Podcasts about DevOps

Sherwood Callaway is the founder of Sazabi (YC P26), the AI-native observability platform built for engineering teams who ship fast. He previously founded and exited a YC company — now he's back, betting that logs are all you need to replace Datadog.Logs Are All You Need: Rethinking Observability with AI Agents // MLOps Podcast #381 with Sherwood Callaway, the Founder of Sazabi

In the previous episode of N is for Networking, Jennifer “JJ” Jabbusch gave us a thorough overview of Network Access Control (NAC) for wired networks. This week we’re going wireless! JJ walks us through the major differences between wired and wireless NAC, how 802.1X is more seamless in Wi-Fi deployments, the unpredictability of web portals,... Read more »

In this episode, Corey Quinn sits down with Dexter Horthy, CEO and Co-founder of Human Layer, to unpack what engineers are getting wrong about AI, especially when it comes to coding agents.From the obsession with “just throwing more tokens at the problem” to the reality of building scalable AI workflows, Dexter shares hard-earned insights on how to actually push models to their limits. They dive into the evolution of developer workflows, the rise of AI-powered software factories, and why understanding context and verification matters more than raw model power.If you're building with AI or trying to, this episode will challenge how you think about what these systems can (and can't) do.Show highlights: (00:00)Throwing Tokens Too Far(01:04) Meet Dexter Horthy(01:52) Personal AI Benchmarks(04:12) Human Layer Race Condition(05:59) Rewrites and Tech Debt(07:19) Software Factories Mindset(10:20) Verifiable Problems and Token Limits(13:45) Agents in the Trenches(18:05) GitHub at Agent Scale(26:23) Safety Ethics and Closing ThoughtsAbout Dexter: Dexter Horthy is the CEO and Co-Founder of HumanLayer, where he helps engineering teams tackle complex problems in large codebases using coding agents. Previously, he worked in DevOps, SRE, and Solutions Engineering at Replicated, and contributed to lunar navigation software at NASA JPL. Outside of work, he's a fan of tacos and burpees, though not necessarily in that order.Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dexterihorthy/Website: https://humanlayer.devSponsored by: duckbillhq.com

Cybersecurity is Bigger Than Hacking | Nate Butler on Career Pathways, Mentorship & GRC Chapters0:00 Welcome to Cyber Crime Junkies0:31 From IT to Cybersecurity | Nate's Career Shift3:34 The Mentor Moment That Changed Everything5:33 Meet The Power of Mentorship8:13 CISM Certification | A Level Up from Security+10:43 Cybersecurity is Bigger Than Hacking12:00 GRC Explained | The Glue That Holds It Together15:40 Governance Risk Compliance for SMBs16:29 Speaking at High School | Youth Outreach17:41 Teaching Kids Cybersecurity Without Fear21:28 Parental Conversation | Gaming Safety & Sextortion Prevention23:42 Communication Across Generations25:37 Explaining Tech Simply to Business Leaders26:47 LinkedIn vs TikTok Strategy27:00 Two Platforms, Two Different Animals28:28 Live TikTok | Building Community Around Real Conversation31:26 Authenticity Over Polish | What Drives Engagement34:02 AI, Claude Code & Building Apps36:39 From Paying for Services to Building Your Own39:44 DevOps, Platform Engineering & Infrastructure Roles41:20 Using AI to Automate Your Own Workflow45:36 Book Trilogy | Breaking Into Cybersecurity48:05 The Second Book | Navigating the Space with Keith51:30 More Content Coming | Guests, Live Streams & Growth54:00 Anyone Can Do This Work56:00 Final Thoughts on Mentorship & OpportunityQuestions? Text our Studio direct. We read these and when helpful we give a special shout out for those to contact us.I wrote Moving Target because overconfidence is the enemy. Hardcover, paperback, Kindle, and audiobook. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and more. I wrote the Moving Target Trilogy because overconfidence is the enemy. Hardcover, paperback, Kindle, and audiobook. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and more. Growth without Interruption. Get peace of mind. Stay Competitive-Get NetGain. Contact NetGain today at 844-777-6278 or reach out at DMauro@NetGainIT.com or find more at www.NETGAINIT.com   Support the showNew Exclusive Offers for our Listeners! New non-fiction Book Series is out! Moving Target: The Art of Online Camouflage drops April 14.Moving Target: The Obedient Machine drops April 21.Book 3 -- Ghost and the Machine -- out soon!

Hosts Ned and Kyler compare notes on everything they've been doing with AI, including the successes they’ve enjoyed and headaches they've suffered building and implementing AI agents. They talk about how AI has sped up their workflows, how managing multiple AI agents is akin to raising toddlers, the necessity of using deterministic scripts for increased... Read more »

Dwayne McDaniel, developer advocate at GitGuardian.com, joins host Priyanka Raghavan to talk about the engineering challenges of secrets management. They explore what "secrets" really are in modern systems—far beyond passwords—including API keys, tokens, certificates, and machine identities, and how "secret sprawl" emerges across the SDLC. Drawing on reports from GitGuardian and Verizon, they discuss the growing scale of secret leaks and why credential abuse and phishing remain dominant attack vectors. They examine common leak points—from code repos and logs to CI/CD pipelines, containers, and SaaS integrations—and how cloud, DevOps, and AI tooling are amplifying risks. Priyanka quizzes Dwayne about recent supply chain attacks from pyPi and trivy ecosystems, highlighting recurring root causes like poor access control, long-lived credentials, and weak security hygiene. Finally, they consider detection, response, and modern solutions—short-lived credentials, secret scanning, and identity-based approaches like OWASP NHIR and SPIFFE/SPIRE—ending with practical advice for engineers to reduce blast radius and design for secure secret lifecycle management.

Hosts Ned and Kyler compare notes on everything they've been doing with AI, including the successes they’ve enjoyed and headaches they've suffered building and implementing AI agents. They talk about how AI has sped up their workflows, how managing multiple AI agents is akin to raising toddlers, the necessity of using deterministic scripts for increased... Read more »

Hosts Ned and Kyler compare notes on everything they've been doing with AI, including the successes they’ve enjoyed and headaches they've suffered building and implementing AI agents. They talk about how AI has sped up their workflows, how managing multiple AI agents is akin to raising toddlers, the necessity of using deterministic scripts for increased... Read more »

AWS Morning Brief for the week of May 25th, with Corey Quinn. Links:Amazon Bedrock expands support for request-level usage attributionAmazon ECS introduces pause and continue controls for service deploymentsAWS announces AWS Interconnect - multicloud connectivity with Oracle Cloud Infrastructure in previewAWS Organizations now supports higher quotas for service control policies (SCPs)Amazon Aurora MySQL 8.4 is now generally availableIntroducing ExtendDB: An open source DynamoDB-compatible adapter with pluggable storage backendsNine Entertainment's journey: Achieving 98% cost savings with Amazon ElastiCache Serverless for ValkeyAnnouncing updated retry behavior for AWS SDKs and ToolsAnnouncing AWS CDK Mixins: Composable Abstractions for AWS ResourcesCVE-2026-8838 - Remote Code Execution in amazon-redshift-python-driverCVE-2026-9133 - Arbitrary file read in rabbitmq-aws plugin

Welcome to this week's episode of the PEBCAK Podcast!  We've got four amazing stories this week so sit back, relax, and keep being awesome!  Be sure to stick around for our Dad Joke of the Week. (DJOW) Follow us on Instagram @pebcakpodcast   Please share this podcast with someone you know!  It helps us grow the podcast and we really appreciate it!   Simple 6 signup link https://simple6.co/r/CFUR98   Apple data and car Bluetooth signals help police identify suspect in crypto robbery https://www.forbes.com/sites/the-wiretap/2026/05/05/apple-subpoena-and-car-bluetooth-help-cops-unmask-crypto-robber-suspect/ Your phone and your car are witnesses — law enforcement used an Apple subpoena and Bluetooth signals from a connected vehicle to unmask a suspect in a physical cryptocurrency robbery, showing how everyday device data is increasingly being used to solve crimes.   FBI reports crypto ATM fraud complaints surged 23% in 2025, topping $388 million in losses https://www.ic3.gov/PSA/2026/PSA260515-2 Canada proposes a nationwide ban on crypto ATMs, calling them a primary tool for scammers https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/canada-crypto-atm-ban-scammers-9.7180642 Bitcoin Depot, North America's largest crypto ATM operator, files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy https://www.bankingdive.com/news/bitcoin-depot-bankruptcy-chapter-11-atm-wind-down/820755 Crypto ATMs are effectively becoming extinct — the FBI documented nearly $389 million in losses through kiosks in 2025, Canada is moving to ban them outright as a fraud-enabling infrastructure, and Bitcoin Depot (the largest operator in North America with 9,000+ machines) just filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, blaming mounting state regulations, litigation, and an unsustainable business model.   DataCamp breaks down Claude Opus 4.7 vs. GPT-5.5 across coding, reasoning, vision, and pricing https://www.datacamp.com/blog/gpt-5-5-vs-claude-opus-4-7 The AI model race between Anthropic and OpenAI is too close to call — Claude Opus 4.7 leads on software engineering benchmarks and visual reasoning while GPT-5.5 dominates terminal/DevOps workflows and advanced math, with output token pricing favoring Claude at $25 vs. $30 per million tokens.   Dad Joke of the Week (DJOW)   Find the hosts on LinkedIn: Chris - https://www.linkedin.com/in/chlouie/ Brian - https://www.linkedin.com/in/briandeitch-sase/ Cody - https://www.linkedin.com/in/cody123anderson/

In Elixir Wizards S15E04, Charles Suggs and Emma Whamond are joined by Somtochi Onyekwere, a software engineer at Fly.io and contributor to the Corrosion distributed database project, to talk about distributed systems, infrastructure resilience, and the growing fragility of centralized cloud platforms.   We discuss what recent outages across major providers reveal about modern infrastructure and why more teams are starting to rethink assumptions around reliability, failover, and system design. Somtochi explains how Fly.io approaches geographic distribution, eventual consistency, and replication across nodes, along with the trade-offs that come with building systems this way.   The conversation explores CRDTs (Conflict-free Replicated Data Types), consensus, split-brain prevention, and what actually happens when distributed systems fail in production. We also talk about testing strategies, rollback planning, property-based testing tools, and how teams can reduce blast radius when things inevitably go wrong.   Along the way, we discuss AI infrastructure, sandboxing AI agents, and how newer workloads may add pressure to already centralized systems. The episode closes with practical advice for developers who want to build more resilient applications without over-complicating their architecture. Topics Discussed in this Episode: Corrosion and distributed database replication Centralized cloud fragility and recent outage patterns Distributed systems versus traditional cloud architectures Multi-region deployment strategies for Phoenix applications CRDTs and conflict resolution in distributed systems Eventual consistency versus strict consistency tradeoffs Consensus, leader election, and split-brain prevention Testing failover and recovery scenarios Property-based testing and Antithesis Rollback planning for database schema migrations Reducing blast radius through system isolation Health checks and blue-green deployment strategies Fly Proxy request routing and replay behavior Cross-region synchronization and replication challenges Single points of failure inside “redundant” systems Backup restoration testing and disaster recovery planning Network partitions and failure handling in production Infrastructure monitoring and operational visibility AI infrastructure workloads and operational strain Sandboxing and securing AI agents Sprites and AI workflows at Fly.io Latency improvements from geographic distribution Distributed systems tradeoffs in real-world environments Transitive dependency failures across cloud providers Practical resilience strategies for modern engineering teams Links Mentioned: https://fly.io https://github.com/superfly/corrosion https://docs.gitops.weaveworks.org/ FluxCD https://fluxcd.io/ Fly.io Stateful Sandbox Environments https://sprites.dev/ Cloudflare Workers AI Inference Platform https://www.cloudflare.com/products/workers-ai/ “An AI Agent Just Destroyed Our Production Data. It Confessed in Writing” Twitter post from PocketOS founder: https://x.com/lifeof_jer/status/2048103471019434248 Oct 2025 AWS Outage https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/24/amazon-reveals-cause-of-aws-outage Dec 2025 Cloudflare Outage https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/dec/05/another-cloudflare-outage-takes-down-websites-linkedin-zoom July 2025 Crowdstrike Outage https://www.ibm.com/think/news/recent-crowdstrike-outage-what-you-should-know March 2026 Stryker Cyber Attack https://www.stryker.com/us/en/about/news/2026/a-message-to-our-customers-03-2026.html https://aws.amazon.com/ https://cloud.google.com/ https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us https://fly.io/docs/elixir/ CRDTs!! https://smartlogic.io/podcast/elixir-wizards/s13-e03-local-first-liveview-svelte-pwa/ https://antithesis.com/docs/resources/property_based_testing/ https://hex.pm/packages/proper

