach their goals and create a successful transition plan. LINKSShow Notes Be a Guest About IC-DISC Alliance About The Business Transition Sherpa About The Endgame Entrepreneurship Course GUEST Laurie BarkmanAbout Laurie TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) David: Hi, this is David Spray. Welcome to another episode of the IC Disc Show. My guest today is Laurie Barkman from Pittsburgh. Laurie is a really fun and interesting guest. She just released her first book entitled the Business Transition Handbook, and she is called in many circles the business transition, the idea being that a Sherpa guides somebody on a journey over a period of time rather than just a one-point event in time. Laurie has an impressive background as a former CEO of a large privately held company. She has a bachelor's and an MBA, and we talked about mistakes business owners make when they're transitioning their business. We talked about the sober reality that 100% every last business owner is going to exit their business and the question is will it be on their terms or someone else's? So there is some great advice and information for any company, any business owner who is looking to exit their business at some point, and I think you'll get a lot of value from this. Good morning, laurie. How are you today? Laurie: David, hey, great to see you, I'm awesome. David: That is great. Now, where are you located today? Laurie: I'm in the great city of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. David: Yes, now are you a native of Pittsburgh. Laurie: I am not. I am not. I'm an adopted daughter of the city. I'm originally from Albany, New York. David: Okay, so Ithaca wasn't too far to go for you. Laurie: That's right, it was not. It was only about three hours away. David: Okay, and then what brought you to Pittsburgh? Laurie: After graduating from college, my husband and I moved around Pennsylvania with different corporations. I was with Aigner Sol Rand Company and I was with a division in Shippensburg and after four years decided to get my masters, get my MBA, and decided to move to Pittsburgh. My husband had gotten a nice job with McKinsey and company and here we are. Okay 25 years later. David: You got your MBA in Pittsburgh, right at Carnegie. Laurie: Mellon. I did at Carnegie Mellon okay. David: Well, let's dig into this. So the business transition Sherpa. Where did this nickname come from? Did you come up with this yourself, or did somebody else give you that title? Laurie: You know, it's kind of an amalgamation of things. I remember talking to my husband about a trip that he and I had taken in 1997. We did a trek, we did a hike, and this idea of somebody guiding you and stuck with me. And as I was thinking about what I'm doing, working with business owners, it's not just one moment in time, it's over a period of time, and I really feel like my role is to be a guide. I don't have all the answers. I have a path, I have tools and, just like a Sherpa and the great work that they do, it's that same idea is we're on a journey together. Entrepreneurs build their business, sometimes on their own, but most likely not. Entrepreneurs are building their companies with other people, and so when they get to this other side of the mountain, so to speak, and thinking about their next chapter, why would they go about that by themselves? And I want to be the person that helps guide them. David: Yeah, I love the description of what you do because it picks up the fact that it's a journey, it's not a point in time and it's tough to do by yourself. In my experience I've just closely held small to medium sized business owners. Only sell a business once right, that's right. Laurie: We can regret things in our experience. We can regret what we do and wish we did something differently, or we do not take an action and we regret not taking that action. And my book the whole reason I wrote the book the business transition handbook was to help people proactively so that they don't have regrets. It's a very big, lofty goal to not have regrets in life, but if we can be proactive and we can understand what it takes to build a more valuable, transferable business and then understand what resources we might want to have on our side. I like to say, David, you can't do exit planning when you're exiting. It's just too late. So if you give yourself a time and space to work on having a more valuable, transferable business, the good news is that it's going to be a lot more fun to run your company. It's going to have an economic benefit to you and then in the future you'll have more options. You'll have more valuable options too. David: Yeah, I really enjoyed reading your book. In fact, behind you there, I believe, there's a blown up cover. Yes, it is. Laurie: That's right. Yeah, it was really interesting to write the book. I guess I could say it's my first book. I don't know that I'll have a second, but this, no matter what, is my first book and it was challenging, but at the same time, it was fun. It was like a giant puzzle. Once I mapped out what I believe the big pitfalls are right. So the subtitle of the book is how to avoid succession pitfalls. Each chapter in the book and I don't know if you picked up on this as you were reading it but each chapter is a pitfall. What do you want to avoid? And so what I tried to do was put myself in the reader's seat, the entrepreneur's seat, and how I developed that perspective was from my own experiences, client experiences and then integrating case studies and other learnings from my podcast. I have a show called Succession Stories that you will be a part of soon, and there are so many valuable things to learn from other people's wins and losses and challenges, and that's what I have always sought out to do with my show. The show is about three years old at this point and when I was writing the book, I had, I think, about 120 recordings, so that's a lot of knowledge and content. And what was so fun for me, david, was I was going back into the archives of a discussion. Every show I have has a transcript and of course I don't remember everything. But when I would write a chapter and I would need a case study, I had space for a case study in that particular spot, for a particular topic I would think, okay, which shows, should I go back to dive into those transcripts and then find these golden nuggets and I it was just so interesting to have the recall in writing of oh yeah, you know, she said that was an amazing conversation, and you, my memories are not long, right, we have so many, only so much storage in our brains, exactly. So it was really cool to go back to that body of knowledge that I had created, and I began to appreciate that body of knowledge even more. I think this case studies bring the book to life. I'd like to hear what you think about that, but that's that's what I hear from my readers is they love the, the learning and the concepts, the business concepts in the book, and they think that it's like me having a conversation with them by sharing these case studies and stories along the way. David: Yeah, I agree there were a number of. I mean, there was a lot of great stuff in there, but some of the particular ones I kind of wanted to dive in with you on is so this is a little bit of a quiz to see how much of your book you remember Do. When somebody, when people, decide to sell their business, do they just automatically sell it or do some portion of them? Are they unable to sell the business? Laurie: There's a mix, as you can imagine. Yeah, what percentage are you? David: able to actually sell it in the small business space. Laurie: It's a surprisingly low number. You know the statistics out. There is that every two out of 10 companies in the lower middle market actually sell. So that leaves eight out of 10 not selling. And you could ask, well, why is that? And there's a lot of reasons why. Sometimes along the way we have the five D's kind of pop up, or always also known as the 60s. These D's are taboo things, sometimes we don't want to talk about them, but they're real and we do need to talk about them. It could be the debt of an owner. It could be divorce disaster like COVID you know we put it in that category or disaster like fires and the business or the market has experienced is something traumatic it could be. Did I say divorce already? Divorce is another D. So these D's are something we can plan for. We don't want them to happen but we do need to be prepared. So if we're not prepared for the 60s, they can really wreak havoc on a business. Particularly death. The death of an owner can throw a business into a tailspin and I did cover that at some you know level in the book with a couple of episodes, snippets of people who had experienced that. The other reason why businesses don't sell, david, is because they're just not transferable. If they are so owner dependent and owner centric, that can be a really big reason why it won't sell and it's hard for owners to see that. You know, sometimes owners think that they are the secret sauce. I have a business assessment that one time I'm marketing. The owner of a marketing firm took this assessment and she said oh my God, she goes. I didn't realize I was standing in the way. She thought she, you know, she's a photographer, she's the creative, she's got the client relationships and she realized at that moment oh my goodness, I am making my company less valuable. So there's a pivot in our brains when we recognize some of the elements that help create a more transferable business and companies that have an owner who don't necessarily see the business as an asset, they see it as a job or they see it as a piggy bank. Those are different things, because if you see your business as an asset, you're going to want to create value in that asset over time. You're also going to want to protect that asset. If it's a job, right, I just accepted what is. And it's not growing, it's staying the same. Maybe you're not reinvesting in the business. You're not reinvesting in yourself or your people. And let's just jump to an example. I have a client who, in his favor, had very loyal people Once he got to his sixties, as did his key employees, and everybody's looking to retire. Buyers looking at that business said oh my goodness, how transferable is this business when all the key people are going to retire at the same time? So he had saved money, so to speak, by not bringing in new people, kind of underneath and over a period of training. So he recognizes that now, but it's too late. David: Sure, yeah, I was having this conversation yesterday with a group of CEOs and we were talking about enterprise value, increasing it, owner dependency, and there's a guy that owns a small boutique intellectual property law firm and they were asking him how sellable law firms are in general and he said not very and from his perspective that he said there's things he could do to make the business run without him better. But his model that he really likes to work with his clients directly, he doesn't like an associate between them and so that in his and a couple of his clients are actually in the room and they're like, and he's like, yeah, if I had like some associates that could potentially lower the fees to a client, you know, because there's more leverage in the client. So like no, we'd rather pay more and have you. So I've noticed in professional services there's this tradeoff between what. If you really want to have delighted clients, sometimes that's at odds with making your business the most valuable. And I know my business is like that. I mean I've got huge owner dependency issues because I am the key relationship, but I've gotten peace with the fact that it's just not very sellable and I like being a craftsman and just like it hit. Laurie: Yeah, and that isn't that the important thing. If you recognize it and are accepting of it, hey, you know what? That's okay. Not every business is going to be an asset to sell to another buyer and that's totally okay with the law firm. Just to circle back, because I do have some professional experience with law firms, one of the catch 22 things about law in particular is the code of ethics that they have to abide by. David: The non-competence, the non-compete. Laurie: Yeah. So if a lawyer leaves a law firm, they you know there's certain restrictions on when they can inform their clients and taking their clients with them, and I know there's lots of gray areas. I'm not going to talk about all of the nuances there. My point is that with law firms also there could be other types of professional services that run into this, but in law in particular what clients will say is that they hire lawyers, not law firms. Yeah, and so when you're tied let's just like you're talking about with that particular partner that the clients are willing to pay more because they want to work with that particular partner it could be highly likely that client would jump and go with them, no matter where they are. That can be particularly concerning for an acquiring firm, knowing that they may have some stickiness to certain clients and then they may not have other stickiness. So it really is dependent If there's a firm that's acquisitive and looking at buying other professional services, whether it's law or any other profession. I work with engineering firms quite a bit and in engineering firms there might be contracts but those contracts are not assignable and it might influence not only the type of transaction that we would do, whether an asset sale or entity sale, but it also would influence potentially on the transition for the sellers and how long they might want to stay, or the buyers might want them to stay under either an employment agreement or consulting agreement. It could also influence whether or not there's an earn out. You could structure an earn out, for example, if the buyer wants to structure an earn out to ensure a certain percent of those contracts are assigned over whatever time period or year and a half. So it could influence it in a big way. David: Talk to me about, and thank you for that. Talk to me about what you enjoy most, about being a business transition or not. I shouldn't say A, but the business transition, Sure. What are some of the aspects of that in working with those companies that you just find particularly satisfying or rewarding? Laurie: One of the things that I experienced as a CEO of a privately held company was the loneliness and being in my own head and having big questions and not really knowing where to go. I find that I bring kind of this EQ, if you will, of smarts and know-how and experiences and questions, and then I bring excuse me, the IQ around that, then the EQ, which is more of the emotional side. I've always been a kind of person that people confide in. Obviously, this is a highly confidential type of scenario but, I talk with my clients about the business. for sure, that's the practical side of everything, but we also talk about the personal side. We have to talk about them because remember earlier in our conversation I talked about regrets and there's some alarming statistics out there about experiencing regrets at least one year after the sale. I'm kind of on this mission to help business owners find clarity, and find clarity in a way that makes sense for them, for their family, for their stakeholders, which includes employees and other shareholders and their communities that they serve. A lot of people feel after a transaction that they let so-and-so down. Maybe they let their employees down, maybe they let their communities down. I had a guy in my show whose family business fourth generation chlorine cleaning product was sold in grocery stores and he could not walk down the aisle anymore. He couldn't bear to see that product under another name or by another. He said, yeah, there was a pride. We used to the small town and we had our name on the baseball team and people knew who I was. The identity that this particular person had his family name was on the company. Identity is a really big part of it, david. People go through almost like a withdrawal If they're not excited about what's next, this pull factor, what's pulling you forward to your next thing? If we're not excited about it, it can be really. You can imagine worst case scenarios. Those things do happen. But the in-between space is not that great either, for what makes me feel that I'm helping entrepreneurs? I've always orbited entrepreneurs with a great respect for the risk that they take. I've come to know family businesses as a category. Also. There's the founder-led, family-led, privately held company. I've worked in venture backed, so no offense to venture backed folks, but they're not really a focus for me. I'm really focused on call it the bootstrapped or family-led companies where they're the everyday entrepreneur making it happen. The sense of clarity clarity on three core types of goals is where we focus business, personal and financial. There's a lot of work to be done there. I think that's what makes me motivated, makes me feel appreciated by my clients. They are awesome people. I work with some amazing people that are doing really wonderful things for their community, for their