#357 | Dave sits down with George Bonaci, VP of Growth at Ramp, to talk about what growth actually looks like at one of the most talked-about brands in B2B. George breaks down why Ramp has no CMO and why he thinks that's a feature, not a bug. He makes the case for attention as the new moat when execution gets commoditized, and shares how he went from hardcore attribution obsessive to betting on stunts with no direct attribution. They also get into Project Glass, Ramp's internal AI tool that reads every Slack channel, preps his meetings, and diagnosed a reporting issue in 15 minutes that would have taken two weeks to investigate. And George shares why he thinks marketers now have two jobs: marketing to humans and marketing to machines.Timestamps(00:00) - - George's background: from biochemist to accidental marketer (07:00) - - How marketing is structured at Ramp (no CMO) (09:15) - - Why brand is the growth lever (13:30) - - AI and the death of functional marketing roles (14:45) - - Ramp's hub and spoke model for AI (16:05) - - Building autonomous go-to-market workflows (17:15) - - How the team responded to going agent-first (20:55) - - The J curve of productivity (22:15) - - Are marketing jobs safe? (24:00) - - Marketing to machines: Ramp's two jobs (25:15) - - Offering $3,000 bonuses to AI agents (28:40) - - Project Glass: Ramp's internal AI tool (34:20) - - Attention as the new moat (36:10) - - How to measure attention without direct attribution (41:20) - - Why taste matters more than ever in direct mail and events (42:20) - - How George went from "measure everything" to betting on stunts Join 50,0000 people who get Dave's Newsletter here: https://www.exitfive.com/newsletterLearn more about Exit Five's private marketing community: https://www.exitfive.com/***Brought to you by:Knak - A no-code, campaign creation platform that lets you go from idea to on-brand email and landing pages in minutes, using AI where it actually matters. Learn more at knak.com/exitfive, or check out the MCP server by clicking this link. Vector - A contact-level ads platform that lets you build audiences from actual people on your site, clicking your ads, and checking out your competitors. Learn more at vector.co, and get on the waitlist for their new MCP server by clicking here. Compound Growth Marketing - A full-funnel demand generation agency that helps high-growth cybersecurity, DevOps, and enterprise software companies drive more pipeline through AI SEO, paid media, and go-to-market engineering. Visit compoundgrowthmarketing.com and tell them Dave sent you.***Thanks to my friends at hatch.fm for producing this episode and handling all of the Exit Five podcast production.They give you unlimited podcast editing and strategy for your B2B podcast.Get unlimited podcast editing and on-demand strategy for one low monthly cost. Just upload your episode, and they take care of the rest.Visit hatch.fm to learn more

Starting an AI company is all about spotting a real problem and using AI to solve it in a smarter, faster way than what's out there today. It's less about having the perfect idea and more about starting focused, learning fast, and building something people actually want.This week, Dave, Esmee, and Rob are joined by Gijs van de Nieuwegiessen and Tijn van Daelen, founders of One Horizon AI, to explore what it really takes to start and build an AI‑native company TLDR00:32 – Introduction00:55 – Hang out: Why Dutch names can be a real tongue-twister02:00 – Dig in: Exploring how an AI-native culture fits with human-to-human interaction13:35 – Deep dive with Gijs van de Nieuwegiessen and Tijn van Daelen1:01:54 – Following AI: Bloopers, reflections, and field hockey with the kids GuestGijs van de Nieuwegiessen: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nieuwegiessen/Tijn van Daelen: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tijn-van-daelen-495986131/Open source repo: https://github.com/onehorizonai/ink HostsDave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/Esmee van de Giessen:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/esmeevandegiessen/Rob Kernahan:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-kernahan/ ProductionMarcel van der Burg:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/marcel-vd-burg/Dave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/ SoundBen Corbett:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ben-corbett-3b6a11135/Louis Corbett:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/louis-corbett-087250264/ 'Realities Remixed' is an original podcast from Capgemini

One of the things I used to emphasize in talks about DevOps is that no modern software of any significance is built by one person. Everything takes a team, so the foundation of version control becomes extremely important. We need a way to coordinate work across multiple individuals and communicate what changes are being made. This requires a strong foundation, and that starts with version control. In 2026, that hasn't changed, but what has changed is the makeup of the team. No longer do I need a bunch of humans. In today's world, with extremely powerful AI LLMs, we can have a team of AI agents that write code, often at a pace far exceeding that of human teams. However, they still need to coordinate and communicate and ensure their changes mesh together.  Read the rest of The New Software Team

Jack sits down with Tapan Patel, Gearset DevOps Leader for 2026 and DevOps Lead for the Salesforce practice at Braze, a publicly traded omnichannel platform where every change management decision is subject to SOX audit scrutiny. Tapan brings a rare blend of project delivery experience, release management rigour, and genuine passion for building DevOps not just as a set of processes, but as a culture.The episode is a masterclass in phased, people-first DevOps rollout. Tapan walks through exactly how he's taken Braze from change sets and manual deployments to a governed, audit-ready CI/CD pipeline over the past year and a half — breaking it down into four distinct phases and sharing what actually worked, what took longer than expected, and where he's headed next. Tapan shares his rounded take on AI, including where it's already adding value in the pipeline today, why agentic autonomy in prod is still a way off, and how Claude, Jira and Gearset's reporting API are becoming a powerful combination for DevOps KPI tracking.00:01 – Intro & Meet Tapan Patel00:40 – Tapan's Journey: From Data & Analytics to Salesforce DevOps02:12 – What DevOps Actually Means as an Organisational Culture04:10 – DevOps in a SOX-Audited, Publicly Traded Company05:10 – The State of DevOps at Braze When Tapan Joined08:14 – Shifting Mindsets From Change Sets to a DevOps Tool10:32 – Precision Deployments: Why Page Layouts Break Everything11:49 – Stakeholder Visibility & the Value of Issue Tracking Integration13:36 – What Tapan Values Most About Gearset15:53 – The Four Phases of CI/CD Rollout at Braze19:16 – Phase Two: Stabilisation & SOX Integration20:30 – Phase Three: Automation Layers & QA Integration21:18 – Phase Four: Maturity & Minimal Intervention22:55 – The Admin Learning Curve for DevOps Adoption25:25 – Continuous Improvement as a Practice, Not a Project28:34 – Where AI Fits Into the DevOps Pipeline Right Now31:07 – Supplementary vs. Agentic AI: Why Tapan Is Taking It Slow33:14 – Using Claude + Gearset Data for Sprint Analysis & KPI Tracking36:00 – The DevOps KPIs That Matter at Braze37:24 – Closing Advice for Anyone Starting Their DevOps Journey

Today our Packet Pushers team assembles to discuss whether the grass is greener on the NetOps or DevOps side of the telemetry fence. William of The Cloud Gambit, Scott of Total Network Operations, and Ned and Kyler of Day Two DevOps discuss the difficulties and differences of getting telemetry and state from devices across different... Read more »