family. They have excellent intentions. They just don't know how to put it all together. I don't either. I don't have all the answers, as I said earlier, but what I do have is I have an awesome Rolodex and I have an awesome way to bring professionals together and collaborate and help my client assemble a business owner transition team advisory team to help them make big decisions along the way. Again, this clarity is the number one thing that I think my clients benefit from. David: Yeah, no, that's really important because, as you talk about in the book, unfortunately 100% of the business owners are going to exit the business, just like 100% of us are going to exit this earth. I was thinking when you were talking about that fourth generation gentleman who couldn't walk down the grocery aisle, but it's one of those things, but it wasn't like he really had. He must not have had a great way to avoid that, because he wasn't going to run the business forever. So you come into what are the options? Basically, if somebody's not immortal, what are the options to exit a business? Because there's several paths, right? Laurie: Yeah, absolutely. Just to finish the statement with 100% of business owners are going to leave one day, there's a big however, you know. However, very few are planning for that day To leave on their terms, and when we have a plan, we're more likely to achieve it. That's just how it works, right. That's why we do strategic planning for businesses. So why don't we do strategic planning for our exit or our transition? And that's really the main advocacy I have in the book is let's have a process, let's have an understanding of what it takes. So to your question I think I address it quite a bit in one of my favorite chapters, which I think is chapter six, which is who should own your business after you, and it shines a spotlight on the different kinds of buyers. When I do workshops, david, I do webinars and I do in-person workshops, and I put up this slide and I have essentially three columns and I go through some examples of each bucket three buckets and people's eyes light up, they take out their camera, they start taking photos of this one particular slide and it is enlightening because we hear about certain kinds of buyers and we don't know that there might be other options out there and maybe not every option is a fit. So what I advocate for is let's understand what are some exit options for your company and which ones might be a better fit than others, and why let's prioritize those and let's come up with option A, b, c and if option A doesn't work out, then we know we've got an option B. It's just like in any negotiation If you have the power to walk away, then you know you're going to get the right deal for you. It's when you don't feel that you have any other options that you feel pinched. So that's why back to the conversation about the five or sixties if an owner passes away and the company is going in a tailspin, with employees leaving and the spouse doesn't know what to do, and they've inherited this company. They've never worked in it, it's a mess and the buyers come out like sharks and there's chum in the water. We want to avoid that. We want to avoid that. So, yeah, I mean we could talk about what. Who are the different kinds of buyers, if you want. David: Sure, yeah, because I mean, I, just off the top of my head, we've got passing it on to the next generation selling it to the employees. A third party buyer? What are some of the other options? Laurie: Yeah, let me just frame it out and that way, visually, I'm kind of working left to right as I talked about these three columns and I put it in that order for a reason. So the first column is strategic buyers, the middle is financial buyers and the one on the right is related buyers. So the examples you mentioned, family and managers would be in the related buyers category. Typically speaking, that is going to be more of a fair market value type of approach to valuing the business, of what price you might expect for your business, and if you kind of go left on that chart then the price expectation should go up right. David: Strategic generally not always generally speaking, will pay the most. Laurie: And why is that? Well, and also, what's a strategic? So a strategic is an entity, it's a company, it could be a competitor, it could be a marketplace vendor, it could be a customer, it could be an adjacent industry to yours where they want to make moves, either geography wise, or into your industry, if they're not part of it yet. So those are strategic and, typically speaking and this was my experience going through a pretty big M&A transaction with a third generation company that we were acquired by a Fortune 50. And, believe me, they had an M&A playbook and when they're that big and they've done that many transactions, so for us it was understanding what's the fit, what will this look like? And for them, I'm sure, in their financial models, it was about leverage what assets do they keep, what employee teams might they cut and how do they gain some cost leverage? And so that's typical where these pieces of the business might be kind of bolted into something else. Maybe it's standalone, maybe it's bolted in, but that's typically why strategic can pay more, because on the back end, as they're modeling out their financials, they know what costs they're going to take out. We don't necessarily know that, but that's what they're looking at. Financial buyer most often we think of private equity firms, and private equity groups will invest on a time horizon roughly five to seven years could be longer and they'll want to buy low, sell high, and so in between, they're investing in that business to improve it, they're putting in management teams and they will take a larger entity, maybe keep it as a standalone and that would be a platform deal. And a platform deal may eventually have other firms acquired to tuck underneath it. Those acquisitions we call tuck ins or add ons. And because they are taking assets and putting them into something larger, you could say, oh well, that kind of sounds like the strategic. And the answer is, yeah, kind of does. So that's why, in a private equity deal, the hybrid, as we might also call it, could, from a multiple standpoint, look more like a strategic offer. So that's just a little financial nuance there. But typically speaking, private equity groups are going to be the biggest, you know, the biggest buyers out there. There's still a lot of dry powder and another big category that I like to spotlight. Well, there's two others I would put under this financial bucket. One is family offices might be investing in privately held companies in different asset classes. So, for example, I had a family office. Second generation was on my show and he talked about what he and his father's investment thesis is. And they're focused on warehousing, like storage, you know, storage unit for consumer storage so you can rent one for a year or whatever and put your stuff in it. So he liked they like that asset class because it has a recurring revenue model to it. And that's just one example. And what's really interesting, if you compare the time horizons for these investments, well, a family office is looking for a buy and hold, more likely than buying, selling a short period of time. So, as I said earlier about fit, this is where it's really important. If the seller doesn't want to be in a situation where it could be sold to the one fish and gobbled up by another. They want to be held for like a longer period of time and perpetuity. Then maybe they should look to you know, talking with family offices who are doing acquisitions in their space. So that's a category that is kind of under the radar and I just put a spotlight on in the book. And then the third one are ESOPs, which is a you know, think of it like an almost like a 401k program for your people. When they retire from your company, they're incentivized to stay, and when they retire they will get a distribution check, and so an ESOP is an interesting option for some other companies Again, not a fit for everyone, but it might be a fit for companies of a larger size with enough employee base, where, again, you're going to have a liability at some point to pay these people, so you have to be able to fund that. But what happens in that transaction is that the company becomes a tax-free entity, and so that's a real incentive, you know for companies to reinvest and acquire others, and it can be very positive for the culture too, yeah. David: I know quite a bit about ESOPs because you were kind enough to introduce me to Mike Silverman and in fact he and his partner, Matt were, I guess, in my podcast a few episodes ago and it's really interesting on some of the ESOP opportunities. And I'm glad you brought up the family office because, right, people don't think of that. Laurie: But when? David: I think about the. What I think of philosophically is the super family office. I think about Berkshire Hathaway's acquisition targets. But the problem is I think now they're up to where. When I started reading Warren's annual letters, they were looking for businesses with enterprise value, I think of like 25 million and up, and I think the last I checked it's half a billion or a billion and up. Just because $25 million companies don't move the needle for them. But yeah and it's kind of like their sales pitch is similar to the family office sales pitch. So I guess one way to think of it is, if you like being an aquire of Berkshire Hathaway but you're smaller than a half a billion dollars, then maybe a family office might make sense. But even then when you think about Berk acquisition requirements. They want a business that runs independently of them. They do not want to manage the business. So you're right back to. A business that can run without the owner is more valuable for everybody. Laurie: Yeah, they have the portfolio largely independent of each other. They've kept the brands, I think, pretty separate because they appreciate the brand and the competitive moat, as they like to call it, around that business. I think they look for companies that have a competitive market differentiation, so it makes sense that they don't muddle the water. David: Yeah. Laurie: Yeah. David: Have there been any positive surprises from writing the book that you didn't anticipate when you wrote? Laurie: it Surprises. Let me think about that. I think just the reviews have been so delightful and meaningful to me and I guess I just didn't think about it. I don't know that it's a surprise, it was just. Maybe I could say a surprise and delight just to see how this book is helping people or how they've shared told me that it's helping people. I think that has been a really lovely outcome. As an author, you put good in the world and you hope goodness comes back, or you hope that it's helping, but you don't really know unless people tell you, and so that's been really great, I would say. The other is with my clients. I have my clients and meet with them on a regular basis and I have clients that are reading the book and then when I meet with them they're like, yeah, I just read chapter five, let's talk about it. So this combination of I'm not going to quite do this myself, I'm going to read the book, I'm going to get knowledge, but I still want to work with someone to help me along the way, was really reinforcing that what I expected. I expected that, frankly, and I think it's important. I do think people can go through this book on their own and at some point in this call give, I'll give the listeners an option to how to make the most of it, but you can do it on your own. You can. What I think is human nature is we want someone to hold us accountable, and that's, I think, not again not necessarily a surprise, but very reinforcing. That is true and that's why just a kind of a pre announcement here I'm going to be creating an online course from the book so that it can help more people in a different way, and hopefully they'll watch the videos and they'll read the book, and I, what I'm aiming to do is reach a wider audience of entrepreneurs, not just the people who are, you know, three to five years out. This is really a book, I think. If you are beyond startup phase but you're growing your business, why not read this book and understand what it's going to take to create a more valuable exit when you're ready? So it's exciting. I'm planning to launch it in the first quarter of 2024. David: Oh, that is exciting. If somebody is interested in learning more about that is do you have any place for them to go yet, or are we too soon? Laurie: We are too soon, but that's a great idea. I should put up like a waiting list or something on my website, but the businesstransitionhandbookcom is the website page for the blog BusinessTransitionHandbookcom. Yeah, the businesstransitionhandbookcom is a page on my site, so they'll see all other pages too, but this is the landing page for the book, so what I might do is put up I'll put up a blurb at some point about awaiting this for the class. And yeah, no, I'm excited about it. Like I said, I aim to reach more people and help more people with it. David: Yeah, and you know that accountability is interesting, because one of the things I see with our clients is that one of the things that's interesting about our clients is that 90% of them have revenues between 10 and 100 million probably somewhere in the light of your clients and the vast majority of them do not borrow money. They've been financially successful enough. They've been able to, you know, internally find growth and because of in that, in addition to other reasons, and most of these also, it's a single shareholder, they don't have a board, and so these clients have zero accountability, like their only accountability is like to their family, to make sure that you know the monthly income is what they're hoping it would be. But you know, they don't have a bank to be accountable to, they don't have a board, they don't have other shareholders, so I can see where that accountability is something that they could be really helpful for them, that they don't really have anywhere else. Now, of course, they may have done that on purpose. Maybe they didn't really like being accountable. You know they were an accountable employee and then they borrowed money from the bank to start a business, so maybe they don't really like me. What do you think? Laurie: I have a client that's about 120 million revenue business in the call it food production space and he's very purposeful, has very good intentions for transition with his daughter over time and really wants to see her be successful in the company and grow with the company. And his partner, to his credit, said hey, not real name. You know, joe, you're going to want we should do a new operating agreement. You know your daughter's in the business now. She's doing a great job. We need a new operating agreement. And this operating agreement was sitting on my client's desk coffee stains. You know he literally had it in the corner of his desk. He told me he was there for nine months and then I met him in a workshop and then that was it. He said oh, that's it, I have to do something. I can't just keep looking at that document. And of course in the transition it's more than just the operating agreement. But it was so many other things too and he just the accountability was really good for him. He needed that. He really did because he had the intention to do it. It just was, you know, backburner and it was never the thing to do when all these other important things are common. Adam. David: Now that makes sense, and I just want to be clear businesstransitionbookcom or businesstransitionhandbookcom. Laurie: I just want to make sure I had it. Yeah, that's okay. It's the title of the book. Yeah, oh it's the. David: Okay yeah, I'm looking at the book. Okay, yeah, that is easy note to remember. What do you enjoy the most about your podcast? Trying to switch gears a little bit. Laurie: I love talking with people on my show about what's worked for them, what they've learned and what they would do differently and if I have an entrepreneur. I have two kinds of entrepreneurs that come on the show. One type is looking in the rearview mirror and that's where they'll get the lessons learned right. We really learn a lot from others where it just didn't quite go the way they would have liked and when they have successes, of course we learn a lot from that too. So that's one type of entrepreneur. The other type of entrepreneur is looking forward and I've started to have more conversations with entrepreneurs and I'm asking them questions about their legacy and how their intentions are for their transition and legacy, if they're open to sharing it. I've had a gentleman came on my show. He's in the HVAC space and he had let his company, his partner, know his intentions to retire in three years and it was almost like this huge weight was lifted off his shoulders and now that it's out there, they can create plans, they can work on things and it's a little bit freeing to do something like that. Other people who aren't quite ready to say what it is they want to do. We talk a little more generally about what's important to them as they think about transition and leaving a meaningful legacy for their stakeholders or family or employees, and I'm really enjoying those conversations. I also talk with people who are experts in the industry on some particular topic, like tax advisors, financial advisors, legal advisors, and those conversations are wonderful because then, as I build my Rolodex of professionals that are able to be the best fit for my clients, it's a wonderful way to do business development and people who listen to the show have. You know, not every listener becomes a client, but I have had listeners reach out. They've listened to succession stories for a year, two years, whatever it is, and they reach out and they said Lori, a longtime fan would love to talk with you. And the resources that are available from the show are on my website, like business assessments and different articles and knowledge articles give plenty of videos and ask to help people learn about different topics. So I feel like this body of knowledge. You know this thought leadership type of approach where if people listen, they learn about me, they learn about what would they do, and then maybe they want to follow up. You know is pretty exciting. So I really like that. I like when I hear from my audience. They tell me what's an interesting topic to them or questions they might have, and I think the learning is really the main thing. I'm a continuous learner I always have been and I find that with every show I'm learning something. You know, I'm learning something every time and I just love that. David: Yeah, and I've probably listened to half of your episodes. I suppose and you know that episode you have with Mike Silverman was really memorable that you know have had to introduce several clients to Mike, and so I think having the advisors on is also a great idea and that's kind of how you fit short of on my show, right? We're not talking about the ICDisc program at all, but you're somebody who my clients outside the ICDisc may find value to this conversation and yeah and I'm like you I love to hear, to hear, people's stories on the Colby. I'm an 8643, which I don't know. If you know the Colby, I do know the Colby. So I'm. That's what's called high fact finding. Okay, so I lead with the fact finding. So for me, I'm always more comfortable, you know, asking questions than answering them. Maybe that's from childhood trauma, where I was forced to answer too many uncomfortable questions by my parents. I don't know. Well, I can't believe how the time has flown by. By the way, what's your website? Laurie: My website is thebusinesstransitionsherpacom. David: Oh, okay, I like it. Laurie: Thank you, you know. I just wanted to mention David, because if your listeners are finding this topic helpful, that's good, you know, and then they probably might be wondering well, what's the next step? Or you know how do I sort of take small nibbles as opposed to biting off a whole arm, and I would recommend that. You know, I don't want people to feel overwhelmed, I want them to feel reassured that we have a process and we'll work with them to meet them where they are and I guess the you know. The next thing would be to reach out and whether they are in a mode of transition and planning, which is what I'll call pre-M&A right, not that they have to sell, but just conceptually. And then, for folks who are anticipating selling to a third party or a family member, you know that transaction somehow some way. So I'm a certified Mergers and Acquisitions Advisor and can help steer them on that path, from the practical side as well as the emotional side, to get a deal done that makes them happy. Okay, I like it. David: If people want to reach out to you, is LinkedIn probably the best way. Laurie: Yeah, linkedin's a great way. Let me know that you heard me on the show. That would be awesome, and I think, david, you'd probably love to know that too. And they could reach me on my website. As you said, the business transition Sherpa, there's a spot to book directly with me. We can connect via Calendly. David: Okay, and then what's the website for the podcast? Laurie: Successionstoriescom is the name of the show and again, you can find it directly on my website in the podcast section. All the catalog of the shows are there, but it's in every type of platform, so if you're Apple or Spotify or whatever you like, you'll find it. David: That's great. So here's the surprise question I promised you. Laurie: So I have two questions left. David: And so here comes the surprise one. So if you could go back in time and give advice to your 25 year old self, what advice might you give? Laurie: I think I should have bought a business. David: Okay, so you would have encouraged yourself to buy a business. Laurie: Yes, when I was 25 and I was graduating from my master's program. It was all about the next great tech startup, yeah, and creating that from scratch. And that wasn't me, yeah. But I knew I wanted to be an entrepreneur. I just didn't feel like that was me in that mold. And I think now I'm more attuned to entrepreneurs through acquisition, you know as a category, and I didn't mention them, but they also would fall under the financial buyer category and there are many of them out there, not just in the US but around the world, who are interested in being part of that succession plan for a founder next generation leader. David: If you do you ever listen to the my First Million podcast. Laurie: I'd spent a while, but I'm familiar with it. You like that. David: They had a guest on recently. That is probably certainly my top five favorite podcast interviews ever and it's about a woman Sarah I forget her last name, but she was getting her MBA and decided she was going to buy a business with and she had zero money. She was going to buy a business you like these real estate advertisements? Buying real estate with no money down. She was going to buy a business with no money down and it's just a fascinating story of the process she went through through in just an astonishingly wonderful interview that I couldn't recommend highly enough. So apparently she was able to somehow go back in time and give her a 25 year old self that advice because she managed to pull that off. That's very cool. Is there anything we didn't cover that you wish we had? Laurie: Well, I think just to reiterate for people that when time is on your side, you can make an impact on your future and give yourself the space to work on your business and not just in your business. That would probably be my main advocacy and surround yourself with people that can help hold you accountable to the process and meet you where you are. So if they are just thinking about it, trying to figure it out, trying to understand what's their business worth today, yeah, that's a great place to start to. You know, try to figure out and model. Where are you now, where do you want to be and what's the gap and how are you going to get there? David: That's awesome, Laurie. I really appreciate your time on the show and I appreciate you taking the time to be on here. Laurie: Well, David, thank you for having me. I know this is my second time around you and I talked on a different show. We did. David: Yeah, we did. Laurie: It's lovely to be back with you and reconnect, and I'm just so glad that you are sharing this content with your audience, and I appreciate you, thank you. David: Yeah, it is my pleasure. Well, I hope you have a great day. Laurie: You too. Special Guest: Laurie Barkman.

Welcome to the STaR Coach Show! However you show up in this big world of coaching, there is something here for you in today's show. We are discussing how finding the edge lights you up and propels your business forward. Join us to learn more! David Wood is a former consulting actuary to Fortune 100 companies. He built the world's largest coaching business, becoming #1 on Google for life coaching and coaching thousands of hours in 12 countries around the globe. In addition to helping others, David is no stranger to overcoming challenges himself, having survived a full collapse of his paraglider and a fractured spine, witnessing the death of his sister at age seven, anxiety and depression, and a national Gong Show experience (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgKwAJieQes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgKwAJieQes)). David coaches high-performing business owners to double their revenue, and he helps them maximize their time off by focusing on less and being 30% more courageous in their business or career. Show Highlights: ● David's work today and the winding road that brought him here from a difficult childhood in Australia to consulting in NYC to coaching ● How his first coaching experience got him hooked on coaching forever--and how he's never looked back ● What it means to “play full out” as opposed to “playing it safe”(David shares his terrifying Gong Show experience.) ● How David “played full out” in becoming a speaker and pursuing his dreams of being an actor ● Three important questions: ○ What really matters to me right now? ○ What would I like to move toward at a faster pace? ○ If I was fearless, what would I do? ● Why it's important to find the sweet spot zone between playing it safe and playing full out ● David's current endeavors include coaching, working with business owners, writing The Mouse in the Room, Extraordinary Focus podcast, and his Tough Conversations podcast. ● Final words from David: “Have courage through a heart lens. Live life so that, when you're on your deathbed, you can say you gave it everything and really, truly lived.” Resources: Connect with David:  http://www.myfocusgift.com/ (My Focus Gift)  Find David on https://twitter.com/_focusceo?lang=en (Twitter), https://www.linkedin.com/in/focus-ceo (Linked In), and on Facebook at https://wwwlfacebook.com/extraordinaryfocus (Extraordinary Focus).

Son of David Have mercy on me ;

Son of David Have mercy on me ;

Preston owns Jensen Air in North Dakota, working primarily in a seasonal real estate   David: “Why don’t you tell us a little bit about your business and what you do? Preston started his drone business on the side. He defined himself as different than other drone business owners because his customer base was already in place. His brother—a real estate broker for Remax—needed someone to do commercial drone footage. Preston did a little research, figured he could do it and “pulled the trigger” on studying to fly a drone. Preston’s first drone was a Mavic Air, and has since upgraded to a Mavic Zoom, which handles the wind in North Dakota much better. Preston has a YouTube channel and recently aired a video on the remote ID—a big topic for drone pilots these days. Preston understands needing to keep the sky safe but believes it's making the playing field uneven for a small drone operators. David: “When did you first get started in drones? Two years ago, he started strictly doing drone photography for real estate for his brother. Once he got his license, he thought he may as well turn it into a business. He created a Facebook page and website. He’s continued to put out content, and his business has been getting more attention: “You've got to put out a little free content so people can see what you're capable of. You have to differentiate yourself from the rest of the crowd. The more you spread your work around, the more people will find out about you and hire you.” Now, Preston has premiere customers, including a local university and a development company. However, when he first put together some footage, he had to figure out what video editing software to use, how to get videos to customers, etc. These things were big learning experiences. He began just taking video clips and photos and giving real estate agents raw footage to make their own videos, although he would still make sure the clips were very cinematic. He likes to see how creative people can get with his shots. David: “Up in your neck of the woods, what would you charge for a typical real estate shoot where you're doing photos and video clips without any editing?” Preston charges $200, which is about ½ hour of shooting but editing and color grading afterward is what takes all the time. He uses Canva, Photoshop and Lightroom as his main editing tools. If he’s doing just photos, he charges about $150, but if it's multiple photos or panoramas, he'll charge $200. For a single photo or refresh on a house, he’ll usually charge $50. If he has travel out to rural areas, he’ll also charge a travel fee. Lastly, before he sends his drone up to shoot, he scans the yard to make everything look nice, which realtors appreciate. David: “Do you stay pretty busy—especially in wintertime or freezing conditions, which are not ideal drone or real estate selling weather?” Preston says the busy season is spring to fall; most of the activities slow down in the wintertime because the cold weather is hard on the equipment, specifically the battery. Also, realtors have better luck selling with photos that have lush green grass and trees—not snow pictures. David: “Have you found real estate to be successful? Have you expanded into other areas or are you sticking with that niche for now?” Although Preston says he’s sticking with the niche of real estate because it’s given him so much business over the past couple of years, he’s still willing to expand. For example, he’s interested in mapping, because he’s always nervous about the accuracy of the drone mapping. He’s also been talking to a local radio station trying to get into radio tower inspections. However, right now, he says, he costs a lot of money for them. David: “During your busy season—and only on the real estate side—how busy do you get? How many jobs are you getting per month?” Sometimes he may be swamped and doing a drone job over his lunch hour, sometimes not. He’s always taking photos and putting content up on Instagram and Facebook. His town flooded a little bit this past fall and he took pictures and posted it to a “What's Happening?” page in Valley City. The last time he checked, the site had 19,000 views, so it was an easy way to get great exposure. Sometimes he gets random calls – like someone wanting to borrow a clip for a promotional video, which was free advertising. David: “You’re doing this on the side of your regular job. You said you work as an office manager during the day—how has that helped you on the business side of drones?” It has really helped him save money. He can't just buy the most expensive video editing software. He has to take that into consideration, especially if just doing it as a side gig. Drone insurance was also difficult to find around where he lives. He now pays monthly for Skywatch so when it's cold or nasty outside, he doesn't have to pay for insurance. He pays for extra coverage with DJI and has liability insurance through the company. He used Squarespace to build his website and pays only $15-20 bucks per month for the site. He’s also taken advantage of Fiverr for design work. “I keep dumping all the money that I've made from my drone business back into the company—I keep improving software and equipment. I keep building myself up and making it better. If everybody else is improving what they're doing, you're gonna get left behind.” David: “For people at the beginning or just interested in listening to what others are doing— what would you recommend if they want a drone business but aren’t sure where to start.” Preston says the first thing to do is start studying for the Part 107. He says that will open doors—but it's not going to guarantee business. You have to go out and get that. “Be optimistic because there are many different avenues to make money with drones—mapping agricultural, public safety, all sorts of things. There's new technology coming out every day to make money from.” Another thing he says to do is to set up an artist's gallery on your website and throw up photos that people can order—HD, metal prints, canvases, any professional printing options. David: “Are people reaching out to you asking to be able to use footage that you already have?” Yes, I've had people contact me about using photos for their website, or as a background for Facebook. I said to go ahead and use it because it’s free advertising. Preston says most of his traction comes from Facebook and Instagram. Connect with Preston: Website: http://www.jensenairllc.com/ Facebook: @jensenairllc Instagram: @jensenairllc Have a Drone Business? Want to be Interviewed for Season 3? Complete this questionnaire: Drone to 1K Business Owner Application Training from Drone Launch Academy Part 107 Exam Prep Course ($50 off) Aerial Photo Pro Course ($50 off) Aerial Video A to Z Course ($100 off) Aerial Roof Inspection Pro Course ($100 off) Drones 101 Course ($20 off) Other Places to Listen iTunes Stitcher Google Play Spotify TuneIn

David Riley joins us on the BlueBay Insights podcast to share his thoughts on the latest actions from policymakers.We asked David:Have policymakers done enough to support the economy and financial markets?Are we over the worst of the sell off?In the short term - what indicators do you look to for insights?