The Great Talent Redistribution: Where is Talent Actually Going in 2026 and beyond?  Is the start-up compensation model broken? How about big Big Tech? How about non-tech small & medium businesses? What is happening to talent, going forward? This and many other topics in this episode of Tech Deciphered. Navigation: Intro The Broken Contract? The Great Unbundling The Three (?) Destinations Alternative Cap Tables, Alternative Compensation Models Investor Landscape Fragmentation Operator Playbook and Predictions Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Nuno Goncalves Pedro Introduction Welcome to episode 77 of Tech Deciphered. This episode will focus on the great talent redistribution. Where’s talent actually going in 2026 and beyond? The Silicon Valley deal of the last 30 years, very low salary, stock options, you will either sell for a ton of money or IPO, and everyone gets rich, is seemingly broken. Or is it really? The dominant narrative says the tech middle class is dying. We disagree. There is obviously a lot of stuff going on whereby big tech is partially barbelling. There’s a superstar concentration on the top. There’s a bit of a seemingly allowing of the belly. We’ll come back to that. We don’t quite believe that is totally true. There’s a collapse at entry level. The belly is migrating into three, potentially even more, very different destinations: AI native startups, human-verified premium businesses, and the read the industrialized middle of the S&P 500 and SMB world. Each has its own cap table, each will have its own compensation model, and each will have its own investor profile. In some ways, this is the third episode in our Reset trilogy. We started with episode 75 on the SaaS-apocalypse. We talked about the great private capital reset in episode 76, and now we talk about talent redistributions. Bertrand, exciting times, not always positive times.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah, it’s exciting times because it’s a time of change. Of course, we have the doomsayers. If you listen to Dario Amodei of Anthropic, every white-collar job on Earth is going to disappear. I think I strongly disagree, and I suppose you too as well, we strongly disagree. It’s going to be more of a redistribution. If you look at the history of technology, this is what always happened. We forget how many jobs have disappeared over the past 150 years. We move from a time of 150 years ago. People were mostly in agriculture. Then you had a lot of weird jobs that disappeared from people transporting water to people bringing ice from the pools to people doing the job of computers. People forget that computer was a title given to human beings. We’re doing calculations. Then, of course, secretory jobs in the ’80s, ’90s, where suddenly anyone can type using a word processor, the rise of Excel, that sort of stuff. Many things have changed. Some jobs have indeed disappeared. Some jobs have totally transformed. Where you do these jobs have changed. I think we are at a similar stage where, thanks to AI, and I would say for now, or at least the rise of AI coding, there is a dramatic change happening. I don’t think it means that people will be without a job. It just means, from my perspective, that jobs are changing. You are not just doing a lowly coding level task that actually indeed could be replaced, but you are going to have more of builder type of mindset, a product manager type of mindset going forward. We also expect that the distribution of jobs, depending on the type of business, will be quite different.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro The Broken Contract? Maybe let’s reset a little bit to the broken contract, or if it’s really a broken contract. There’s been this image in technology and tech that basically you get paid very little to work in tech. You get a bunch of stock options. The earlier you are in the company, the higher the level of stock option grants you get. Then you make a ton of money at some point because the company will either sell or IPO, and that’s heard of it. Obviously, there’s a lot of movements happening right now that are changing how these dynamics work. The first part is obviously AI, and in some ways, AI is shrinking companies. It’s not unheard of that companies with as little as four or five people reach 50 million in ARR. There’s companies with one person that have gotten bought for hundreds of millions of dollars or billion of dollars. Obviously, things are moving very, very fast, and therefore, there isn’t a large employee cap table. How would you share the upside? Would you actually give a couple of percentage points to an early employee rather than your 0.2-0.5% kind of thing for early employees? The second part is a little bit the other side of the table, which is the IPO market is seemingly in a drought. There’s not much happening in IPOs. Maybe 2026, at some point, there will be an unlock, but right now, it’s seemingly difficult to get your upside. Even if you’re an employee, you have to wait a long time. The median time of IPO has climbed over 10, 11 years, the longest in over a decade. Basically, not only you have to wait a long time as if there is an IPO drought, like we might be going through right now, when do I actually get my cash back? Unless the company gets bought, maybe there are secondary transactions along the way, maybe there’s something else. But obviously there’s a little bit of a reduction and lowering of the upside seemingly for this contract and for this place. The easy conclusion that I think many are taking is, because of all of this and all the layoffs that are happening, even in big tech, that serve the tech middle class is dying, that basically AI screwing the workers, et cetera, there’s also a lot of discussion that even it might be affecting the entry-level jobs as well. Everyone coming out of undergrad right now can’t get a job, et cetera. There’s this doomsday scenario that you’re alluding to that everything is changing. We have a slightly different perspective. We think there’s a realignment of market. In layoffs, there was a lot of layoffs that were warranted. Big tech, in particular, had actually hoarded a lot of engineering capacity over the last decade or so. There’s a little bit of a realignment that needed to happen in any case. When everyone’s saying, “Well, AI is compressing everything,” well, it’s compressing right now, but we don’t think actually it’s going to compress over time. You’ll still need engineering and science talent to come on board for you to be able to scale up. It’s not like AI is going to take care of everything and teams are going to be five people for companies that are worth a trillion dollars. That’s not happening. Today’s thesis, I think a little bit of this doomsday scenario needs to be seen with a more nuanced lens. I think that’s how we’re framing today’s episode, that there’s a bit of a nuance, there are some extremes happening. We’re going to talk about those extremes, but ultimately, it’s not quite as simple as saying that the tech middle class is disappearing in early jobs are going to be a thing of the past.   Bertrand Schmitt At the same time, what you started with is true. I mean, that 50 million ARR company, just five people. At a bigger scale, that’s exactly the matrix for Anthropic. They have reached a stage where they are at a range of 12 million ARR per staff per employee. It’s metrics that are definitely never seen before. I don’t think any company raised to this level. Best in class, best run companies, one, two million per employees. I mean, that was your target if you can make it. We are definitely in a different game. But I think what matters at the end of the day, and that’s what we’re arguing, is that you have to see the big pictures. Yes, some positions might disappear inside some companies, but some other positions will be created in other companies. Usually, what people do is keep talking about the jobs who disappear and not looking at the bigger picture of jobs that are being created as well. What is true, and I think you alluded to that, is that the big tech the past 10, 15 years had some strategy of hoarding talent in a war where having the best talented people will make the difference in numbers, will make the difference between winning or losing. The Google of the world, the Microsoft of the world, the Amazon of the world, they were hoarding talent. They would try to make sure that they might not have such needs in talented number of people. But if they have the talent, it means their competitors didn’t have the talent. It means that the startup trying to reach scale couldn’t pay the giant salaries that the Google of the world were paying. There was definitely some hoarding. But it went so far in the 2020, 2021, that I think since then there has been a coming back to normal. There is also now in 2026, the recognition that it’s not true anymore. Yes, talent can be very valuable, but there is now a bigger and bigger gap between the extremely talented versus the rest that are merely talented because of AI. AI is able to replace at scale your software engineers, your software managers. I would say it’s quite new. I don’t think it was true a year ago. We’re really talking about a recent dramatic change in what can be achieved thanks to AI. We can see most of the big AI companies are moving to coding. It was started by Anthropic as a trend, OpenAI has followed through. Obviously, the Cursor of the world existed before, but they were not as successful. All the Chinese open-source models are moving very fast to coding optimization the past few weeks. It’s quite an incredible change. I think there is that dramatic change, recognition that coding can be done differently. As a result, we are going to see change in the distribution of jobs. I think it will start from the top because we see the news of the big Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and others who used to hold talented software developers to a change in realization that no, we actually need to invest in AI. We need to invest in compute because compute is going to do the job of most of these people. Therefore, we can’t pay for both at the same time, even us with all our money, we cannot. Wall Street is not going to let us do that. They start by removing a lot of position. I think we see that accelerating, quite frankly. We have only seen the beginning, but in the next 2 years, we see a dramatic shift. But I think my position, I guess yours, and you know as well, is that there will be a lot more opportunities created as well, probably by also entities.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro The Great Unbundling Yeah, there will be more opportunities created. The hoarding is just taken also a little bit of a different view. To your point, there’s hoarding of resources, compute, et cetera. But there’s also hoarding of top talent. We are seeing people getting paid, packages all in that could run up to 100 million, in some cases even over 100 million over several years. This is unheard of. I mean, an officer of Meta would make, I don’t know, maybe 20, 25 million a year. It’s like now there are people that are on the top end of AI researchers that are getting paid around that amount just to join some of these companies. There’s a little bit of a different hoarding. It’s very selective hoarding of certain talent. We’ve seen some acqui-hires. We’ve talked about it in previous episodes that are just literally about getting one or two people specifically to come on board. Alexander Wang, again, going to Meta to lead their intelligence labs there. I feel, I don’t know what you feel, but I feel this is a transition moment where there is overpaying for certain talent on the top of the market. At some point, this will stabilize. You can’t keep paying people 100 million over 4 years or something like that across the board. To your point, a lot of this is actually going to scale up quickly also on the AI side. There’s a little bit of a different hoarding happening on the top end, not just the resources, but also of people, which seems to give further this notion of barbell, that there’s two extremes, the haves and have-nots, the super-duper talented people that get paid a ton of money, tens of millions of dollars a year at the very least. Then the emptying of the middle where there’s a ton of tech layoffs going on in some ways, the belly, as they would call it, is being expelled. The middle market, the managers are being fired because there’s nothing to manage. There’s a lot of positions going away. In some cases, you might keep some of the more junior talent, but with a little bit of experience. But even the talent coming out of colleges is not getting hired either. It’s a little bit of a weird thing where there’s hoarding at the top, there’s an emptying of the belly, the middle, and then the early, early, early is also not getting recruited. It’s like what gives? How is this going to look in the future? I agree fully with you, Bertrand, that there’s a migration of this talent, not only to other companies, but also to other jobs. There will be new jobs that will emerge out of this. The DevOps, dev tools market didn’t exist until maybe 20 years ago at scale, and it got created. In some ways, we’re seeing there will be new markets, there will be new roles and new jobs that will be created around engineering teams going forward. We can’t anticipate all of them. But basically, the emptying of the belly is true as it’s happening right now. The low hiring on the early and the top end, getting tons of money. We think this is a transition to something else. There’s the hoarding of engineering in general is coming to an end at momentum. Now it’s time to rightsize teams, to get the right at the table, et cetera, and start figuring out what works and what doesn’t work. We’ve already had some horror stories coming out even from Amazon where they were breaking systems with their use of AI tools, and I’m sure it’s happening across the board. I’m on a board of a company and been tremendously affected by Meta and its algorithms, where basically because of advertising, there have been people served with ads for this specific company where the ad doesn’t match the company, so basic stuff like that. It’s been actually very, very difficult because in some ways, the company goes back to Meta. It’s like, “Hey, dudes, you guys are serving ads that are not even our ads with our copyright and stuff. How does this work?” They’re like, “Oh, it’s AI.” It’s like, “Well, it’s AI but can you give me my money back?” They’re like, “No, we won’t give you money back.” This creates huge issues for companies, for example, that are very dependent on advertising, which obviously there’s a lot of industries that are. They’re actually in production systems at scale. Meta is, I think now, the largest digital advertising in the world. I think they outgrew Google in one of the last quarters. Basically, this has a tremendous effect that systems that are in production at scale are getting inputs and changes driven by AI tooling, and somehow nobody can say what the hell is happening. Again, there will be a reckoning, there will be a redistribution, there will be a rightsizing of teams and an adequacy of teams going forward. I personally think this is a transition period.   Bertrand Schmitt I think we are moving from hoarding or software engineering to hoarding the top of the top scientists in AI and hoarding of GPUs, GPUs/data center. For me, it was quite interesting to see the deal of Cursor with xAI, where basically they couldn’t get access to computing resources to run their model. But xAI had, I forgot the exact numbers, but close to half a million GPUs that no one, I mean, “no one was using” because their services are not so successful yet in terms of AI chatbot and the like. Basically, suddenly they are like, “You know what? We control access to resource.” But the new resource is, again, a mix of extremely talented AI engineering or AI scientists versus GPUs/data center. There is this race of controlling boss and everything else is going to be collateral damage. Some examples, I think, are quite interesting. You talk about some example of Amazon, even some production issues. I remember reading a quick post-mortem of one of the issues, and the conclusion was it was AI, definitely part of the issue. But the other part of the issue was AI used by junior engineers. For me, it’s interesting. It shows that actually junior plus AI is actually a danger zone. That’s why many companies are going to be way more careful. “Why do we need the junior people if they are just playing with fire?” I think we go back to that situation of barbell, as you call it. The top talents are extremely valuable because they know how a production system works. They are here to develop better AI systems. But the junior guys playing with fires, yeah, maybe it’s cute in startups, but in a big time production environment, a different story.