Day 23 - COMPLETE! On Day 23, we completed 2 Samuel 17- 1 Kings 1, and the stories in these chapters are literally no different than the most popular dramas on ABC or NBC in 21st Century Pop-Culture. Long short, David has impregnated Bathsheba and murdered her husband, Uriah, in an attempt to cover up his error. Nathan, the prophet, exposes him and tells him that his entire family will be punished as a result. In the next chapter, Amnon, David’s son, rapes Tamar, David’s daughter. Absalom is David’s other son, and he finds out what Amnon did to his sister, and he waits for two years, and then kills Amnon. When David finds out about Tamar, he does nothing. And when David finds out about Amnon, he does nothing. Over time, Absolom decides that he will crown himself king. And around that same time, he plots to have his own father, David killed. So we see this interesting turn of events because Absolom wants to kill David, but David wants to save Absolom. In the middle of all of this, David’s nephew Joab, steps up to the plate and eventually kills Absolom so that David can stop “sleeping with one eye open and the other closed,” and when David finds out in 2 Samuel 18:33 he is distraught. He literally cries out, “o my son Absalom! If only I had died instead of you.” Because in part, this will always be his son, but on the other hand, this same son plotted to kill David. So in comes Joab with a strong word for David. At this point, Joab is the only person that can really tell David the truth and he says these words that resonated with me so deeply: 2 Samuel 19:6 You love those who hate you and hate those who love you. You have made it clear today that the commanders and their men mean nothing to you. I see that you would be pleased if Absolom were alive today and all of us were dead.” When I read those words, I thought about a play I wrote years ago titled LOVING YOU IS KILLING ME. Why? Because David was literally consumed by someone who was committed to destroying him. David couldn’t see the truth that was staring right in front of him, but before we judge David, we first need to ask, have we ever been David? Have you ever been blinded by “love” that you didn’t see the “lust?” Have you even been so hung up on fixing something broken that you didn’t realize how much it was breaking you. I pray, ultimately, that God will open all of our eyes so that we don’t waste our time, energy, and love on people who, truly, want us dead.

Bill continues his distro hopping. We discuss the history of Linux and a wall-mountable timeline. Troy gives feedback on Grub. Grubb give feedback on finding the right distribution. Highlander talks communication security and hidden files. Ro's Alienware computer won't boot. David provides liks to articles. Episode 371 Time Stamps 00:00 Going Linux #371 · Listener Feedback 00:15 Introduction 00.54 Summer weather 01:43 Distro hopping: Ubuntu 18.04 again 04:46 Greg: GNU Linux Distributions Timeline 17:49 Troy: Grub and dual boot 24:06 Highlander: Hiding files 28:54 George: William and the unmountable drive 34:27 Highlander: Communications security 41:57 David: Have you seen these articles? 49:33 Grubb: Finding the right Linux distribution 60:10 Ro: Why won't she boot? 69:16 goinglinux.com, goinglinux@gmail.com, +1-904-468-7889, @goinglinux, feedback, listen, subscribe 79:41 End

Bill continues his distro hopping. We discuss the history of Linux and a wall-mountable timeline. Troy gives feedback on Grub. Grubb give feedback on finding the right distribution. Highlander talks communication security and hidden files. Ro's Alienware computer won't boot. David provides liks to articles. Episode 371 Time Stamps 00:00 Going Linux #371 · Listener Feedback 00:15 Introduction 00.54 Summer weather 01:43 Distro hopping: Ubuntu 18.04 again 04:46 Greg: GNU Linux Distributions Timeline 17:49 Troy: Grub and dual boot 24:06 Highlander: Hiding files 28:54 George: William and the unmountable drive 34:27 Highlander: Communications security 41:57 David: Have you seen these articles? 49:33 Grubb: Finding the right Linux distribution 60:10 Ro: Why won't she boot? 69:16 goinglinux.com, goinglinux@gmail.com, +1-904-468-7889, @goinglinux, feedback, listen, subscribe 79:41 End

Panel: David Kimura Eric Berry In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panelists talk amongst themselves about their favorite software, equipment, and apps. Both Eric and David thoroughly share their preferred picks within these categories, and they explain how and why they use the specified item. Check out today’s episode to hear more! Show Topics: 0:00 – Advertisement: Sentry.io 1:03 – David: Welcome! Today, Chuck is not feeling well. I am David and today we have Eric Berry on our panel today. It is just the two of us today. I want to talk about our development environment. What is your setup like? Do you have an office space and your hardware? 1:58 – Eric: I Have a room in my basement that has everything that I need. I do work from home. There is my guitar, my geek toys and more. For my hardware I am using 2017 MacBook Pro (16 GB of ram). The 13-inch is convenient, but I upgraded b/c I do a lot of traveling. I do pull the iPad out and use DUET. You no longer have to use a cord. I have a monitor that is 30-inches and it’s gorgeous. That is my hardware setup. I am not a mechanical keyboard guy, and I stick with the Apple super flat keyboard. I do use Bestand – it’s a holster for the keyboard and the track pad. What do you have? 4:35 – David: I have a Frankenstein setup. My needs change, over time, and when that changes my hardware changes. Back in the day I did not have a Mac and I used a Windows machine. I used to be a gamer, but then met my wife and then stopped b/c she didn’t like for me to waste time. My setup is more proper. I have a baseline iMac Pro b/c there was a great deal of $1,000 off. The other option was an iMac. I like the desktop b/c that’s where I do work – at home. It was a $4,000 investment. I am on my computer ALL the time it was worth it to me. I got the wall-mount for me, and I have more monitors wall-mounted, too. 8:00 – David: That is my monitor and computer setup. I have an eco-rhythmic keyboard b/c of childhood injuries. I have a really old Microsoft keyboard from 2005 something. It was cheap but I like the style of it. For my mouse I have a Logitech mouse. I love the feel of this thing. It has a side scroll left and right, and up and down. Especially when I am looking at code. It helps with my video editing, too. My mouse is my favorite to-date. I don’t have too much plugged into the Mac. I have a GoDrive, which has everything on it – my whole life’s work is on there. If there is ever an emergency I know to grab that. Back things up in case of an emergency would be my tips to you all. 11:40 – Eric: I have struggled with backing things up actually. The problem that I have is that I am constantly moving my laptop. I have this guilt and fear of doing it wrong. 12:33 – David: I have this work laptop – I don’t back that up every day.  David gives Eric his suggestions in regards to backing files up. David mentions Back Blaze. 14:05 – Eric: That makes sense. I live in the Apple eco-system. I have my phone, watch, 40 iPads, laptop – everything backs up to the Cloud. The date we are recording this is 10/30/18. Apple just announced a new upgrade. I feel like this could compete with an actual laptop computer. Eric asks David a question. 15:35 – David: ...My main problem with that is that you might already have a developmental machine. It’s a stationary computer then it’s not feasible to take on the go. I do have an iPad Pro and I will take that on the go. I can login to my home network. BLINK – I used on my iPad Pro. David continues to talk about his setup. 19:00 – Eric: I kind of agree with you. I have seen it used quite a bit. My brother does everything online for his job. The pros are that if you are training, and his company is configured that way. The pros is that you can code from anywhere on anyone’s computer. I am glad that it DOES exist. It’s not Cloud9 but someone does offer... 20:20 – David: I think going to a solo screen does hurt my productivity – working on the iPad vs. working on the computer. I could get faster and faster but only to a certain degree. If you have the resources – then I don’t think it’s sustainable. However, if you don’t have the resources it’s better than nothing. At least you are coding and that’s important. 22:15 – Eric: I think of the audience we cater to with Ruby Rogues. I wonder if our listeners are strapped for cash or if they do have the resources to get the job done? 22:48 – David: If you don’t have a lot of money, you don’t have to buy a Mac. If Cloud hosting isn’t your thing there are different options. You have DOCKER, and use Windows as your main editor, and the WSL. I wanted to do a test – I bout a laptop for $500-$700 and you can get away with doing what you need to do. Learning how to program and code with what you have is great! 25:00 – Advertisement – Fresh Books! 26:05 – Eric: Let’s talk about the software developer environment. Nate Hopkins isn’t on today, but you can’t change his mind – I am VEM all the way. I think Cuck is EMAX. 26:43 – Eric: What do you do? 26:45 – David: I use VS code. David talks about the benefits of using VS code. 27:37 – Eric: Yes, 100%. I met the lead engineer behind VS code. They just made a new announcement. I have been using VS code for quite a while now. The integrated terminal and other features are awesome. Pulling me out of Sublime Text was a really, really hard thing for me. 29:28 – David: Sublime text, yes, but I got tired of the 40-year long beta, and the lack of expanding it, too. VS code has won my heart over. 30:53 – Eric: My guess is that they are going to leave it alone. I am sure they will connect the 2 teams. Think of how much work has gone into ATOM. That would be a hard pill to swallow. 31:20 – David: At the end of the day, though, it is a company. You don’t need 2 different editors when they do the same thing. 31:40 – Eric: I would have to disagree with you. Maybe they won’t merge the 2 but they just become different between ATOM (React and React Native) and... 32:22 – David: Why would a company cancel something only have 1 season? (Clears throat...Fox!) 32:58 – Eric: I open very large files with Sublime. Sublime handles this very easily. This goes back to: why am I opening up very large files? 33:31 – David: It’s a log file don’t lie. 33:40 – David: What browser do you use? Safari? 34:03 – Eric: Safari is nice for non-developers. Safari is lightweight and very fast. I have been a browser whore. I go from bedroom to bedroom from Opera to Firefox to Chrome. I fall into the Chrome field though. I have a problem with Chrome, though, and that it knows me too well. Google can sell my data and they do. 37:14 – David: With BRAVE, weren’t they doing something with the block chain and bit coin to reward you for browsing? 37:38 – Eric: Yeah I think that’s being run by... 38:03 – David: I still use CHROME b/c I like the extensions. It’s important to know why you are picking a certain browser. When you are talking about development you need to know who your target audience is. What kind of apps do you use? 39:54 – Eric: It’s interesting to see how much traffic the Android Browser gets. You want to switch over to other parts? For my tech software...I use Polymail.io for email. I use THINGS to keep me on-track, I use SLACK, BRAVE BROSWER, iTerm3 and MERT. I use FANTASTICO (calendar), and I use BEAR (for my note taking). What about you? 41:21 – David: I use iTerm3, too. I’m on 3 different Slack channels. I have been using DISCORD. Other tools that I use are SPECTACLE (extension) among others. I try to keep it slim and simple, though. Another one is EasyRez (free download) and you can adjust the screen resolution on your desktop monitors. It’s important to target my audience better. I do like PARALLELS, too. 44:24 – David continues: Screenflow, Apple Motion, and Adobe After Effects CC. 45:04 – Eric: I use 1 PASSWORD and BETA BASE. 46:04 – David: Have you heard of Last Pass? 46:15 – Eric: Oh sure! I have been using though 1 Password and I guess there some loyalty there. 46:54 – David asks Eric a question about 1 Password about pricing. 47:12 – Eric: I want to pay with money than with something else. 47:23 – David: It’s owned by LogMeIn, and they have tons of experience with security. 48:00 – Eric: I am going to put an article here that compares all these different apps so you can see the similarities and differences side-by-side. 48:40 – David: Anything else? Banking passwords? 48:54 – Eric: Nah, I am excited to see where we are. I like Mojave for the desktop but I don’t like it for the constant number of resets that I’ve had to do. I love what I do. 49:34 – David: Yeah, I agree. I haven’t experienced any major setbacks, yet. 49:55 – Picks! 50:03 – Eric: I think this whole episode has been PICKS! 50:15 – Advertisement: Get A Coder Job! End – Cache Fly! Links: Get a Coder Job Course Ruby Rust Ruby Motion Ruby on Rails Angular React React Native Komodo Bestand Duet Atom.io EasyRez Polymail.io Docker Adobe After Effects CC LogMeIn Brave 1 Password iTerm3 VS CODE iPad Pro Last Pass GoDrive Mojave EMAX Back Blaze Discord Sublime Text AWS Cloud9 StatCounter GitHub: Mert Bear App Process.st Pi-Hole Sponsors: Sentry Cache Fly Fresh Books Picks: Dave ProxMox Pi-Hole Eric Open Source Funders

Panel: David Kimura Eric Berry In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panelists talk amongst themselves about their favorite software, equipment, and apps. Both Eric and David thoroughly share their preferred picks within these categories, and they explain how and why they use the specified item. Check out today’s episode to hear more! Show Topics: 0:00 – Advertisement: Sentry.io 1:03 – David: Welcome! Today, Chuck is not feeling well. I am David and today we have Eric Berry on our panel today. It is just the two of us today. I want to talk about our development environment. What is your setup like? Do you have an office space and your hardware? 1:58 – Eric: I Have a room in my basement that has everything that I need. I do work from home. There is my guitar, my geek toys and more. For my hardware I am using 2017 MacBook Pro (16 GB of ram). The 13-inch is convenient, but I upgraded b/c I do a lot of traveling. I do pull the iPad out and use DUET. You no longer have to use a cord. I have a monitor that is 30-inches and it’s gorgeous. That is my hardware setup. I am not a mechanical keyboard guy, and I stick with the Apple super flat keyboard. I do use Bestand – it’s a holster for the keyboard and the track pad. What do you have? 4:35 – David: I have a Frankenstein setup. My needs change, over time, and when that changes my hardware changes. Back in the day I did not have a Mac and I used a Windows machine. I used to be a gamer, but then met my wife and then stopped b/c she didn’t like for me to waste time. My setup is more proper. I have a baseline iMac Pro b/c there was a great deal of $1,000 off. The other option was an iMac. I like the desktop b/c that’s where I do work – at home. It was a $4,000 investment. I am on my computer ALL the time it was worth it to me. I got the wall-mount for me, and I have more monitors wall-mounted, too. 8:00 – David: That is my monitor and computer setup. I have an eco-rhythmic keyboard b/c of childhood injuries. I have a really old Microsoft keyboard from 2005 something. It was cheap but I like the style of it. For my mouse I have a Logitech mouse. I love the feel of this thing. It has a side scroll left and right, and up and down. Especially when I am looking at code. It helps with my video editing, too. My mouse is my favorite to-date. I don’t have too much plugged into the Mac. I have a GoDrive, which has everything on it – my whole life’s work is on there. If there is ever an emergency I know to grab that. Back things up in case of an emergency would be my tips to you all. 11:40 – Eric: I have struggled with backing things up actually. The problem that I have is that I am constantly moving my laptop. I have this guilt and fear of doing it wrong. 12:33 – David: I have this work laptop – I don’t back that up every day.  David gives Eric his suggestions in regards to backing files up. David mentions Back Blaze. 14:05 – Eric: That makes sense. I live in the Apple eco-system. I have my phone, watch, 40 iPads, laptop – everything backs up to the Cloud. The date we are recording this is 10/30/18. Apple just announced a new upgrade. I feel like this could compete with an actual laptop computer. Eric asks David a question. 15:35 – David: ...My main problem with that is that you might already have a developmental machine. It’s a stationary computer then it’s not feasible to take on the go. I do have an iPad Pro and I will take that on the go. I can login to my home network. BLINK – I used on my iPad Pro. David continues to talk about his setup. 19:00 – Eric: I kind of agree with you. I have seen it used quite a bit. My brother does everything online for his job. The pros are that if you are training, and his company is configured that way. The pros is that you can code from anywhere on anyone’s computer. I am glad that it DOES exist. It’s not Cloud9 but someone does offer... 20:20 – David: I think going to a solo screen does hurt my productivity – working on the iPad vs. working on the computer. I could get faster and faster but only to a certain degree. If you have the resources – then I don’t think it’s sustainable. However, if you don’t have the resources it’s better than nothing. At least you are coding and that’s important. 22:15 – Eric: I think of the audience we cater to with Ruby Rogues. I wonder if our listeners are strapped for cash or if they do have the resources to get the job done? 22:48 – David: If you don’t have a lot of money, you don’t have to buy a Mac. If Cloud hosting isn’t your thing there are different options. You have DOCKER, and use Windows as your main editor, and the WSL. I wanted to do a test – I bout a laptop for $500-$700 and you can get away with doing what you need to do. Learning how to program and code with what you have is great! 25:00 – Advertisement – Fresh Books! 26:05 – Eric: Let’s talk about the software developer environment. Nate Hopkins isn’t on today, but you can’t change his mind – I am VEM all the way. I think Cuck is EMAX. 26:43 – Eric: What do you do? 26:45 – David: I use VS code. David talks about the benefits of using VS code. 27:37 – Eric: Yes, 100%. I met the lead engineer behind VS code. They just made a new announcement. I have been using VS code for quite a while now. The integrated terminal and other features are awesome. Pulling me out of Sublime Text was a really, really hard thing for me. 29:28 – David: Sublime text, yes, but I got tired of the 40-year long beta, and the lack of expanding it, too. VS code has won my heart over. 30:53 – Eric: My guess is that they are going to leave it alone. I am sure they will connect the 2 teams. Think of how much work has gone into ATOM. That would be a hard pill to swallow. 31:20 – David: At the end of the day, though, it is a company. You don’t need 2 different editors when they do the same thing. 31:40 – Eric: I would have to disagree with you. Maybe they won’t merge the 2 but they just become different between ATOM (React and React Native) and... 32:22 – David: Why would a company cancel something only have 1 season? (Clears throat...Fox!) 32:58 – Eric: I open very large files with Sublime. Sublime handles this very easily. This goes back to: why am I opening up very large files? 33:31 – David: It’s a log file don’t lie. 33:40 – David: What browser do you use? Safari? 34:03 – Eric: Safari is nice for non-developers. Safari is lightweight and very fast. I have been a browser whore. I go from bedroom to bedroom from Opera to Firefox to Chrome. I fall into the Chrome field though. I have a problem with Chrome, though, and that it knows me too well. Google can sell my data and they do. 37:14 – David: With BRAVE, weren’t they doing something with the block chain and bit coin to reward you for browsing? 37:38 – Eric: Yeah I think that’s being run by... 38:03 – David: I still use CHROME b/c I like the extensions. It’s important to know why you are picking a certain browser. When you are talking about development you need to know who your target audience is. What kind of apps do you use? 39:54 – Eric: It’s interesting to see how much traffic the Android Browser gets. You want to switch over to other parts? For my tech software...I use Polymail.io for email. I use THINGS to keep me on-track, I use SLACK, BRAVE BROSWER, iTerm3 and MERT. I use FANTASTICO (calendar), and I use BEAR (for my note taking). What about you? 41:21 – David: I use iTerm3, too. I’m on 3 different Slack channels. I have been using DISCORD. Other tools that I use are SPECTACLE (extension) among others. I try to keep it slim and simple, though. Another one is EasyRez (free download) and you can adjust the screen resolution on your desktop monitors. It’s important to target my audience better. I do like PARALLELS, too. 44:24 – David continues: Screenflow, Apple Motion, and Adobe After Effects CC. 45:04 – Eric: I use 1 PASSWORD and BETA BASE. 46:04 – David: Have you heard of Last Pass? 46:15 – Eric: Oh sure! I have been using though 1 Password and I guess there some loyalty there. 46:54 – David asks Eric a question about 1 Password about pricing. 47:12 – Eric: I want to pay with money than with something else. 47:23 – David: It’s owned by LogMeIn, and they have tons of experience with security. 48:00 – Eric: I am going to put an article here that compares all these different apps so you can see the similarities and differences side-by-side. 48:40 – David: Anything else? Banking passwords? 48:54 – Eric: Nah, I am excited to see where we are. I like Mojave for the desktop but I don’t like it for the constant number of resets that I’ve had to do. I love what I do. 49:34 – David: Yeah, I agree. I haven’t experienced any major setbacks, yet. 49:55 – Picks! 50:03 – Eric: I think this whole episode has been PICKS! 50:15 – Advertisement: Get A Coder Job! End – Cache Fly! Links: Get a Coder Job Course Ruby Rust Ruby Motion Ruby on Rails Angular React React Native Komodo Bestand Duet Atom.io EasyRez Polymail.io Docker Adobe After Effects CC LogMeIn Brave 1 Password iTerm3 VS CODE iPad Pro Last Pass GoDrive Mojave EMAX Back Blaze Discord Sublime Text AWS Cloud9 StatCounter GitHub: Mert Bear App Process.st Pi-Hole Sponsors: Sentry Cache Fly Fresh Books Picks: Dave ProxMox Pi-Hole Eric Open Source Funders

Panel: David Kimura Eric Berry In this episode of Ruby Rogues, the panelists talk amongst themselves about their favorite software, equipment, and apps. Both Eric and David thoroughly share their preferred picks within these categories, and they explain how and why they use the specified item. Check out today’s episode to hear more! Show Topics: 0:00 – Advertisement: Sentry.io 1:03 – David: Welcome! Today, Chuck is not feeling well. I am David and today we have Eric Berry on our panel today. It is just the two of us today. I want to talk about our development environment. What is your setup like? Do you have an office space and your hardware? 1:58 – Eric: I Have a room in my basement that has everything that I need. I do work from home. There is my guitar, my geek toys and more. For my hardware I am using 2017 MacBook Pro (16 GB of ram). The 13-inch is convenient, but I upgraded b/c I do a lot of traveling. I do pull the iPad out and use DUET. You no longer have to use a cord. I have a monitor that is 30-inches and it’s gorgeous. That is my hardware setup. I am not a mechanical keyboard guy, and I stick with the Apple super flat keyboard. I do use Bestand – it’s a holster for the keyboard and the track pad. What do you have? 4:35 – David: I have a Frankenstein setup. My needs change, over time, and when that changes my hardware changes. Back in the day I did not have a Mac and I used a Windows machine. I used to be a gamer, but then met my wife and then stopped b/c she didn’t like for me to waste time. My setup is more proper. I have a baseline iMac Pro b/c there was a great deal of $1,000 off. The other option was an iMac. I like the desktop b/c that’s where I do work – at home. It was a $4,000 investment. I am on my computer ALL the time it was worth it to me. I got the wall-mount for me, and I have more monitors wall-mounted, too. 8:00 – David: That is my monitor and computer setup. I have an eco-rhythmic keyboard b/c of childhood injuries. I have a really old Microsoft keyboard from 2005 something. It was cheap but I like the style of it. For my mouse I have a Logitech mouse. I love the feel of this thing. It has a side scroll left and right, and up and down. Especially when I am looking at code. It helps with my video editing, too. My mouse is my favorite to-date. I don’t have too much plugged into the Mac. I have a GoDrive, which has everything on it – my whole life’s work is on there. If there is ever an emergency I know to grab that. Back things up in case of an emergency would be my tips to you all. 11:40 – Eric: I have struggled with backing things up actually. The problem that I have is that I am constantly moving my laptop. I have this guilt and fear of doing it wrong. 12:33 – David: I have this work laptop – I don’t back that up every day.  David gives Eric his suggestions in regards to backing files up. David mentions Back Blaze. 14:05 – Eric: That makes sense. I live in the Apple eco-system. I have my phone, watch, 40 iPads, laptop – everything backs up to the Cloud. The date we are recording this is 10/30/18. Apple just announced a new upgrade. I feel like this could compete with an actual laptop computer. Eric asks David a question. 15:35 – David: ...My main problem with that is that you might already have a developmental machine. It’s a stationary computer then it’s not feasible to take on the go. I do have an iPad Pro and I will take that on the go. I can login to my home network. BLINK – I used on my iPad Pro. David continues to talk about his setup. 19:00 – Eric: I kind of agree with you. I have seen it used quite a bit. My brother does everything online for his job. The pros are that if you are training, and his company is configured that way. The pros is that you can code from anywhere on anyone’s computer. I am glad that it DOES exist. It’s not Cloud9 but someone does offer... 20:20 – David: I think going to a solo screen does hurt my productivity – working on the iPad vs. working on the computer. I could get faster and faster but only to a certain degree. If you have the resources – then I don’t think it’s sustainable. However, if you don’t have the resources it’s better than nothing. At least you are coding and that’s important. 22:15 – Eric: I think of the audience we cater to with Ruby Rogues. I wonder if our listeners are strapped for cash or if they do have the resources to get the job done? 22:48 – David: If you don’t have a lot of money, you don’t have to buy a Mac. If Cloud hosting isn’t your thing there are different options. You have DOCKER, and use Windows as your main editor, and the WSL. I wanted to do a test – I bout a laptop for $500-$700 and you can get away with doing what you need to do. Learning how to program and code with what you have is great! 25:00 – Advertisement – Fresh Books! 26:05 – Eric: Let’s talk about the software developer environment. Nate Hopkins isn’t on today, but you can’t change his mind – I am VEM all the way. I think Cuck is EMAX. 26:43 – Eric: What do you do? 26:45 – David: I use VS code. David talks about the benefits of using VS code. 27:37 – Eric: Yes, 100%. I met the lead engineer behind VS code. They just made a new announcement. I have been using VS code for quite a while now. The integrated terminal and other features are awesome. Pulling me out of Sublime Text was a really, really hard thing for me. 29:28 – David: Sublime text, yes, but I got tired of the 40-year long beta, and the lack of expanding it, too. VS code has won my heart over. 30:53 – Eric: My guess is that they are going to leave it alone. I am sure they will connect the 2 teams. Think of how much work has gone into ATOM. That would be a hard pill to swallow. 31:20 – David: At the end of the day, though, it is a company. You don’t need 2 different editors when they do the same thing. 31:40 – Eric: I would have to disagree with you. Maybe they won’t merge the 2 but they just become different between ATOM (React and React Native) and... 32:22 – David: Why would a company cancel something only have 1 season? (Clears throat...Fox!) 32:58 – Eric: I open very large files with Sublime. Sublime handles this very easily. This goes back to: why am I opening up very large files? 33:31 – David: It’s a log file don’t lie. 33:40 – David: What browser do you use? Safari? 34:03 – Eric: Safari is nice for non-developers. Safari is lightweight and very fast. I have been a browser whore. I go from bedroom to bedroom from Opera to Firefox to Chrome. I fall into the Chrome field though. I have a problem with Chrome, though, and that it knows me too well. Google can sell my data and they do. 37:14 – David: With BRAVE, weren’t they doing something with the block chain and bit coin to reward you for browsing? 37:38 – Eric: Yeah I think that’s being run by... 38:03 – David: I still use CHROME b/c I like the extensions. It’s important to know why you are picking a certain browser. When you are talking about development you need to know who your target audience is. What kind of apps do you use? 39:54 – Eric: It’s interesting to see how much traffic the Android Browser gets. You want to switch over to other parts? For my tech software...I use Polymail.io for email. I use THINGS to keep me on-track, I use SLACK, BRAVE BROSWER, iTerm3 and MERT. I use FANTASTICO (calendar), and I use BEAR (for my note taking). What about you? 41:21 – David: I use iTerm3, too. I’m on 3 different Slack channels. I have been using DISCORD. Other tools that I use are SPECTACLE (extension) among others. I try to keep it slim and simple, though. Another one is EasyRez (free download) and you can adjust the screen resolution on your desktop monitors. It’s important to target my audience better. I do like PARALLELS, too. 44:24 – David continues: Screenflow, Apple Motion, and Adobe After Effects CC. 45:04 – Eric: I use 1 PASSWORD and BETA BASE. 46:04 – David: Have you heard of Last Pass? 46:15 – Eric: Oh sure! I have been using though 1 Password and I guess there some loyalty there. 46:54 – David asks Eric a question about 1 Password about pricing. 47:12 – Eric: I want to pay with money than with something else. 47:23 – David: It’s owned by LogMeIn, and they have tons of experience with security. 48:00 – Eric: I am going to put an article here that compares all these different apps so you can see the similarities and differences side-by-side. 48:40 – David: Anything else? Banking passwords? 48:54 – Eric: Nah, I am excited to see where we are. I like Mojave for the desktop but I don’t like it for the constant number of resets that I’ve had to do. I love what I do. 49:34 – David: Yeah, I agree. I haven’t experienced any major setbacks, yet. 49:55 – Picks! 50:03 – Eric: I think this whole episode has been PICKS! 50:15 – Advertisement: Get A Coder Job! End – Cache Fly! Links: Get a Coder Job Course Ruby Rust Ruby Motion Ruby on Rails Angular React React Native Komodo Bestand Duet Atom.io EasyRez Polymail.io Docker Adobe After Effects CC LogMeIn Brave 1 Password iTerm3 VS CODE iPad Pro Last Pass GoDrive Mojave EMAX Back Blaze Discord Sublime Text AWS Cloud9 StatCounter GitHub: Mert Bear App Process.st Pi-Hole Sponsors: Sentry Cache Fly Fresh Books Picks: Dave ProxMox Pi-Hole Eric Open Source Funders