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro There will be a barbell with top-end talent super-mega paid and then mid-level talent that is individual contributors still doing a lot of great work, et cetera. Along the way, a lot of emptying of entry, a lot of emptying of the middle. Where does the talent go? The Three (?) Destinations I think we could say there’s three destinations for this talent. Maybe there’s four, maybe there’s more. Three that we can immediately identify. One is the AI native startup piece, where we have smaller teams that potentially get to a lot of revenue or top line over time, and where the Series Seed is the primary round, where we’re seeing Series Seed being raised of tens of millions of dollars, actually even hundreds of millions of dollars in Series Seed. In some ways, the stars there can get incredible compensations in terms of stock. They will stay for private and selling in secondaries later down the road because there’s so much capital at the table. Actually, in some ways, salaries are very high as well in some of these companies. It’s not like you’re trading off anything. You can get paid a lot of money. If your company at Series Seed for 10 or 15 employees has raised 50-$100 million, you can pay great salaries. In some ways, this is the extreme destination. The AI native startups that can make it is the extreme destination. Now, there aren’t a ton of AI native startups that can raise 50-100 million to 400 million in Series Seed, just to be clear. There’s a handful of hot deals in that space, but that’s one clear destination for top-end talent going through that. In that market, I think that’s one of the destinations. The second one is more what we would call the human-verified premium. It’s more of a play of companies that has still the need of human in the loop, either in terms of development, also in terms of activity, either because go-to markets are very intensive, and so therefore you need to have sales forces, partnership teams, et cetera. Or on the engineering side, it needs to have a lot of customization, integration. Companies are not just going to the, “Oh, you can come in and just apply your AI tooling and somehow magically the systems all work.” there needs to be quite a lot of and work and high touch work in getting stuff done. A significant part of that market, I’m not sure, is super VC investible. Maybe it’s a hybrid of private equity in VC, more PE style in many cases. It’s a PE-hold, sell to someone else market. As we’ve discussed in a previous episode on the SaaS-apocalypse, that hasn’t quite worked out for PEs. Question marks on how that human-verified premium market is going to evolve. But obviously, there’s a lot of work still to be done there, even on the engineering and science side. That’s the second potential destination. Then the third more aggressive destination is the reindustrialized middle companies that have a lot of specificity in going after small and medium businesses, local or regional affectations like ERPs or CRMs for specific markets, et cetera. Those are the three natural destinations. I would add the fourth, which is big tech. I mean, big tech doesn’t magically disappear, and I don’t think it fits neatly into any of these three markets. In some ways, big tech is now looking at the extreme for top talent a little bit like the AI native startup because they can pay. They can pay the 100 million every four years, et cetera. I do think it will typify taxonomically into a fourth type emerging, where, as we discussed, you’ll have top-end individual contributor talent. You’ll have the absolute top-end of the market because they can get paid. Then you’ll start having the emergence of earlier talent that is highly capable, et cetera. That will go back to a bit of a normal distribution in terms of talent on big tech. For me, those are the four destinations that I would put at the table.   Bertrand Schmitt For me, big tech moving to big tech, I’m not sure if it’s really a destination. I mean, yes, in some ways it’s a reshuffle between the big tech companies. They are definitely all fighting in some ways for some of the same people. I can see that dramatic shift where big tech has to remove a lot of positions in order to replace by AI. Again, I think at this stage, it’s mostly driven by AI coding. We are still at the beginning because this is brand-new phenomenon that AI coding is so successful at its task. I don’t think it was true even 6 months ago. Some companies, take Anthropic, take OpenAI, are definitely there or close to be there in terms of no more writing of a single line of code by a human, zero. This is, again, 6, 12 months ago. Not true. But now it’s true in a few top companies. Take OpenClaw as well, most successful GitHub project of all time, not a single line written by its author. It would have been impossible. We’re talking about hundreds of thousands of line of code in a few months. It’s impossible to achieve that manually. If you look at the other big tech companies, the Google of the world, the Meta of the world, the Microsoft of the world, they are absolutely not there yet. They are going to be there because they have no choice. It’s you either go fast there or you die. You are not going to be able to survive competitors that are shipping 10, 50, 100 times faster than you are shipping. It’s a life and death situation. All the big tech companies are going to move, and mark my word, in the next 2 years from 10, 20% of AI-written code to 100%. During that transition, the next 2 years max, if you don’t do it in 2 years, you are going to die. Your stock price is going to crash. Then, of course, you will have to make changes. You will have to invest more in GPUs. You will have to invest less in your standard typical software engineer employees. Like you, I’m very optimistic that there are new buckets. AI-native startups definitely will be there. It will be transformational. Human-verified premium, very interesting category. In a way, it will be businesses that are inevitably less scalable through AI, and there is definitely a spot from there. I think the biggest would be the reindustrialized middle SMBs. Most of S&P 500 type of business are going to dramatically offer new software opportunities, new opportunity story to talented software employees because they will need to implement AI in everything they do. They will do it. They will need people who have software engineering knowledge in order to implement these systems. For them, what’s changing dramatically really is that thanks to much cheaper cost as thanks to AI coding, a lot of software projects that they couldn’t afford to do, that they couldn’t imagine doing by themselves, they are able to do it. They will invest in a lot more software capabilities than ever before. That will be a big game changer. And software, very tuned to their business model. There might be less buying of your traditional off-the-shelf SAF software and a lot more investment in a highly custom software by their own team, assisted with AI. I think that would be the part that is most transformed by all of this in a positive way.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Alternative Cap Tables, Alternative Compensation Models This will lead to a very fundamental shift, right back to the broken contract. What does the new contract look like? It looks like alternative cap tables depending on which bucket are you transitioning into. If you’re going into your AI-native bucket, and you’re a top-end talent, you’re like, “Dude, I’m worth 100 million over 4 years, so just compensate me accordingly with a mix of options in the company plus my salary.” If you’re top 1%, you can probably get away with salaries that you’d get anyway at mid-level from 300K, 400K and above, and you can get actually a lot of options already in the company. A lot of this is happening right now. There’s a premium for AI, we know that. There’s a premium for AI at the top end of AI researching, in particular on companies that are doing hardcore research on staff AI engineers, so companies that require actual AI engineering. There is a premium that is significant. It could be as high as 18% over non-AI peers, and it widens actually with seniority, shockingly enough. This is more of an average than anything else. Now, for me, and it’s for debate, but the perspective is this extreme comp will need to compress at some point. There will still be the haves and have-nots paid much better than the have-nots, so to speak, but there will be a compression. The variance can’t be the variance we’re seeing today for absolute top-end talent. That said, there will be variants. We know that big tech for over a decade, decade and a half, for example, in the Bay Area, has been paying a lot of money for director and above levels that used to be the VPs, so a million, a million and a half a year, all in compensations. It’s not unheard of that this will actually increase after this stage. That said, I do think that the compensation extreme that we’re in will get diluted down the middle. It will actually come down at some point. It’s part of where we are today. As we know, it is still a bubble.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah, it’s an interesting point. I think it’s possible. At the same time, that compression coming 2, 3, 5 years. At the same time, we have examples where there is no such compression. Take the top sports players in the world, golfing, basketball, NBA players. There has not really been any compression at all. For me, it’s interesting. If you look at the big tech companies, each being one of this top NBA team, why would such compression happen? As long as they are competing against each other and generating plenty of cash, I think there will be some fair question. We will see. I don’t have a strong opinion, but for me, it’s not a total given.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro For me, the shocking thing is the faster AI becomes better, the more that compression will happen, because at some point, it’s like, why do you need the top talent as well? I don’t know. It feels like you’re trying to evolve a system that’s there to replace you. It’s like, “Okay, I’m getting paid 100 million over the next 4 years”, and then you develop something that’s so good that replaces you. Thank you. That’s cool.   Bertrand Schmitt That’s a total possibility, yes, because we are in that very unusual market where the game is to only replace yourself and people like yourself. At some point, it is a possibility, I guess this one. Right now, we’re talking about replacing your “average software talent”. In 2 years, could we absolutely replace the absolute best top experts in the world? Probably. I think it’s just that at some point we’ll be reaching the stage where we strictly have no control anymore on our AI systems because no human is able to challenge and understand what’s produced. It’s not just a question of scale anymore. We’re talking about a gap in IQ, basically.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Exactly. It will happen at some point in history. We don’t know exactly when. For the second bucket, the human-verified premium bucket, it’s difficult to see how an HVAC company or an HVAC roll-up of scale or a regional health care platform or high touch go-to-market, B2B, SaaS play, et cetera, for a vertical will compete. At the same end, they have to compete and they will compete. There will be more and more jobs, we believe, for engineering talent in these companies. They’ll have to be more and more AI-enabled themselves. The cash salaries will have to be competitive within the local markets, not necessarily with Silicon Valley. There will be potentially profit sharing and revenue sharing and actual dividends played at the table. The model there on the cap table needs to change a little bit, needs to be probably propped up more on salary and on some way of doing profit sharing or actually having dividends paid to employees and figuring out employee to equity in a more aggressive manner. This is the market that probably was already very attacked, so to speak, or let’s say, occupied by private equity firms. There are still obviously part of that model that would work well. There needs to be a fundamental shift, certainly on the quantum of salary compensation, dividend compensation, profit sharing, and all of that. Then last but not the least, obviously, we had the bucket around basically the reindustrialization of the middle, so everything else, which will take most of the belly that we were talking about. This is probably a poor analogy, the belly fat. It’s not belly fat, it’s people that were doing their jobs that now are getting disrupted. In some ways, that bucket will absorb a lot of that belly, will absorb a lot of talent. The small and medium businesses that Bertrand was saying will need to crucially become more AI, software-enabled by themselves, even with some core stuff and underpinnings that actually might not even require AI in terms of infrastructure platforms. There, you need to get properly paid. Again, how many people do you need in your engineering team if you’re a small business? Probably not a lot. It’s maybe you need one or two people and that’s it. They’ll need to be very nicely paid because they’re running the stuff in the rails. This is probably a market that over time, as AI gets more and more competent, will also be disrupted, but let’s not talk about the disruption to the disruption because otherwise, we’ll stay here the whole day, but certainly a market that has a lot of potential to shift and to absorb a lot of the moments that we’re seeing in terms of layoffs happening in the US in particular.   Bertrand Schmitt This category was a category that historically could not compete with Silicon Valley salaries, could not attract the most talented engineers. It’s not a category that didn’t want to bring these people on board. It’s a category that just couldn’t afford to bring this talent on board, typically. I think it would be a dramatic shift for them when suddenly there are opportunities to hire these people. There is an opportunity to hire them at maybe more reasonable prices from this company’s perspective. You talk about small companies, the great thing is that there are millions of small companies at some point. I think things could be truly transformational. Of course, some of these engineers, software engineers, might decide to become entrepreneurs on their own. Solo entrepreneurs, small businesses, build their own, easier to build their own product to market so to serve other companies. I think there will be quite dramatic changes because not all companies will be disrupted by AI as much, but not every company will benefit from improving processes, improving software through AI. At least early on, you will need this human touch to make it work inside a business. Interestingly enough, I was hearing that some companies like IBM were hiring more younger people to do the work of going to the client, understand their needs, propose implementation plans. That forward deployed engineer, those positions, I think there will be more and more available.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Investor Landscape Fragmentation What happens to investor into the landscape? We already had an episode, the previous one, Episode 76, where we talked quite a lot about the big capital reset on the private equity and private reset, including venture capital. Just maybe to summarize, how does it align with the buckets that we’ve just been discussing? I think the AI-native bucket clearly is going to be the key bucket. There, we’re going to see two movements. One movement, which is the mega funds, as we discussed in the last episode, are no longer just VC funds. They’re really mostly multi-asset private equity funds, maybe even private equity hedge funds in some cases. Those funds will be all over the high-growth AI-native companies and will be pouring money into companies that are scaling really, really quickly. The early stage, so to speak, VCs, the actual VCs that will stay in the market will be the guys probably identifying the next big wave of AI-native companies. We’ve discussed that as well in the last episode, some research that we did at Chamaeleon that I shared in episode 76. We’ll see that as emerging. What happens to the second bucket, the bucket around human premium, human in the loop? Likely we’ll have more and more private equity capital going into it and the large-scale VC guys, the Thrives of the world, they’ve just announced Thrive Holdings, and others going after those markets as well. It’s trying to converge into the private equity market, which aligns with the point we made in the previous episode that the VC mega funds are no longer VC, that they are private equity, multi-asset class. They’re going after a bunch of things. There’s a conversion happening from VC into private equity. It was going to happen anyway because the private equity guys were coming into VC as well and the hedge funds were coming to VC as well. There’s a convergence in the middle of very, very large funds and large assets under management happening to go after some of these opportunities, certainly in Bucket B. Then this Bucket C, so to speak, the bucket of reindustrialization, as Bertrand was saying, very well, likely will be self-funded for a significant period of time. Will self-fund with their own cash flow. Doesn’t need to have a ton of capital intensity. Maybe you need one or two engineers to do stuff, but that’s it. You don’t need tons of capital. You didn’t need in the past, you won’t need it today. Not sure there’s going to be a fundamental shift to that market.   