Guest: Philip Poots: GitHub | ClubCollect Previous Episode: 056: Ember vs. Elm: The Showdown with Philip Poots In this episode, Philip Poots joins the show again to talk about the beauty of simplicity, the simplicity and similarities between Elm and Ruby programming languages, whether Elixir is a distant cousin of the two, the complexity of Ember and JavaScript ecosystems (Ember helps, but is fighting a losing battle), static vs. dynamic, the ease of Rails (productivity), and the promise of Ember (productivity, convention). The panel also talks about the definition of "quality", making code long-term maintainable, and determining what is good vs. what is bad for your codebase. Resources: Michel Martens mote Learn the Elm Programming Language and Build Error-Free Apps with Richard Feldman Worse is Better: Richard P. Gabriel Gary Bernhardt's Destroy All Software Screencasts Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values The Calm Company It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work This show was produced by Mandy Moore, aka @therubyrep of DevReps, LLC. Transcript: CHARLES:: Hello, everybody and welcome to The Frontside Podcast, Episode 113. My name is Charles Lowell. I'm a developer here at the Frontside and with me today are Taras Mankovski and David Keathley. Hello? DAVID:: Hey, guys. TARAS: Hello, hello. CHARLES:: And we're going to be talking with a serial guest on our serial podcast, Mr Philip Poots, who is the VP of engineering at ClubCollect. Welcome, Philip. PHILIP: Hey, guys. Thanks for having me on. CHARLES:: Yeah. I'm actually excited to have you on. We've had you on a couple of times before. We've been trying to get you on the podcast, I think for about a year, to talk about I think what has kind of a unique story in programming these days. The prevailing narrative is that folks start off with some language that's dynamically typed and object oriented and then at some point, they discover functional programming and then at some point, they discover static programming and they march off into a promised land of Nirvana and no bugs ever, ever happening again. It seems like it's pretty much a straight line from that point to the next point and passing through those way stations. When I talk to you, I guess... Gosh, I think you were the first person that really introduced me to Elm back at Wicked Good Ember in 2016 and it seemed like you were kind of following that arc but actually, that was a bit deceptive because then the next time I talked to you, you were saying, "No, man. I'm really into Ruby and kind of diving in and trying to get into Ruby again," and I was kind of like, "Record scratch." You're kind of jumping around the points. You're not following the preordained story arc. What is going on here? I just kind of wanted to have a conversation about that and find out what the deal was and then, what's kind have guided your journey. PHILIP: There was one event and that was ElmConf Europe, which was a fantastic conference. Really, one of the best conferences I've been to, just because I guess with the nature of early language, small conference environment. There's just a lot of things happening. There's a lot of people. Evan was there, Richard Feldman was there, the leading lights of the Elm community were there and it was fantastic. But I guess, one thing that people have always said to me is the whole way track is the best track of the conference and it's not something I really appreciated before and during the breaks, I ended up talking to a guy called Michel Martens. He is the finder of a Redis sourcing company and I guess, this was just a revelation to me. He was interested in Elm. He was friends with the guys that organized the conference and we got talking and he was like, "I do this in Ruby. I do this in Ruby. I did this in Ruby," and I was like, "What?" and he was like, "Yeah, yeah, yeah." He's a really, really humble guy but as soon as I got home, I checked him out. His GitHub is 'soveran' and it turns out he's written... I don't know, how many gems in Ruby, all with really well-chosen names, very short, very clear, very detailed. The best thing about his libraries is you can print them out on paper. What I mean by that is they were tiny. They were so small and I guess, I just never seen that before. I go into Ruby on Rails -- that was my first exposure to programming, that was my first exposure to everything -- unlike with Rails, often when you hit problems, you'd start to dive a bit deeper and ultimately, you dive so deep that you sunk essentially and you just accepted, "Okay, I'm not going to bend the framework that way this time. Let's figure out how everyone else goes with the framework and do that." Then with Ember when I moved into frontend, that was a similar thing. There were so many layers of complexity that I never felt like had a real handle on it. I kind of just thought this was the way things were. I thought it's always going to be complex. That's just the nature of the problem. That's just the problem they're trying to solve. It's a complex problem and therefore, that complexity is necessary. But it was Elm that taught me, I think that choosing the right primitives and thinking very carefully about the problem can actually give you something that's quite simple but incredibly powerful. Not only something quite simple but something so simple that it can fit inside your head, like this concept of a program fitting inside your head and Rails, I don't know how many heads I need to fit Rails in or Ember for that matter and believe me, I tried it but with Elm, there was that simplicity. When I came across this Ruby, a language I was very familiar with but this Ruby that I had never seen before, a clear example was a templating library and he calls it 'mote' and it's including comments. It's under a hundred lines of code and it does everything you would need to. Sure, there were one or two edge cases that it doesn't cover but it's like, "Let's use the trade off." It almost feels like [inaudible] because he was always a big believer in "You ain't going to need it. Let's go for that 80% win with 20% effort," and this was like that taken to the extreme. CHARLES:: I'm just curious, just to kind of put a fine point on it, it sounds like there might be more in common, like a deeper camaraderie between this style of Ruby and the style encouraged by Elm, even though that on the surface, one is a dynamically typed object oriented language and the other is a statically typed functional language and yet, there's a deeper philosophical alignment that seems like it's invisible to 99% of the discussion that happens around these languages. PHILIP: Yeah, I think so. I think the categories we and this is something Richard Feldman talks. He's a member of the Elm community. He does a lot of talks and has a course also in Frontend Masters, which I highly recommend. But he often talks about the frame of the conversation is wrong because you have good statically typed languages and you have bad statically typed languages. You have good dynamic languages and you have bad dynamic languages. For all interpretations of good and bad, right? I don't want to start any wars here. I think one of the things that Elm and Ruby have in common is the creator. Matz designed Ruby because he wanted programming to be a joy, you know? And Evan created Elm because he wanted programming to be a delight. I think if you experience both of those, like developing in both of those languages, you gain a certain appreciation for what that means. It is almost undefinable, indistinguishable, although you can see the effects of it everywhere. In Ruby, everything is an object, including nil. In Elm, it's almost he's taken everything away. Evan's taken everything away that could potentially cause you to stumble. There's a lot to learn with Elm in terms of getting your head around functional mindset and also, working with types but as far as that goes, people often call it like the Haskell Light, which I think those are a disservice to Elm because it's got different goals. CHARLES:: Yeah, you can tell that. You know, my explorations with Elm, the personality of Elm is 100% different than the personality of Haskell, if that is even a programming term that you can apply. For example, the compiler has an identity. It always talks to you in the first person, "I saw that you did this, perhaps you meant this. You should look here or I couldn't understand what you were trying to tell me." Literally that's how the Elm compiler talks to you. It actually talks to you like a person and so, it's very... Sorry, go ahead. PHILIP: No, no, I think the corollary to that is the principle of the surprise in Ruby. You know, is there going to be a method that does this? You type it out and you're like, "Oh, yes it is," which is why things like inject and reduce are both methods in enumerable. You didn't choose one over the other. It was just like, "Let's make it easy for the person who's programming to use what they know best." I think as well, maybe people don't think about this as deeply but the level of thought that Evan has put into designing Elm is crazy, like he's thought this through. I'm not sure if I said this the last time but I went to a workshop in the early days in London, which is my kind of first real exposure to Elm and Evan was giving the workshop. Someone asked him, "Why didn't you do this?" and he was like, "Well, that might be okay for now but I'm not sure that would make so much sense in 10 years," and I was kind of like, "What?" Because JavaScript and that ecosystem is something which is changing like practically hourly and this is a guy that's thinking 10 years into the future. TARAS: You might have answered it already but I'm curious of what you think is the difference, maybe it just comes down to that long term thinking but we see this in JavaScript world a lot, which is this kind of almost indifference to APIs. It almost doesn't really matter what the API is for whatever reason, there seems to be a big correlation between the API that's exposed with the popularity of the tool. I think there are some patterns, like something that's really simple, like jQuery and React have become popular because of the simplicity of their APIs. What the flip side to that? What other ways can APIs be created that we see in JavaScript world. Because we're talking about this beautiful APIs and I can relate to some of the work that Charles has been doing and I've been doing microstates but I wonder like what would be just a brief alternative to that API, so it's kind of a beautiful API. PHILIP: I don't know if anyone is familiar with the series of essays 'Worse is Better' like East Coast versus West Coast, from Richard Gabriel. The problem is, I guess and maybe this is just my understanding over my paraphrase of it, I'm not too familiar with it but I think that good APIs take time and people don't have time. If someone launches a V1 at first and it kind of does the job, people will use that over nothing and then whenever they're happy with that, they'll continue to use it and develop it and ultimately, if she's market share and then that's just the thing everyone uses and the other guy's kind of left behind like, "This is so much better." I guess this is a question, I think it was after Wicked Good Ember, I happened to be on the same trend as Tom Dale on the way back to New York and we started talking about this. I think that's his big question. I think it's also a question that still has to be answered, which is, "Will Elm ever be mainstream? Will it be the most popular thing?" aside from the question of whether it has to be or not. For me, a good APIs good design comes from understanding the problem fully -- CHARLES:: And you can understand the problem fully without time. PHILIP: Exactly and often, what happens -- at least this is what happens in my experience with the production software that I've written -- is that you don't actually understand the problem until you've developed a solution for it. Then when you've developed a solution for it, often the pressures or the commercial pressures or an open source is [inaudible] the pressures of backwards compatibility, mean that you can never refactor your way to what you think the best solution is and often, you start from scratch and the reality is people are too far away with the stuff you wrote in the past about the thing you're writing now. Those are always kind of at odds. I think there are a lot of people that are annoyed with Elm because the updates are too slow, it relies on Evan and we want to have a pool request accepted. All of the things that they don't necessarily recognize like the absence of which make Elm an Elm, if you know what I mean. The very fact that Evan does set such a high standard and does want everything to go through his personal filters because otherwise, you wouldn't gain the benefits that Elm gives you. The attention is very real in terms of I want to shift my software now and it becomes easier then. I think to go to a language like JavaScript, which has all of the escape hatches that you need, to be able to chop and change, to edit, to do what you need to do to get the job done and let's be quite honest, I think, also with Elm, that's the challenge for someone who's not an expert level like me. Once you hit a roadblock, you'll say, "Where do I go from here?" I know if I was using JavaScript, I could just like hack it and then clients are happy and everything's fine and you know there's a bit of stuff in your code that you would rather wasn't but at the end of the day, you go home and the job's done. DAVID:: Have you had to teach Elm to other people? You and I did some work like I've seen you pair with someone and guide them through the work that they needs to get done. If you had a chance to do something like that with Elm and see how that actually happens, like how do developer's mind develops as they're working through in using the tool? PHILIP: Unfortunately not. I would actually love to go through that experience. I hope none of my developers are listening to this podcast but secretly, I want to push them in the direction of Elm on the frontend. But no, but I can at least make from my own perspective. I find it very challenging at first because for me, being a Ruby developer and also, I would never say that I understood JavaScript as much as I would have liked. Coming from dynamic language, no functional experience to functional language with types, it's almost like learning a couple of different things at the same time and that was challenging. I think if I were to take someone through it, I would maybe start with a functional aspects and then move on to the type aspects or vice versa, like try and clearly breakdown and it's difficult because those two are so intertwined at some level. Gary Bernhardt of Destroy All Software Screencast, I watch quite a bit of his stuff and I had sent him an email to ask him some questions about one of the episodes that he did and he told me that he done the programming languages course, I think it's on Coursera from Daniel Grossman, so [inaudible] ML which is kind of the father of all MLs like Haskell and also Elm. I find that really helpful because he broke it down on a very basic level and his goal wasn't to teach you ML. It was to teach you functional programming. It would be a very interesting exercise, I think. I think the benefit that Elm gave you is you get to experience that delight very quickly with, "Oh, it's broken. Here's a nice message. I fix the message. It compiles. Wow, it works," and then there's a very big jump whenever you start talking about the effects. Whenever you want to actually do something like HTTP calls or dealing with the time or I guess, the impure stuff you would call in the Haskell-land and that was also kind of a bit weird. CHARLES:: Also, there's been some churn around that, right? PHILIP: That's right. When I started learning, they had signals, then they kind of pushed that all behind the scenes and made it a lot more straightforward. Then I just mastered it and I was like, "Yes, I know it," and then I was like, "All right. I don't need to know it anymore." This is the interesting thing for me because at work, most of our work now is in Elixir and Phoenix. I'm kind of picking a little bit up as I work with them. I think Elm's architecture behind the scenes is kind of based, I believe on Erlang's process model, so the idea of a mailbox and sending messages and dealing with immutable state. CHARLES:: Which is kind of ironically is very object oriented in a way, right? It's functional but also the concept of mailboxes and sending messages and essentially, if you substitute object for process, you have these thousands and thousands of processes that are sending messages back and forth to each other. PHILIP: Yeah, that's right. It's like on a grand scale, on a distributed scale. Although I wouldn't say that I'm that far with Erlang, Elixir to appreciate the reality of that yet but that's what they say absolutely. CHARLES:: Now, Phoenix and Elixir is a dynamically typed functional language. does it share the simplicity? One of the criticisms you had of Rails was that you couldn't fit it in your head. It was very difficult. Is there anything different about Elixir that kind of makes it a spirit cousin of Elm and the simple Ruby? PHILIP: I think so, yes. Absolutely. I don't think it gets to the same level but I think it's in the right direction and specifically on the framework front, it was designed specifically... I mean, in a sense it's like the anti-type to Rails because it was born out of people's frustrations with Rails. José Valim was pretty much one of Rails top core committers. Basically, every Rails application I wrote at one period, at 80% of the code written by José Valim, if you included all the gems, the device and the resourceful and all the rest of it. Elixir in many ways was born out of the kind of limitations of Ruby with Rails and Phoenix was also born out of frustrations with the complexity of Rails. While it's not as simple as say, Michel Martens' Syro which is like his web framework, which is a successor to Cuba if people have heard of that, it is a step in the right direction. I don't understand it but I certainly feel like I could. They have plug which is kind of analogous but not identical to Rack but then the whole thing is built out of plugs. I remember Yehuda Katz give a presentation like 'The Next Five Years' and essentially about Rails 3.0. This is going way back and Phoenix is in some ways the manifestation of his desire to have like the Russian doll pattern, where you could nest applications inside applications and you could have them side by side and put them inside each other and things like that. Phoenix has this concept called umbrella applications which tells that, like Ecto is a really, really nice obstruction for working with the database. CHARLES:: I see. It feels like, as opposed to being functional or static versus dynamic, the question is how do you generate your complexity? How do you cope with complexity? Because I think you touched on it at the beginning of the conversation where you thought that my problems are complex so the systems that I work with to solve those problems must necessarily also be complex. I think one of the things that I've certainly realized, kind of in the later stages of my career is that first part is true. The problems that we encounter are extremely complex but you're much better served if you actually achieve that complexity by composing radically simple systems and recombining them. To the commonality of your system is going to determine how easy it's going to work with and how well it can cope with complexity. What really drives a good system is the quality of its primitives. PHILIP: Absolutely. After ElmConf, I actually invited Michel to come to my place in the Netherlands. He live in Paris but I think he grew up Buenos Aires in Argentina. To my amazement, he said, "Yes, okay," and we spent a couple of days together and there he talked to me about Christopher Alexander and the patterns book, where patterns and design patterns actually grew out of. One of his biggest things was the code is the easiest part, like you've got to spend 80% of your time thinking deeply about the problem, like literally go outside, take long looks. I'm not sure if this is what Rich Hickey means with Hammock Driven Development. I've never actually got around to watching the talk. CHARLES:: I think it's exactly what he means. PHILIP: And he said like once you get at, the code just comes. I think Michel's work, you should really check it out. I'll send you a link to put in the show notes but everything is built out of really small libraries that do one thing and do it really well. For example, he has a library like a Redis client but the Redis client also has something called Nest, which is a way to generate the keys for nested hashes. Because that's a well-designed, the Redis client is literally just a layer on top. If you understand the primitive then, you can use the library on top really well. You can embed Syro applications within Syro applications. I guess, there you also need the luxury of time and I think this is where maybe my role as VP of engineering, which is kind of my first role of that kind, comes in here which is when you're working on the commercial pressure, try to turn around to a business guy and say, "Yes, we'll solve this problem but can we take three weeks to think about it?" It's never going to happen -- CHARLES:: No. PHILIP: Absolutely, it will never going to happen. Although the small things that I tried to do day to day now is get away from the computer, write on paper, write out the problem as you understand it, attack it from different angles, think about different viewpoints, etcetera. CHARLES:: I think if you are able to quantify the cost of not thinking about it for three weeks, then the business person that you're going to talk to is their ears are going to perk up, right? But that's so hard to do. You know, I try and make like when we're saying like, "What technologies are you going to choose? What are the long term ramifications in terms of dollars or euros or whatever currency you happen to be in for making this decision?" I wish we had more support in thinking about that but it is kind of like a one-off every time. Anyway, I'm getting a little bit off track. PHILIP: No, not at all. This is a subject I love to talk about because we kind of had a few a bit of turbulence because we thought, maybe we should get product people in, maybe we should get them a product team going and what I find was -- and this is maybe unique to the size of the company -- that actually made things a lot more difficult because you got too many heads in many ways. Sometimes, it's better to give the developer all of the context so that he can think about it and come up with the best solution because ultimately, he's the only one who can understand. I wouldn't say understands the dollars and cents but he understands the cost implications of doing it in efficient ways, which often happens when you're working in larger teams. TARAS: One thing I find really interesting about this conversation is the definition of good is really complicated here. I've observed Charles work on microstates and I work with him, like I wrote a lot of the code and we got through like five or six iterations and at every point, he got better but it is so difficult to define that. Then when you start to that conversations outside of that code context and you start to introduce business into the mix, the definition of good becomes extremely complicated. What do you think about that? How do we define it in a way? Are there cultures or engineering cultures or societal cultures that have a better definition for good that is relevant to doing quality work of this? CHARLES:: That's a deep question. PHILIP: Wow. Yeah, a really, really deep question. I think often for business, like purely commercially-driven, money-oriented good is the cheapest thing that gets the job done and often that's very short term, I think. As you alluded to Charles, that people don't think about the cost of not doing the right things, so to speak in our eyes and also, there's a huge philosophical discussion whether our definition of good as programmers and people who care about our craft is even analogous to or equal to a good in a commercial context. CHARLES:: Yes, because ultimately and this is if you have read Zen in the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, one of the things that Pirsig talks about is what is the definition of quality. How do we define something that's good or something that's bad? One of the definitions that gets put forward is how well something is fit to purpose. Unless you understand the purpose, then you can't determine quality because the purpose defines a very rich texture, a very rich surface and so, quality is going to be the object that maps very evenly and cleanly over that surface. When it comes to what people want in a program, they're going to want very different thing. A developer might need stimulation for this is something that's very new, this is something that's going to keep my interest or it's going to be keeping my CPU max and I'm going to be learning a whole lot. A solution that actually solves for that purpose is going to be a high quality solution. Also, this is going to be fast. We're going to be able to get to market very quickly. It might be one of the purposes and so, a solution that is fast and the purpose fits so it's going to be good. Also, I think developers are just self-indulgent and looking for the next best thing in something that's going to keep their interest, although we're all guilty of that. But at the same time, we're going to be the ones maintaining software, both in our current projects and collectively when we move to a new job and we're going to be responsible for someone else's code, then we're going to be paying the cost of those decisions. We both want to minimize the pain for ourselves and minimize the pain for others who are going to be coming and working in our code to make things long term maintainable. That's one axis of purpose and therefore, an axis of quality. I think in order to measure good and bad, you really have to have a good definition of what is the purpose of that surface is so rich but the more you can map it and find out where the contours lie, the more you're going to be able to determine what's good and what's bad. TARAS: It makes me think of like what is a good hammer. A sledgehammer is a really good hammer but it's not the right hammer for every job. CHARLES:: Right. TARAS: I think what you're saying is understanding what is it that you're actually doing and then matching your solution to what you're actually trying to accomplish. PHILIP: Yeah, absolutely and in my experience, we have a Ruby team building a Rails application. That's our monolith and then, we have a couple of Elixir teams with services that have been spun out of that. This isn't proven. This is just kind of gut feel right now and it is that Elixir is sometimes slower to develop the same feature or ship it but in the long term it's more maintainable. I haven't actually gotten dived into to React and all of the amazing frameworks that it has in terms of getting things up and running quickly but in terms of the full scale application, I still think 10, 11 years on, Rails has no equal in terms of proving a business case in the shortest time possible. CHARLES:: Yeah. I feel very similarly too but the question is does your development team approach the problem as proving a business case or do they approach the problem as I want to solve the set of features? PHILIP: Yes. Where I'm working at the moment, I started out just as a software developer. I guess, we would qualify for 37 signals or sorry... base camps definition of a calm company -- CHARLES:: Of a what company? PHILIP: A calm company. Sorry. They just released a new book and called 'The Calm Company' and 'It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work.' I was given in my first couple of months, a problem. It was business oriented, it had to be solved but it had to be