Bertrand Schmitt Yes, I certainly, overall, agree with you. That last pocket, probably little change to the capital and capital structure. Again, I see that as the biggest opportunity for a lot of people who might be less needed by big tech and also top tech companies. What is sure for the first category, the high native startups? I would say more overall in the VC ecosystem, there is no space left for SaaS anymore. I think SaaS, as we used to know it, is dead in some ways in the sense that new pure SaaS software startup are definitely out. Existing ones that are critical to run your infrastructure, the Salesforce of the world, I think they’re in a decent spot. Actually, interestingly, they changed their pricing model to now sell to AI agents, not just per seat. There is a change in pricing there. But this day and age of funding a pure SaaS software startup through VC money, no way. VC money going to AI-native startups, AI-focused startups, to biotech, to deep tech, to defense tech, yes. SaaS as a fundable category early on, I think it’s over.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I’m a bit more nuanced as we shared in The SaaS Apocalypse episode. We can call it whatever we call. It’s applied AI is the new SaaS thing. Horizontal applied AI is the new horizontal SaaS or vertical applied AI is the new vertical SaaS. I agree in common with your point that very specific point solutions around SaaS will be disrupted by nature with all the easy stuff you can do today with AI. It will take a while. This is not something that’s going to happen this year. It’s going to happen over the next years. Maybe interesting to also talk about the exit markets. I think the IPO market, as we’ve also discussed in the past, there is, in my view, going to be a reopening of the IPO market, I think this year, probably later in the year, third or fourth quarter. The median time to IPO actually is going to be really weird because there’s going to be potentially some companies in the current landscape, bubble or no bubble, that are going to IPO, the OpenAIs of the world, Anthropics of the world, et cetera. There will be more and more aggression, I think, on M&A. Big tech has already shown it, that they want to buy into markets. Large non-tech companies have also started doing acquisitions in space. To prop up their IT teams, their engineering teams with this world that we’ve also discussed in previous episodes that I’m going to own my own engineering stack for now. As we see, that normally doesn’t withstand the test of time. At some point it will get unbundled and served by someone else. Then finally, the secondary market is very hot right now. Obviously, there’s heavy discounting on some areas, high premiums on others. The exit market, strangely enough, is going to be propped up, in my opinion, over the next year to 2 years, dramatically. Then we’ll see if there’s a big reckoning around the bubble that we are clearly in or not, if it’s a soft landing or hard landing. Definitely, there’s going to be a lot of exit paths over the next year to 2 years.   Bertrand Schmitt Concerning the “bubble”, I have two perspectives on this. One is it’s a bubble in the sense that money is going to a lot of players and some players are going to blow it up. There will be a concentration of players at the end, like it usually happens. If you look at, for instance, long time ago, the railway revolution, there was that intense influx of capital. At the end of the day, there was a dramatic change in transportation in the US and a complete railway system put in place. Yes, some investors lost money, some companies went bankrupt, but the transformation was fully real. There were a lot of top leaders at the end of this revolution. The change after that only happened, we guess, post-World War II, with the construction of the highway system and the rise of airlines and plane transportation overall. Here I feel it’s similar in the sense that, yes, there is a lot of money going in. Some players are going to blow it. They will misuse the money in different ways, but that’s part of dynamic allocation of capital. Of course, you make mistakes. That’s what happens. At the same time, I feel it’s a similar level in the sense of this is a dramatic change in the US infrastructure. This buildup of AI data centers filled with GPUs, integrated at scale with some of the best software in the world and running it, supported by a dramatic shift in energy infrastructure. This is for me similar to the Railroad Revolution. Some players might not own the data center they build because they didn’t manage well their debt, they didn’t manage to run proper software. You know what? They will get acquired by somebody else. I think we are at this level of fundamental transformation. The fact that in a matter of maybe 2 years, the move from 0% of code written by AI to 100 % written by AI is an insane dramatic shift. Just to be clear, when you move from manually coded to AI coded, we’re talking about a 100X difference in terms of speed at similar, if not better level of quality. The shift is dramatic, and on top of it, you don’t pay salaries anymore to achieve that. You pay CapEx, and with GPUs and OpEx with electricity. It’s a very big shift, positive shift in business model. New unions, no management over it, AI working 24/7. Personally, I think for me, bubble has a bad connotation in the sense of it was all for a waste. I don’t think it’s all for a waste. I think we are witnessing a dramatic revolution of our lifetimes, quite frankly, bigger than SaaS, bigger than mobile. From my perspective, it’s exciting times.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Operator Playbook and Predictions Let’s move to if you are this person, what would you do in the future? Let’s start with two extremes and go from there. One is you’re non-tech, so you’re not an engineer, et cetera. You’re trying to figure out, how do I scale my activity? Maybe physical labor is where I want to go. It’s not, “Go west” anymore. Definitely not necessarily go west. You should go to, I guess, the states that have no sales tax with very cheap energy because that’s where the data centers are being built if you want to be in that market. Obviously, there’s a lot of stuff that needs to be done: HVAC, electricity work, et cetera. Don’t go west. Go low sales taxes, low cost of energy. That’s likely where the data centers are being built. You probably can just follow. There’s, I’m sure, some way for you to follow where the data centers are being built, but that’s next, I think on that extreme of the table. The other extreme of the table, let’s say you are super ambitious, maybe you’re no longer an engineer, but you’re a product manager in your prompt engineering. You could do prompt engineering all day long. You’re 28, 29-year-old superstar. What do you go and do? Likely either you start your own thing, start your own company because you’re so good at prompt engineering, you probably can do a lot of the code yourself, particularly if you have an engineering background, or you go and join very early an AI-native startup that you think has the chance of going through the roof, and you take a pretty good salary early on, a ton of upside on the company because guess what? Companies like that need product managers. They need people to figure out UX, UI. It’s not going to be, at least for now, yet AI figuring that out for you. Those are two extremes, just to give two of the extremes, like engineering, product management persona, and physical labor at the other extreme, non-tech, et cetera.   Bertrand Schmitt In some ways, every software engineering job is going to become the equivalent of a software engineering manager or a product manager, because suddenly you don’t have to do the coding anymore. You’re managing AI that is coding for you. Either you start to have some manager hat, but we saw the humans, so it’s a very different type of manager, obviously, or you are going to be really an empowered product manager. You’re skipping the middleman. You’re skipping the traditional engineering organization because your engineering organization is AI running and doing the work for you. I still believe that it requires some serious skills. I don’t believe in the vibe coder type of value proposition. I don’t believe in the prompt engineer becoming suddenly super incredible, able to manage that. I still think it requires some serious chops to do the best from all of this and to do it in a safe and sane way. It’s very easy to have poor taste, make mistakes. I don’t know you, but keep reading these stories on the heads of companies who lost everything because of the AI agents. That deleted stuff in production, and they had no backups or the backups weren’t deleted as well. Crazy situation. You cannot run companies like this if you let your agents running wild. You could argue it’s the early days. I would argue it that that issues would be there for a while. You need to have some engineering discipline at core in the company running the business to make sure things don’t go sideways because it would be easy for things to go sideways.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I totally agree. If you’re thinking, Oh, should my kid go into science and engineering and computer science, et cetera? Absolutely, still, because of everything that Bertrand just said. You need to understand actually what code does and what technology does and what all of that does. That’s still a skill of the future. It’s not a skill of the past. In some ways, it’s still a skill of the future very much. Maybe let’s try two more extremes. Around the same level, the person that decided to do an AI native company bootstrapped initially, having difficulty raising a mega round, but could probably get away with raising a 2-3 million seed round, et cetera. Is that still viable? The answer is yes. There’s tremendous capital efficiency right now happening in the market still, 10 plus higher than if you were doing a SaaS company, and you were a founder in 2019 or something like that. That capital efficiency is going to reverberate. You can run a tighter team, smaller team. Actually, you don’t need that many salaries. If you’re a decent engineer as a founder or if you understand enough as a product manager to just generate that code, you can do a lot of stuff yourself, can bring in maybe one or two technical elements to the team early on as you would have done if you were bootstrapped anyway. There’s obviously a path for that. The other extreme is you’re in big tech, you’re level five, individual contributor, making a ton of money, or you were a manager, and you’re now out of a job, where do you go? You can go to a big company that is non-tech, S&P 500 company that’s non-tech, something like that. You join the company, you’ll probably get paid pretty well, maybe not as high as you were paid in big tech. There’s some stock at the table, but guess what? You’ll have probably more work-life balance than you ever did. That’s the trade-off. You’ll have a better job. On the upside, you can transform the company. You can help and be part of transforming a company from non-AI to AI-first or AI-enabled in the future, whatever BS that will look like in terms of the argumentation to the board. You can actually create tremendous productivity enhancements in a big non-tech company if you come with that background. Again, you’ll have certainly a better work-life balance, so not a bad deal, to be honest.   Bertrand Schmitt Also, to be clear, I talk a lot about AI coding because it’s truly transformational. You could argue that it’s going to be self-improving. We are in the situation of a self-improving AI that keeps improving itself thanks to automated coding. It’s a dramatic, virtuous loop. Obviously, AI is also going to improve everything else. It’s going to improve your marketing, it’s going to improve your search process, it’s going to improve your DNA. Improvements will be everywhere. It’s just that right now we are at a point in the quote-unquote revolution where there is one clear piece of the puzzle that is moving faster than the rest.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Bertrand, the senior executives at non-tech don’t know anything about that. It could be just a great prompt engineer. That’s the only job you do. “I’m the chief marketing officer. I have someone below me that’s doing the whole work.” Nobody knows. Nobody’s the wiser, I guess. I’m being facetious, but not fully.   Bertrand Schmitt Yeah. There would be a transition period where what you described happen. I want to say, going back to AI coding, I think that the part of AI that as of today has reached a stage of limited AGI. We have reached, from my perspective, a limited type of AGI for coding. If you take coding as a discipline today, I think we reach AGI. If you go beyond coding, that’s true. If we are talking about coding, leveraging the latest LLMs: OPUS 4.7, ChatGPT 5.5, combined with Claude Code, Codex, and OpenCode for harness, I think we’ve reached AGI in the context of coding. I’m not sure everyone fully realize that and the consequence of that. I think the rest is going to come as well. We are going to see that category by category, usually categories that are more scientific in nature, where you can replicate, where you can test easily, where you can create clear success. Metrics will be the “easiest” to follow in that direction of self-improvement. I just want to highlight that this part is truly transformational, the root cause of everything we’re talking about today. At the same time, it’s coming beyond coding.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro I think it is true. There are a couple of markets where that might not hold true, which is maybe the final path. If you’re thinking of starting your own business in plumbing and in HVAC maintenance and installation, this is a pretty good time for the reasons we already said before. There’s a lot of buildup of data centers and all that stuff, but also for other reasons, because it’s an activity that won’t be disrupted by AI yet. You need them embodied AI. You need physicality to AI to do stuff like actually fixing pipes.   Bertrand Schmitt Until Optimus replace you.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Yeah, but if we’re 3, 4 years out in terms of a lot of these optimizations that we’re talking about at the software layer, we’re 10 years plus out on embodied AI, right?   Bertrand Schmitt Oh, yeah, it’s 10 years.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro We’ll probably be optimistic as we speak. That’s a nice business. I’m thinking of starting to go into that market. If you guys are interested in listening to this, just reach out to me. What’s the angle? I think there’s a lot of stuff you can do in the buildup of some of these businesses, plumbing, HVAC, all sorts of maintenance. There are markets that are just totally messed up. Handyman market in the US is totally messed up. There’s a bunch of companies out there that try to go after it with marketplaces and stuff. I honestly just start something from scratch, a small business, and go from there.   Bertrand Schmitt Yes. They’re an interesting middle. Think about accounting firms, consulting firms. I think they are not as easy to replace, but at the same time, there is no way on what they do is not going to be dramatically changed with AI. I don’t know if it’s 50, 80, 90% of the job, but this is changing quite dramatically, would be my expectation in the coming few years. Conclusion Thanks for listening episode 77 of Tech Deciphered about that great talent redistribution. As you heard it from us, we believe there is a dramatic change in play, enabled by AI coding, and that ultimately a lot of the big tech companies are changing their employee distribution, way more focused on the top talents and bringing more GPUs. As a result, we will see a change in their staffing. Some of this change will benefit AI-focused startups, but probably more likely will benefit the bigger SMBs, the S&P 500 companies of the world that will finally be able to bring inside and afford some of the talent that were in some ways trapped by the top 5, 10, 20 software companies of the world. Thank you, Nuno.   Nuno Goncalves Pedro Thank you, Bertrand