solved well from a technical perspective because we didn't want to have to return to it every time. It was standardizing the way that we exported data from the database to Excel. You know, I was amazed because it was literally, the first time that I'd been given the space to actually dive in on a technical level to do that kind of stuff. But I think even per feature, that varies and that sometimes challenging when handing the work on because you've got to say, "This fit. Literally, we're just trying to prove, whether if we have this feature, the people will use it?" versus, "This is a feature that's going to be used every day and therefore, needs to be at good, technical quality." Those are the tradeoffs that I guess, keep you in a job. Because if it was easy, then you would need anyone to figure it out but it's always a challenge. What I like is that our tools are actually getting better and I think, with Elm for example, it's kind of major selling point is maintainability and yet, with Elm, there haven't been that many companies with Elm over a period of years that exists, that can live to tell the tale. Whereas, we certainly know with Rails applications have done well like Basecamp and GitHub. For sure, they can be super maintainable but the fact that it took GitHub to just moved Elm to Rails 5.0, I belief, the fact that it took them years and years and they were running off at fork of Rails 2.3, I think it shows the scale of the problem in that way. You know, Phoenix also went through a few issues, kind of moving architectures from the classic Rails to a more demand driven design model. I think we're getting there slowly, zig-zagging towards a place where we better understand how to write software to solve business problems. I guess, I was really interested in microstates when you shared it at Wicked Good Ember because that to me was attacking the problem from the right perspective. It's like given the fact that the ecosystem is always changing. How can we extract the business logic such that these changes don't affect the logic of our application? CHARLES:: Man, we got a lot to show you. It has changed quite a bit in the last two years. Hopefully, for the better. TARAS: It's been reduced and it's almost a quarter of its size while maintaining the same feature set and it's faster, it's lazier, it's better in every respect. It's just the ideas have actually been fairly consistent. It's just the implementation that's evolved. CHARLES:: Yeah, it's been quite a journey. It parallels kind of the story that we're talking about here in the sense that it really has been a search for primitives and a search for simplification. One of the things that we've been talking about, having these Ruby gems that do one thing and do it very, very, very well or the way that Elixir being architected has some very, very good primitives or Elm, the same kind of thing being spiritually aligned, even though on the surface, it might share more in common with Haskell. There's actually a deep alignment with a thing like Ruby and that's a very surprising result. I think one of the things that appeals to me about the type of functional programming that is ironically, I guess not present in Elm, where you have the concept of these type classes but I actually think, I love them for their simplicity. I've kind of become disenchanted with things like Lodash, even though they're nominally functional. The fact that you don't have things like monoid and functors and stuff is kind of first class participants in the ecosystems, means you have to have a bunch of throwaway functions. Those API surface area is very large, whereas if you do account for those things, these kind of ways of combining data and that's how you achieve your complexity, is not by a bunch of one-off methods that are like in Lodash, they're all provided for you so you don't have or have to write them yourself. That is one level of convenience but having access to five primitives, I think that's the power of the kind of the deeper functional programming types. PHILIP: And Charles, do you think that that gives you the ability to think at a higher level, about the problems that you're solving? Would you make that link? CHARLES:: Absolutely. PHILIP: So, if we're not doing that, then we're actually doing ourselves a disservice? CHARLES:: I would say so. PHILIP: Because we're actually creating complexity, where it shouldn't exist? CHARLES:: Yeah, I think if you have a more powerful primitive, you can think of things like async functions and generator functions, there's a common thread between async functions, generator functions, promises arrays and they're all functors. For me, that's a very profound realization and there might be a deeper spiritual link between say, an async function and an array in the same way that there's a deep spiritual link between Ruby and Elm, that if you don't see that, then you're doing yourself a disservice and you're able to think at a higher level. Also, you have a smaller tool set where each tool is more powerful. PHILIP: You did a grit, I think it was a repository with a ReadMe, where you boiled down what people would term what I would term, the scary functional language down to a very simple JavaScript. Did you ever finish that? Did you get to the monads? CHARLES:: I did get to the monads, yeah. PHILIP: Okay. I need to check that out again. I find that really, really helpful because I think one of Evan's big things with Elm is he doesn't use those terms ever and he avoids them like the plague because I think he believes they come tinged with the negative experiences of people trying Haskell and essentially getting laughed at, right? CHARLES:: Yes. I think there's something to that. TARAS: But we're doing that in microstates as well, right? In microstates documentation, even though microstates are written completely with these functional primitives, on the outside, there's almost no mention of it. It's just that when you actually go to use it, if you have an idea, one of the thing that's really powerful with microstates is that this idea that you can return another microstate from a transition and what that will do is what you kind of like what a flat map would do, which is replace that particular node with the thing that you returned it with. For a lot of people, they might not know that that's like a flat map would do but a microstate will do exactly what they wanted to do when it didn't realize that's actually should just work like that. I think, a lot of the work that we've done recently is to package all things and it make it powerful and to access the concepts that it is very familiar, something you don't need to learn. You just use it and it just works for you. CHARLES:: Right but it is something that I feel like there's unharvested value for every programmer out there in these type classes: monads and monoids and functors and co-functors or covariant functors, contravariant functors, blah-blah-blah, that entire canon. I wish there was some way to reconcile the negative connotations and baggage that that has because we feel kind of the same way and I think that Evan's absolutely right. You do want to hide that or make it so that the technology is accessible without having to know those things. But in the same way, these concepts are so powerful, both in terms of just having to think less and having to write less code but also, as a tool to say, "I've got this process. Is there any way that could it be a functor? If I can find a way that this thing is a functor, I can just save myself so much time and take so many shortcuts with it." PHILIP: And in order to be able to communicate that, or at least communicate about that, you need to have terms to call these things, right? Because you can't always just refer to the code or the pattern. It's always good to have a name. I'm with you. I see value in both, like making it approachable, so the people who don't know the terms are not frightened away. But I also see value in using the terms that have always existed to refer to those things, so that things are clear and we can communicate about them. CHARLES:: Right. definitely, there's a tradeoff there. I don't know where exactly the line is but it would be nice to be able to have our cake and eat that one too. We didn't get really to talk about the type versus dynamic in the greater context of this whole conversation. We can explore that topic a little bit. PHILIP: Well, I can finish with, I think the future is typed Erlang. Maybe, that's Elm running on BEAM. CHARLES:: Whoa. What a take? Right there, folks. I love it. I love it but what makes you say that? Typed Erlang doesn't exist right now, right? PHILIP: Exactly. CHARLES:: And Elm definitely doesn't run on BEAM. PHILIP: I don't know if I'm allowed to say this. When I was at this workshop with Evan, he mentioned that and I'm not sure whether he mentioned it just as a throwaway comment or whether this is part of his 20-year plan but I think the very fact that Elm is designed around like Erlang, the signal stuff was designed around the way Erlang does communication and processes, it means I know at least he appreciates that model. From my point of view, with my experience with Elixir and Erlang in production usage, it's not huge scale but it's scale enough to need to start doing performance work on Rails and just to see how effortless things are with Elixir and with Erlang. I think Elm in the backend would be amazing but it would have to be a slightly different language, I think because the problems are different. We began this by saying that my story was a little different to the norm because I went back to the dynamic, at the dark side but for example in Elixir, I do miss types hugely. They kind of have a little bit of a hack with Erlang because they return a lot of tuples with OK and then the object. You know, it's almost like wrapping it up in a [inaudible]. There are little things and there's Dialyzer to kind of type check and I think there are a few projects which do add types to Erlang, etcetera. But I think something that works would need to be designed from the ground up to be typed and also run in the BEAM, rather than be like a squashed version of something else to fit somewhere else, if that makes sense. CHARLES:: It makes total sense. PHILIP: I think so. I recently read a book, just to finish which was 'FSharpForFunAndProfit' is his website, Scott Wlaschin, I think. It's written up with F# but it's about designing your program in a type functional language. Using the book, you could probably then just design your programs on paper and only commit to code at the end because you're thinking right down to the level of the types and the process and the pipelines, which to me sounds amazing because I could work outside. CHARLES:: Right. All right-y. I will go ahead and wrap it up. I would just like to say thank you so much, Philip for coming on and talking about your story, as unorthodox as it might be. PHILIP: Thank you. CHARLES:: Thank you, Taras. Thank you, David. TARAS: Thank you for having us. CHARLES:: That's it for Episode 113. We are the Frontside. This is The Frontside Podcast. We build applications that you can stake your future on. If that's something that you're interested in, please get in touch with us. If you have any ideas for a future podcast, things that you'd like to hear us discuss or any feedback on the things that you did here, please just let us know. Once again, thank you Mandy for putting together this wonderful podcast and now we will see you all next time.

Hey Campers! This episode is a fun look at Love & Saucers, a documentary directed by Brad Abrahams. The focus of the film is David Huggins, who lost his virginity to an alien woman. Who are these beings and what do they want? Why did she... um...come for David? Have a listen and give us your thoughts! Is she from another planet? Another dimension? Have a listen and don't forget to watch Love & Saucers! https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6152590/

In 1879, Ferdinand Cheval was a postman in France who tripped on a strangely shaped stone and stumbled awkwardly forward. He was 43 years old. This would not normally be news but Cheval continued to stumble awkwardly forward each day for 33 more years. His was not the 10,000 hours to excellence championed by Malcolm Gladwell. Cheval stumbled forward for more than 10,000 days. The miracle he left behind in his garden is protected by France as a cultural landmark and admired by more than 120,000 visitors each year. Ferdinand Cheval was our brand of crazy. Just like you and me, Cheval initially dismissed his strange idea for fear that people would think he was crazy. But when the idea came back to him like a boomerang thrown by an Australian shepherd boy, he said, “Screw it. Let's do this thing.” The next day, Cheval gathered cement and wire and picked up rocks while walking his 18-mile postal route. In a dream I had built a palace, a castle or caves, I cannot express it well… I told no one about it for fear of being ridiculed and I felt ridiculous myself. Then fifteen years later, when I had almost forgotten my dream, when I wasn't thinking of it at all, my foot reminded me of it. My foot tripped on a stone that almost made me fall. I wanted to know what it was… It was a stone of such a strange shape that I put it in my pocket to admire it at my ease. The next day, I went back to the same place. I found more stones, even more beautiful, I gathered them together on the spot and was overcome with delight… It's a sandstone shaped by water and hardened by the power of time. It becomes as hard as pebbles. It represents a sculpture so strange that it is impossible for man to imitate, it represents any kind of animal, any kind of caricature. I said to myself: since Nature is willing to do the sculpture, I will do the masonry and the architecture”http://mondaymemo.wpengine.com/wisemenfindthelight/ (A) In the 8th Psalm, David considers outer space and then asks a question of God: When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers,The moon and the stars, which you have ordained,What is man that you are mindful of him,And the son of man that you visit him?For you have made him a little lower than the angels,And you have crowned him with glory and honor.You have made him to have dominion over the works of your hands;You have put all things under his feet…”The 8th Psalm doesn't tell us whether God answered David's question that day, but if he had, I think God's answer might have gone something like this: David, David, David… Have you never considered the laughter of little girls or heard the songs of singers singing or read the words of men unafraid or seen the magic that leaps from the heart of every carrier of messages?”Ferdinand Cheval took his inspiration from where he found it, even though it was ridiculous. My Christmas hope for you is that you might have the courage to do the same. You, too, are a carrier of messages. Tell me, what is your ridiculous dream? Roy H. Williams