Take the 2026 AI Engineering Survey and get >$2k in credits and AIE WF tickets!This was recorded before Railway suffered a major GCP outage on May 19, despite being a multi-AZ, multi-zone mesh ring, with HA fiber interconnects between their Metal GCP AWS, because workload discoverability was unintentionally still tied to GCP. All has been resolved with a post-mortem.Railway did not start as an AI infrastructure company.It was founded in 2020 years before agents became the default way people thought about deploying software. Jake Cooper, formerly at Bloomberg and Uber, started Railway with a simple obsession: the activation energy to ship something to production should be near zero. Push code, get a URL, iterate. No Docker files, no Kubernetes manifests, no Ansible scripts stacked on Ansible scripts.For years, this was a slow grind. Railway spent its first 18 months hand-acquiring its first 100 users with Jake personally greeting every Discord signup on a second monitor.Today, Railway has raised $124m and is growing very fast. A 35-person team supports 3 million users, adding roughly 100,000 signups a week. Their bare metal data centers have a 3-month payback period vs. renting in the cloud, with 70% margins funding aggressive cloud bursting when needed. The servers they own have actually appreciated in value as RAM prices have climbed basically meaning the value of their hardware now exceeds the capital they've raised.From rebuilding Railway's network overlay over a weekend to moving the vast majority of workloads onto its own bare metal data centers, Jake Cooper is trying to build a new cloud for an agent-native world. In this episode, Railway's founder and “conductor” joins swyx and Alessio to unpack why the next era of software infrastructure is not just “Heroku but newer,” what agents need that humans did not, and why the old deployment loop of Git, PRs, CI/CD, and static cloud resources may be heading for a rewrite.We go deep on Railway's infrastructure stack: own-metal data centers, three-month cloud payback periods, cloud bursting, data center debt, Railpack, Nixpacks, Temporal, feature flags, Central Station, content-addressable filesystems, agent-safe production forks, and why the CLI may become more important than the canvas in an agent world. Jake also shares the founder journey behind Railway, how the company survived losing $500K/month, why it now serves millions of users with only 35 people, and why he believes the pull request is dying.We discuss:* How Railway went from a slow six-year grind to adding 100,000 users a week* How Railway thinks about agents as the next dominant software species* Why agents need version control, observability, compute, storage, and orchestration at 1000x scale* The economics of Railway's own-metal data centers and three-month payback* How Railway uses cloud bursting while scaling its own infrastructure* Why data center debt can be a better tool than venture debt for infra startups* Central Station, Railway's internal system for clustering customer feedback and incidents* Why responsible disclosure and over-communication matter for platforms* Why feature flags, progressive rollouts, and shadow traffic are essential for agents* Temporal's strengths, pain points, and why workflows matter for agents* Railpack, Nixpacks, Nix, and lazy-loaded content-addressable filesystems* Why “cattle, not pets” may change if you can clone the pets* Why Railway is building a new cloud from scratch instead of copying hyperscalers* The solo founder path, focus, writing, and how Jake thinks about company buildingRailway:* Website: https://railway.com/* X: https://x.com/RailwayJake Cooper:* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/thejakecooper/* X: https://x.com/JustJakeTimestamps00:00:00 Introduction: What Is Railway?00:02:07 Jake's Path to Railway00:06:13 Railway's Six-Year Growth Story00:08:52 Rebuilding the Business After the Free Tier00:11:17 Agents as the Next Software Platform00:13:29 Railway's Infrastructure Philosophy00:15:42 Bare Metal, Cloud Economics, and the Compute Crunch00:17:22 Cloud Bursting and Five-Cloud Networking00:20:20 Data Center Debt and Infra Financing00:23:31 Data Centers in Space00:25:24 What Agents Need From Infrastructure00:28:24 CLIs, Canvas, and Agent-Native UX00:35:15 Central Station, Incidents, and Responsible Disclosure00:40:30 Safe Rollouts, SRE Agents, and Production Forks00:45:00 AI SRE, Specs, Code, and Tests00:48:24 Self-Replicating Infrastructure and the New Serverless00:53:18 Heroku, Temporal, and Workflow Engines01:04:07 Railpack, Nixpacks, and Lazy-Loaded Filesystems01:06:01 Coding Agents, Token Spend, and Roadmap Acceleration01:10:56 The Pull Request Is Dying01:12:28 Feature Flags and the Agent-Era SDLC01:16:15 Cattle, Pets, and Cloning Machines01:19:29 Solo Founder Lessons01:24:12 Focus, GPUs, and Building a New Cloud01:28:20 Closing ThoughtsTranscriptAlessio [00:00:00]: Hey, everyone. Welcome to the Latent Space Podcast. This is Alessio, founder of Kernel Labs, and I'm joined by Swyx, editor of Latent Space.Swyx [00:00:10]: Hey, hey, hey. Today we're in the studio with Jake Cooper of Railway.Alessio [00:00:14]: Conductor of Railway.Swyx [00:00:15]: Conductor at Railway. Yeah.Alessio [00:00:16]: Choo-choo.Swyx [00:00:17]: Do you actually have that anywhere, like on your business card?Jake [00:00:20]: We call some of our volunteer moderators conductors. I don't have a business card. We're not that big yet. At some point I will. I got handed a nice business card from the Supermicro folks, and I was like, “Damn, this is pretty official.”Swyx [00:00:30]: Business cards are coming back.Jake [00:00:32]: They're cool. They're hip. The conductor thing is good. We're trying to figure out what we want to call each other internally. Some people think it's super cringe and say, “You don't need a name for people internally.” Some people want to call each other something. We still don't have a really good one.Jake [00:00:55]: We've got New Railcrews, Trainiacs. Nothing has stuck yet.Swyx [00:01:00]: I like Trainiac. Trainiac sounds good. Railwayians. For those who don't know, what is Railway? Let's give people a crisp definition up front.Jake [00:01:09]: Railway is the easiest way to ship anything. You go to the canvas, or you talk with Claude, and you say, “Deploy a Postgres instance, deploy my GitHub repository, run this code,” and you're off to the races.Swyx [00:01:22]: You've got a nice animation on the landing page.Jake [00:01:24]: Thank you. None of my work, by the way. They don't let me touch the design stuff anymore.Jake [00:01:25]: We want to make it trivially easy not just to deploy things, but to evolve applications over time. Most tooling right now stacks entropy on top of entropy: Docker, Kubernetes, Ansible scripts, and all these other things. If we can version all of your software and keep track of all the changes, then we can make it trivial to clone environments, fork into a parallel universe, get copies of production data, get copies of any services, make changes, validate them, and collapse them back in without reproducing everything across a staging environment.The Railway Origin Story: From Uber Systems to a New CloudSwyx [00:02:07]: I was looking at your background: Bloomberg, Uber. Nothing immediately stands out as, “This guy is going to found the next great platform as a service.” What prepared you for Railway?Jake [00:02:21]: It was curiosity to keep going deeper. I started out on front-end stuff, working on Wolfram Mathematica and porting it over. Then I briefly moved to Bloomberg, then toward Uber and distributed systems, taking the Jump Bikes systems and moving them to a distributed system built on top of Cadence, the pre-Temporal Temporal.Swyx [00:02:44]: Which, by the way, I'm happy to talk about, pros and cons.Jake [00:02:48]: Totally.Swyx [00:02:51]: But let's do the Railway story.Jake [00:02:52]: It has been a continual step of wanting an experience. Whether it's walking up to a bike, unlocking it, and having it work frictionlessly, or something else, the depth required to make that happen follows from the experience. A lot of the work I do, and a lot of the team does, is in service of that experience. We fundamentally don't care how deep we have to go. We will swim to the bottom of the swimming pool to get the experience.Jake [00:03:17]: I don't have a physics PhD. I did an EECS degree. It has always been about figuring out the next step: how do we get there? That's what led to starting Railway for that experience and then moving all the way to bare metal data centers. I was adding patches to the kernel this week to get the experience there because I can see how much better it can be.Swyx [00:03:49]: Other patches to the Linux kernel this week?Jake [00:03:51]: Yeah. Not upstream. Our fork.Swyx [00:03:52]: That's a flex. Railpack? No, this is different. This is the OS on top of Railpack?Jake [00:03:57]: No, this is an actual kernel patch. It's always literally: what do we have to do to get that experience? Then figure it out. Anything is figureoutable.Swyx [00:04:10]: Would you send the patch upstream, or does it not fit other use cases?Jake [00:04:13]: Maybe. We have to work out the experience internally. It has to do with the storage layer we're building for some of the agentic stuff. Maybe it'll be useful upstream, but it's deeply useful for us internally.Open Source, Forks, and Non-Deterministic VersioningSwyx [00:04:29]: You mentioned open source before. How do you think about starting from open source, and then coding agents letting you do a lot more from forks of it?Jake [00:04:38]: GitHub's original sin is that it's almost a series of broken pointers. You have this thing, then you clone it, and now you've lost the whole upstream. How do we make it trivial for people to modify really small pieces of it?Jake [00:04:51]: We think of Git in a discrete sense: I've either made a change and merged upstream, or I haven't. What would it look like if it were percentage-based, a little more non-deterministic, or a stream of changes that users traverse as a percentage rolled out in general and then rolled all the way up?Jake [00:05:13]: We have the open-source kickback program and let you deploy templates because we want to make it trivial for people to version these shards over time. It solves a large problem around authentication, authorization, and security. NPM has a way to define, “Don't take any new packages.” The ideal end state is that you roll out progressively to users with the minimum impact zone and continue rolling up. JPMorgan should probably be the last one on the patch line, for all our sakes, because our money and livelihoods are there.Jake [00:05:53]: It's okay if Johnny Vibe Coder gets a broken patch because there's so much entropy in the system that the rubber has to meet the road at some point. You have to test at varying levels.The Long Grind: First Users, Free Tier, and Making the Business WorkSwyx [00:06:13]: I wanted to pull up this glorious chart, which is your usage or number of daily signups?Jake [00:06:22]: Daily signups, I think.Swyx [00:06:24]: You started six years ago. It was a slow grind, and now you're on a rocket ship. You say, “Don't doubt your fight and don't quit.” Maybe pick out certain points that were key inflections for the company.Jake [00:06:40]: At the start, it's about getting your first 100 users, hell or high water. We had a website and a support link. The support link was the Discord channel. I had notifications on with two monitors: the monitor I was working on and the other monitor with Discord. If anybody came in, I was immediately like, “Hey, how's it going?” It was rare, so getting those first 100 users to come back was the start.Jake [00:07:14]: Then you build a consultancy factory because users want all these things. You have to go back to the board and ask, “What is the actual product offering I want to build on top of this?”Jake [00:07:28]: VCs want charts that always go up and to the right, but in reality you don't necessarily want charts that look like that. For us, there have been periods of expansion where we add features to test use cases, and periods of compaction where we ask, “If the experience we have is good, how do we make it significantly better?” Maybe we strip out features that don't fit our ICP anymore.Jake [00:07:57]: The boom from 2022 to 2023 came from the free tier. Everybody under the sun was using it.Swyx [00:08:09]: A lot of Reddit bots and Discord bots.Jake [00:08:12]: And crypto miners. When you build an open product on the internet where anybody can sign up, the internet is a horrible place with so many things. You go through periods of asking, “How do I reach as many people as possible?” Then, “How do I fit the exact use case for the people who really matter and are really excited about this specific thing?”Jake [00:08:39]: Then there was a two-year period of making the actual business work. During the free-tier era, we were losing about half a million dollars a month.Swyx [00:08:59]: On a $20 million bank account.Jake [00:09:02]: On a $20 million bank account with maybe $50,000 a month in revenue. That's a horrible business. I don't know how anybody invested. But you have to go through it and say, “We have an experience people love, but the business has to work.”Jake [00:09:17]: There are two schools of thought. You can run the horrible business all the way up with bad margins, or you can go back and make it work. We've always wanted a super lean team. We're 35 people right now. It's very small.Swyx [00:09:36]: Supporting three million already?Jake [00:09:38]: Yeah. We're adding 100,000 users a week right now, so it's growing fast. We don't want to add headcount for the sake of headcount or throw bodies at problems. We want to build systems. It's hard to build systems during expansion because you're adding things to the system because people are asking for them or things are breaking.Jake [00:10:00]: We had to cut off the free users for a little while, rebuild the business, and make sure it worked. We want to reach as many people as possible because software is important. It's become difficult to create things in the physical world, so it's important to make it easy for people to build in the virtual world and have access to creation. But there are legs to that journey.Jake [00:10:30]: You can see divots in the charts. If you follow between 2025 and 2026, it's either summer or winter. People go on holiday with family.Swyx [00:10:50]: It affects that much?Jake [00:10:51]: Yeah. It's kind of B2C and kind of B2B. People are shipping constantly, then they stop. Our activation curve now shows more people activating on weekdays because we have more business users, so it smooths out over time.Agents as the New Interface to DeploymentSwyx [00:11:17]: Was there a point where you started prioritizing AI development or agent development?Jake [00:11:24]: We've prioritized agentic as a top-of-funnel thing. Over the last six months, we've deeply prioritized agentic as a mechanism to build and deploy things because we believe the curve is so steep and that is how people will build and deploy software.Jake [00:11:42]: It almost fundamentally doesn't matter whether this is dot-com or not because we're all on the internet anyway. If agents are going to deploy a bunch of things and we hit an inference wall at some point, we'll fix those problems. The dominant species over the next 10 years is that we've moved from assembly to C to C++ to JavaScript to words. You're going to need to close that loop.Swyx [00:12:13]: When you say this is dot-com, did you mean buying the domain, or the general case?Jake [00:12:17]: I mean the dot-com era, when companies had a huge run-up because people understood the internet was important. Then they hit bottlenecks, fundamental laws of physics, math didn't work, and everybody came back down to earth. But it didn't matter because the internet became so impactful. If you operate on a long enough time horizon, you should build these things anyway because you can see where it's going.Jake [00:12:45]: That's where I think a lot of agent stuff is. You get to a point where you're running thousands of agents in parallel. What is the inference cost? What is the compute cost? How do you make that efficient? How do you coordinate all this? We have issues coordinating humans; we don't even have good tooling for that. Now we have to figure out how to get agents to coordinate, safely version changes, and know when to raise their hand for someone to intervene. Otherwise it becomes an interrupt factory.Railway's Infrastructure Thesis: Network, Compute, Storage, and MetalSwyx [00:13:19]: Let's go right into the technical side. What are the core infrastructure or architectural beliefs of Railway that allow you to do what you do?Jake [00:13:29]: The primitives matter a lot for us. We need network, compute, storage, and orchestration around it. You need control over a lot of those things. We've talked a lot about how we don't really use Kubernetes because we want higher-order control to place workloads in very specific places.Jake [00:13:48]: The reason is that you have to be very efficient with agents: memory reuse and all these other things, or you're going to massively blow up your cost structure. Being able to rack and stack your own servers and build your own metal unlocks performance and cost. Experiences where you're running 1,000 agents in parallel are not massively cost prohibitive.Jake [00:14:13]: Token use and compute use are blowing up. Over time, those things have to get a lot more efficient. You can get a lot of margin to make those experiences solid by building your own metal. That's all in service of offering a differentiated experience to as many people as humanly possible.Swyx [00:14:51]: You have a data center in Singapore.Jake [00:14:53]: Yeah. We have two in every other region now. In Singapore, we're adding a second one in Q3.Swyx [00:14:58]: What's it like? I've never built a data center. Do you go to Equinix and say, “I want some slots?”Jake [00:15:05]: Yeah. Equinix. You basically go and say, “I want power and I want a cage.” They say, “Great, here's what it's going to be.” You rent the cage for a period of time, fill it with racks and servers, and hook up internet to it. That's all the pieces.Swyx [00:15:36]: Then you handle everything else.Jake [00:15:37]: You handle everything else.Swyx [00:15:39]: What's the math versus clouds doing it for you?Jake [00:15:43]: If we rented in the cloud, our payback period when we go to metal is about three months.Swyx [00:15:50]: Which is crazy.Jake [00:15:51]: It's nuts. That's four years of depreciated hardware. You're going to see a lot of this compute crunch because hyperscalers are buying up a lot of stuff. We're working directly with OEMs, resellers, and people building these machines: Supermicro, Dell, and others.Jake [00:16:11]: Upstream, there's a bunch of supply pressure. When we raised our last round, between deploying capital for servers and now, the amount of money we've raised is less than the amount of money we have in the bank plus the value of the servers because the servers have appreciated as RAM has gone up. It's nuts how valuable hardware has become.Jake [00:16:50]: If you look at hyperscalers, they deployed around $80 billion of capital expenditures this year, and next year will be more. That's a massive infrastructure build-out. You look at that and think it's crazy that they're spending way more than the Manhattan Project. But if every person is going to run dozens or hundreds of agents in parallel, you have no conceptual idea how much compute is required to make that experience happen, even if you're deeply efficient and sharing resources. And that doesn't even count inference.Swyx [00:17:22]: How do you plan the build-out? The growth chart is so vertical. Are you usually at 100% utilization as soon as racks are live? How far ahead are you planning?Jake [00:17:33]: We still maintain cloud presence for bursting. We work with AWS, GCP, and a few other clouds. We can rent, and then the moment we get space or power, we compact those workloads off the cloud. We started on the clouds, then built a system to migrate to our own metal. There's nothing that says you can't continually do that again, and that's exactly what we do. We never want to be compute constrained.Jake [00:18:09]: At the start of the year, we actually became compute constrained because one upstream provider wasn't able to give us quota at the rate we needed, and the hardware was slower. I spent a weekend rebuilding our entire network overlay so we could straddle five clouds: Oracle, AWS, ourselves, GCP, and one other one. We can do more than that now.Jake [00:18:38]: We got into a spot where we were trying to pack instances tight because we couldn't get enough compute. That led to a few reliability issues, which are now past us. I made a tweet pointing out that it's becoming harder and harder to acquire compute at the rate these models need to acquire compute. We got bit by it.Swyx [00:19:15]: How do you think about pricing knowing you might not have your own metal available at all times? Are you pricing assuming you need extra margin if you end up going into the cloud?Jake [00:19:26]: Because we've built out our metal data centers, our margins on metal are around 70%. We can deeply subsidize the cloud business if we want to scale at a reasonable rate. We have a few levers: metal, which makes the margins; cloud burst; debt to buy servers; and venture capital. It's an interesting operational problem: how much cash do we have, how much should we raise, how quickly can we deploy it, and can we scale revenue as quickly as we scale compute?Jake [00:20:05]: If we continue making it trivially easy for people to build and deploy, then the faster we close that loop and the more operationally excellent we are with capital, the faster the business can scale. It's almost a straight linear deployment rate.Financing Infrastructure: Hardware Debt, VC, and Operational LeverageSwyx [00:20:20]: I think infra startups raising debt is a tool people don't utilize enough or know enough about. What can you tell us about that? Is it secured against your CPUs?Jake [00:20:32]: It's secured against our hardware.Swyx [00:20:37]: What rates do you get? Who are the lenders?Jake [00:20:39]: We pay prime plus a spread, and we can refinance any of the debt as rates go down. The terms are pretty good. The unfortunate thing is that Twitter has no nuance, so people say, “Venture debt bad.” But as with all things, there are specific tools and areas where you can be deliberate instead of using one tool as a hammer. Venture capital is not the hammer for everything. You have to explore and figure out what works.Swyx [00:21:12]: VC is usually the most expensive financing you can get.Jake [00:21:15]: Yeah. I also think people think about VC incorrectly from a capital-raising perspective. Most people think, “How do I raise as much money as possible from whoever is probably the best I can get at that time?” That's close to right, but what we've tried to do is figure out what unfair advantage we can buy with that equity.Jake [00:21:34]: It's the most expensive equity you're going to give away at that point in time, assuming the company keeps getting better. How do you use it to work with someone stellar who complements you? In the seed stage, I had never started a company. Ray Tonsing had good advice, and I could text him all the time. He was really fast. Awesome.Jake [00:22:01]: Then with John and Erica at Unusual, they said, “You roughly know what you're doing building a product. We'll mostly leave you alone and be available for advice.” Amazing. Then we got to Series A and the business was an operational tire fire because we didn't know how to scale a business. Work with Erica, and Jordan is over at Redpoint, so bonus.Jake [00:22:28]: Now we've raised from TQ and FPV as we're moving into enterprises. Every step of the way, we've asked: who can we partner with at this specific time to unlock the next section of the journey? I don't know enterprise sales. As an engineer, I can eyeball what features we might need, and we have wonderful people internally who can help. But you want boardroom dynamics where everyone is aligned and asking, “How do we win this?” instead of bickering about strategy.Data Centers in Space and the Physics of ComputeSwyx [00:23:31]: You had a tweet about data centers in space. Why no data centers in space?Jake [00:23:37]: It's not “no data centers in space.” My hot take is that I think it is solvable. I've just never seen anybody solve it.Swyx [00:23:49]: You said, “How are you going to dissipate that much heat in a vacuum?” You're making a physics claim.Jake [00:23:55]: I haven't seen anybody prove how you're going to dissipate that much heat in a vacuum. It doesn't mean it's not possible. It just means nobody has brought it up yet.Swyx [00:24:05]: Astrophage.Jake [00:24:06]: I don't know what that is.Swyx [00:24:07]: The Martian thing. Okay, you're very logical.Jake [00:24:09]: It could work. A lot of people are putting the cart before the horse. They say, “We're going to put data centers in space.” Okay, but how? “We have time to figure it out.” It's like in The Martian where they ask how they're going to intercept something and say, “We'll figure it out.”Swyx [00:24:36]: Making a bet on human invention is weird because you blind trust that it can be solved. But with physics, there are first-principles bounds you can put on it. Maybe not. Maybe you're asking to travel time or break a fundamental thermodynamic law.Jake [00:24:57]: I don't know how VCs do this either. How do you know what's not possible and a grift versus what's possible but sounds completely insane? “We're going to put data centers in space.” Coin flip as to which it is, and I guess you'll know in 10 years. That's one cycle.What Agents Need: Versioning, Observability, and 1,000x ScaleSwyx [00:25:23]: Moving back to agents. The branching, fast spin-up, and orchestration you do feels like pre-work that happened to be exactly what agents want. What do agents want differently than humans?Jake [00:25:37]: They want the ability to version things. It's not that different; it materializes slightly differently. Agents want a way to test changes incrementally. Engineers have feature flags. Is there a reason agents can't use feature flags? I don't think so.Jake [00:25:54]: They want version control. Can we use Git or not Git? That one is up in the air. I think something outside Git will emerge for how we version these things over time. They need observability. You need to query what happened, when it happened, which steps failed, traces, logs, metrics, and all the rest. They need network, compute, and storage. They need to write files, save files, iterate on files, and snapshot file systems.Jake [00:26:25]: A lot of what humans needed is in line with what agents need. Branching and forking are not different; we're just moving 1,000 times quicker. It can look like you need something massively different, but what you need is something massively better than what existed. You need orchestration massively better than Kubernetes. You need networking probably better than Envoy. It goes all the way down the stack.Jake [00:26:55]: If the workload profile doesn't change so much as it gets massively compressed because you need thousands of these things, what assumptions change? etcd is going to melt. You need to replace it with something. You can go all the way down the stack and say, “That part has to change, that part has to change, and that part has to change.”Jake [00:27:19]: The interesting thing about the super-exponential curve is that you have to build systems where you can rip out those parts at any time because a new bottleneck might emerge. You get good at parallel agents, and a different part of the system breaks. So it's similar to what humans needed, but at 1,000x scale.Jake [00:27:55]: How do you do code review in the age of agents?Swyx [00:28:00]: You throw more agents at it.Jake [00:28:01]: You don't. But then who reviews for CVEs and all these other things?Swyx [00:28:07]: More agents.Jake [00:28:08]: And that's how we hit the inference wall. You can continually throw agents at the problem, but I think there's a limit to the number of agents you can throw at a problem.CLI, Agent Handles, and Closing the LoopSwyx [00:28:24]: You already had a CLI before it was cool. How is the shape of what you're exposing changing, if at all?Jake [00:28:28]: CLIs have always been cool. The CLI changes because we think about how to give Claude, Codex, ChatGPT, or any model a handhold.Jake [00:28:50]: A CLI is a single command: deploy, get logs, and so on. Things that were prohibitively annoying to humans are not annoying to agents. They're nice. If I handed you a CLI with 40 arguments and 600 flags, you'd think, “I'm never going to use all of this.” But if you hand it to an agent, it says, “This is excellent. I have so many handles to work with.”Jake [00:29:24]: If you're going to expose things to agents that way, you want as many handles as possible where they can get information, query dynamic information, and close the loop quickly. Most problems right now are about how to close the loop as quickly as possible. Where does the agent get stuck, and how can you remove that?Jake [00:29:49]: Telemetry is important. If you can tell where the agent gets stuck from the CLI and say, “12% of people deviate from the happy path because of this, and now I add this argument and drive it down to 2%,” you massively increase the rate of loop closure.Jake [00:30:03]: That's how we think about not just the CLI, but every point in the dashboard. It's a user journey: I hear about Railway. I get something deployed. I get my first green build or aha moment. I see an endpoint, logs, whatever. Then I iterate. The iteration loop is indefinite. The user wants to deploy a new thing, a Postgres instance, change code, and keep iterating.Jake [00:30:36]: If you focus on the iteration loops and what's blocking them from closing quickly, one thing we say internally is: you never want to be waiting on compute anymore. You always want to be waiting on intelligence. If you're waiting on compute, there's a bottleneck that needs to be destroyed because eventually that bottleneck becomes so large that another workflow emerges to change it.Jake [00:31:04]: We've built a product where you push code, build it, and so on. But I fundamentally believe the push-pull loop is going away. We'll get to a point where you make a small change in production, that change is versioned across your infrastructure, you're working alongside copy-on-write versions of your database and infrastructure, and then you merge it in and it's instantaneously live. That's the holy grail of loops. The push-pull-rebuild thing is a point of friction that we're removing entirely.Canvas as Output: Dashboards, Context Anchors, and HyperstructuresSwyx [00:31:43]: It's incredibly fast. If anyone hasn't tried it, that fast feedback is great. My hot take is that Railway was famous for its canvas, which visualizes your infrastructure and lets you manipulate it visually. But that was for humans. For the next phase of growth, Railway CLI is more important than canvas.Jake [00:32:05]: The canvas is funny because it's a mechanism to show changes over time. You're right that previously we used it a lot as an input. Moving forward, its goal is more like an output. You would go to the canvas, make changes, see them, and watch your infrastructure evolve. Now agents have access to the CLI and can make those changes. So the canvas becomes an output: what information does the human need at this moment to make suitable decisions about control requests? Do I approve this or not?Jake [00:32:57]: It also has to be an anchor for your context, a port in the storm. Think of it like layers in a file system. You start with a project, then drill down into services, then into a function or code, because you want to represent the entire thing not just in your head, but in the canvas. Other people can share that representation, think on the same wavelength, and move quickly.Jake [00:33:33]: A lot of organizations get in trouble as they scale because all the context lives in someone's head. “How does this microservice work?” “I have no idea; go ask this person.” Then you have whole categories of products built around context discovery. A lot of that melts away if you have a solid hierarchy and can infinitely nest services, code, context, and everything else all the way down. That's what lets you build these structures over time.Jake [00:34:18]: It's also what lets us build what I've called hyperstructures: things that are way bigger. You look at the Golden Gate Bridge and ask, “How did we build that?” There's a meme that we lost the technology. To some extent, yes, because the coordination that built those things evolved and changed. We lost some of the art of building structure as we jammed everything into Slack.Swyx [00:34:52]: But you jam everything in Discord.Jake [00:34:53]: Same point. It doesn't matter. It's message passing and interrupts, message passing and interrupts.Swyx [00:35:00]: So you're arguing there should be something better and more structured than Slack?Jake [00:35:04]: Yeah. For sure. I think Slack is awful, and Discord is awful too.Central Station: Context Routing, Support, and Incident ClustersSwyx [00:35:09]: This is the equivalent of my mom test. What have you done that has your solution to this?Jake [00:35:15]: Internally, we've built a tool called Central Station that aggregates all the context from our users. Every piece of feedback, every customer support item, everything gets aggregated into clusters. If an incident is brewing, we can determine how many users are affected and break off a discussion based on that.Jake [00:35:40]: That is more helpful than long-running channels where you're trying to decide which channel to put something in. If you can dynamically aggregate information and dynamically route it to the right person based on context, it works better. We know internally that these four people are close to networking. If we see a networking thing, we can drill it down to those four people. If it's with this part, we can look at the commits. This is no longer a manual process internally.Jake [00:36:13]: If you go to station or help.railway.com, that's why we built it. We wanted to scale with a massive amount of leverage by aggregating feedback.Swyx [00:36:27]: This is built in-house?Jake [00:36:28]: Yep.Swyx [00:36:29]: I remember helping out on this one with Angelo in 2023. You scale a lot with a very small team.Jake [00:36:38]: Yeah. We're about 10 times bigger now.Swyx [00:36:40]: You have your full developer code here? Very cool.Jake [00:36:44]: If you go to railway.com/stats, we expose this as a pub-sub-able thing. It's all real-time metrics. There's a way to get it as JSON somewhere if you care.Jake [00:37:01]: We're big on trying to build everything in public and talk about what we're working on. We've had issues in the past, and we'll say, “Here's how we're fixing these things.” We've gotten compliments and flak for incident reports. We're always trying to make them better and talk with people.Incidents, Disclosure, and Progressive RolloutsSwyx [00:37:20]: You had a big one recently. I liked that it was scoped to 3,000. You presumably used Central Station. Talk through what happened and how you address it internally as a team.Jake [00:37:38]: Internally, this one really sucked. It had to do with an upstream provider that didn't do the behavior it said it documented, which is unfortunate given they wrote the RFC for how the behavior should work. We rolled those things out, and Central Station caught it initially when a couple users said caches weren't invalidating. We turned it off immediately.Jake [00:38:03]: When you roll out to a large user base of three million people, you get a lot of disparate behaviors. We tested in staging and had tests, but we hit an edge case. We've hardened those systems, and now we can make that better. But it was a tough one.Swyx [00:38:39]: I always wonder how private disclosure is supposed to work if people find an issue. Are they supposed to contact you first? When you run a platform, these things will happen. What channels should people pursue to quietly resolve it before it becomes a bigger incident?Jake [00:38:59]: There's responsible disclosure. We err on the side of over-disclosing and letting you know something is wrong versus having your provider gaslight you. We've erred on sharing those things more publicly, even if they impact a small subset of users. That's a decision we've made internally. We have four values. One is honor. The honorable thing is to notify people to the widest degree at which they may have been affected or there was an issue, and then confront it head-on: why did it happen, what can we do better?Swyx [00:39:45]: Not the whole user base. That's because of incremental rollouts and other things?Jake [00:39:50]: Yeah. Progressive rollouts.Swyx [00:39:54]: That should be the norm at all large platforms.Jake [00:39:58]: It should. A variety of companies do this. There's the quote that Meta runs 10,000 different versions of Meta. To our earlier point about agents, they need the same thing. They need shadow traffic and all these other things. We've built so much ceremony around production being sacred that we need to make it trivially easy to test different behaviors in a safe environment. Then you can make mistakes in a safe environment.Safe AI SRE: Customer Agents, Forked Environments, and Production ParityAlessio [00:40:30]: Do you see a world where these things get automatically caught, not necessarily by your agent, but by your customer's agent? The cache invalidation issue seems easy to check if you know to look for it.Jake [00:40:44]: It's hard because to determine it, we almost need to hook into your observability infrastructure. That's why we have the template loop on the platform: so you can roll things out progressively. You can roll out to Johnny Vibe Coder initially, or push a shard that someone consumes at their own leisure. Or you can roll it out over weeks: 0.1% of people, 1% of people, early adopters, then all the way up. That's the non-deterministic version control we talked about earlier.Jake [00:41:30]: I believe that's where most things should go, because most companies end up building staged rollout systems in-house. It's the same thing built again and again at every company. There's a massive opportunity to consolidate developer debt.Alessio [00:41:45]: You should have a free tier. Model providers give free tokens if you let them use the data. You could give free compute if someone is the number-one shard that goes out and lets you plug into their observability.Jake [00:41:55]: We do that. That's why we talked about the impact on 3,000 people. We start with lower-impact people. Larger companies on the platform are last to receive those rollouts so they have a version of the platform that's deeply stable.Alessio [00:42:16]: I have three services, so I'm sure I get the first rollout. You can nuke my thing at any time. There are all these SRE agent companies. Observability people also want agents that fix upstream problems. You have your own agent in the canvas now. How do you see that playing out?Jake [00:42:39]: It's the stacking entropy problem. If you don't have primitives to make iteration in production safe, it becomes difficult. If you're an observability provider saying, “Here's the fix to this error,” assume 80% are good and make sense. But in the last 20% long tail of complex issues, if you let somebody stamp it, you create an opportunity for an incident.Jake [00:43:08]: That's why forked environments are important. People have staging, but it always drifts from production. You need primitives, workflows, and experience built first-party on the platform so you can fork any service at any point in time.Jake [00:43:33]: I think of the canvas as a sheet of transparency paper. The agent is a little guy you push up into the canvas. It should say, “I need to copy that service and that service so I can test these two things.” It gets a read-only copy of production. Anything that's PII gets marked as a transform when we clone the database, create a copy-on-write version, or read from it. Then the agent makes changes and asks, “Does this actually work?” as close to production as possible.Jake [00:44:22]: That's how close you have to be, or you get massive drift. The system becomes unstable. You see this with massive systems built on Docker for local, Kubernetes for production, and a specific thing for something else. That complexity slows developers and becomes unstable at scale, making it hard to iterate. We want to compress that way down and say, “As close to prod as possible is where we want to be.”From AISRE Skeptic to Agent BelieverSwyx [00:45:00]: I was texting Erica for questions, and she says you were originally not a believer in AISRE. Have you come around on it?Jake [00:45:10]: I flipped, but I'm still not a believer in AISRE if you don't have the primitives to make it safe. If you unleash AISRE on production infrastructure without safe primitives for copying volumes and making sure things are fine, it's going to nuke your production database. It's not a matter of if, but when. I'm a big believer in making those loops safe.Jake [00:45:33]: I was a deep AI skeptic until 2023. In 2024, I thought, “Maybe I can roughly make this thing do it.” In 2025, I thought, “Now I can hold this.” Over winter break, everybody came back saying, “It's almost impossible to hold this.”Swyx [00:46:01]: Did you see this on the Claude docs? CloudBot? OpenCloud?Jake [00:46:06]: It's gotten to a point where it's harder to hold it wrong than to hold it right. There's a scene in Avengers where Vision picks up Thor's hammer and says it's terribly well-balanced. It self-balances and works well. I'm a deep believer at this point that this will be the dominant species: assembly, C, C++, JavaScript, words.Swyx [00:46:35]: It feels like a big jump.Jake [00:46:37]: It is. But it's not like you abandon CPU-based discrete logic and move straight to fuzzy logic. You need both. Your skills should call code or applications or some static structure. You can use skills to distill what the procedure should be or how the code should act.Jake [00:47:02]: I'm coming to a thesis: you need three points. You need a clear spec defining the system, the code, and the tests. When you say it out loud, if you've been in engineering long enough, you're like, “Of course. That's an RFC, tests, and code.” But they all matter. Having them together lets them reinforce each other: the spec and tests match, but the code doesn't, so reconcile it. Or the tests and code match but the spec doesn't, so reconcile that. That's the iteration loop.Jake [00:47:41]: That's why you're seeing people talk about software factories, docs, and reconciliation. Some of that is architectural astronomy if you don't implement it, but that loop is where most things will end up.Swyx [00:48:07]: For listeners, we've been talking about this on the pod for three years: the holy trinity of specs and tests. Itamar Friedman from Qodo is the reference if people want to look it up.Self-Modifying Infrastructure and the End of Push-Pull-RebuildSwyx [00:48:18]: One thing I want to mention on the OpenCloud idea is self-modification. I don't know how Railway would support it, but I have my OpenClaw, and I just tell it it has the Railway CLI and can do whatever. In theory, whatever capabilities or new infra it needs, it can call the Railway CLI, provision it, and add it to itself. The agent can modify its own infra.Jake [00:48:45]: It's nuts. I have a loop set up where you put the Railway CLI on top of something that runs on Railway. You're authenticated as whatever the current box is, and you can make any changes to it. Then you call Railway deploy, and it deploys itself.Jake [00:49:04]: It's like: “I need to spin up this instance of this environment. I already exist in this environment. Excellent, I have access to a Postgres instance now.” That's where we want to go with agentic, self-replicating infrastructure. That's your loop: iterate in production. You continue making changes. If it works, merge it upstream. If it doesn't, throw it away.Jake [00:49:37]: How do you make throwaway copies trivial to spin up and super cheap? The era of “I have an AWS instance with four vCPU and 16 gigs of RAM” is going to get destroyed. If you do that for agents, you need a thousand of those machines. It's prohibitively expensive compared with what we've spent a ton of time figuring out: the atomic unit of deploy, whether you call it isolates, sandboxes, or something else. Only pay for what you use, spin up instantaneously, and close the loop as quickly as possible.Jake [00:50:15]: If the system can self-replicate safely and say, “This is my environment, I'm making these changes,” it can come back with, “Does this look good? This is a new state of infrastructure given this prompt. I think I've solved it.” Then you go back and say, “Actually, it looks different.” It does the loop again. Then you say, “Cool. Apply.”Swyx [00:50:38]: That's retroactively obvious, which is the most useful kind. Any other comments on agent deployment on Railway?Jake [00:50:51]: It's getting better every day. I'm on X or Twitter. You can always yell at me about the parts not working as well as they should, because plenty of things should work way better.The New Serverless: Stateful, Long-Running, Pay-for-What-You-Use LinuxSwyx [00:51:04]: At this stage, when people want massively or embarrassingly parallel compute, they usually talk serverless. I feel like there's a new serverless compared to the previous five years of serverless. You're in that new bucket. Do you have comparisons or philosophical differences you want to call out?Jake [00:51:31]: It's somewhere in between. It's the ability to run stateful, long-running workflows or executions.Swyx [00:51:42]: Vercel has Fluid Compute, Cloudflare has some container thing, Google has App Runner and others.Jake [00:51:55]: That's where everything is roughly going, and it's why we've been working on this for six years. We believe users need access to a computer: a box that speaks Linux. They need to deploy what they want. Other systems change the surface area of what you can build. For us, users need a computer and need to deploy anything they truly want. That's why we've focused on the primitives: network, compute, storage. If we give you those and expose them so you can run things indefinitely, that's where we believe it's going.Jake [00:52:43]: Twitter has no nuance, so everyone says “servers” or “serverless.” It's always somewhere in the middle: I want to run it for a long time, but I don't want to provision the resource statically or pay for things I'm not using. That's been our thesis from day one: pay only for what you use, run it indefinitely, and it is full Linux.Swyx [00:53:12]: That's why I like the naming of Fluid. It's fluid. Flexible.Heroku, Focus, and Carrying the Torch Without Becoming the PastSwyx [00:53:18]: Another milestone is the Heroku official deprecation. You're one of the presumptive new Herokus. “New Heroku” has been a category for as long as I've been in developer tooling. It's finally happening. What was that like? Any behind-the-scenes of, “This is the moment”?Jake [00:53:42]: You have people where you're like, “You were running stuff on here? You, as this company?” It's crazy that names you would know are running on it and now coming to us saying, “We want to move a lot of this off.”Swyx [00:54:00]: Any behind-the-scenes on why Salesforce let Heroku stagnate?Jake [00:54:05]: I can only guess. It's hard when it's not your business. Salesforce's business is to build a great CRM. That's their focus. Then you acquire a compute business as an offshoot. A lot of early Meta people talk about focus. Boz has a write-up about how in the early days of Meta they had no money, so they were forced to focus. Then they turned on the money tree and had no reason not to split their focus.Jake [00:54:52]: But that dilutes your product. You get offshoots where you ask, “Is this the focus of the business?” If it's not core, it languishes. A lot of companies get in trouble when they split focus because they're fighting a multi-front war, not just externally but internally for alignment. Where are we going? What are we doing? What is our purpose?Jake [00:55:24]: If you're Salesforce-built and mission-driven, you want to work on Salesforce. Heroku is off to the side. It's not core to the business. Getting resources, budget, focus, and alignment internally becomes hard. It was a matter of time.Swyx [00:56:06]: Kudos for them to call it out instead of leaving it unknown.Jake [00:56:12]: Their release was a little odd. They called it out, but they didn't say they were shutting it down. Behind the scenes, I think they issued messages to people saying they should close accounts and that they were going to deprecate and remove things over time.Jake [00:56:30]: It's crazy because some of my first deployment experiences were on Heroku. You start with dragging things into an FTP server, then you try to get a deploy working, and then it's Heroku. It was the on-ramp for us. But the wheel turns. New things emerge. We're happy to carry the torch for a lot of that. But we don't want to be the new Heroku. We want to be the way people build and deploy software, and ultimately the way people monetize software over time.Swyx [00:57:19]: It's still a big crown to be the new Heroku. There are 50 companies that fought for that.Jake [00:57:23]: Everybody is holding some portion of it. We're happy to support people and companies. The platform works differently. The game loop is similar, but we've been dogmatic about where these things are going: primitives, agents, fan-out. Some things fit; some workflows need to change. We have an approximation of Heroku pipelines with the environment system. It's exciting. We've got a ton of people we can support, and it's growing a lot.Temporal, Workflow Engines, and State MachinesSwyx [00:58:12]: I have one more technical question about Temporal. I've sold my shares. You're a power user and one of our earliest customers. I met you through Temporal. You built on Temporal. You have complaints. This may be the most neutral and informed conversation anyone will hear about Temporal without someone working at the company.Jake [00:58:39]: That's fair. I've used Temporal for almost 10 years because of Cadence at Uber.Swyx [00:58:52]: Give people a sense of what Cadence was at Uber.Jake [00:58:57]: Cadence was the precursor to Temporal. It powers trip actions, rides, when you rent a Jump bike or scooter or car. You're running workflows for a period of time and saying, “This ride will run indefinitely until it finishes.” You attach information: you paused in this zone, so add this charge to the bill. When you end the trip, the workflow is done. That experience was powered by Cadence at the time.Swyx [00:59:34]: I used to say it's like programming the entire user journey top-down as one function.Jake [00:59:39]: It's a powerful idea and important. It's also important for the next phase of the agentic journey. You want an agent to do a specific task, be complete or incomplete on that task, and move on to the next thing. You need a way to manage workflows dynamically.Jake [00:59:59]: Temporal was always great in theory, and great when you got it working the way you wanted in production. But it required you to model the entire journey in your head. If you didn't, you could cause issues where replaying the state of the workflow causes non-determinism.Swyx [01:00:25]: Because it works on deterministic workflow history.Jake [01:00:28]: Exactly. I describe it as a jet engine. If you know how to operate it and run it, it's great. But you can't hand it to people trying to build complicated things if they don't have the whole state in their head.Jake [01:00:48]: We run our whole deployment pipeline on top of it. That's a reasonably complicated workflow: pre-commit hooks, signaling, queuing, and all the rest. We ran into the same thing at Uber. As you express a large workflow, it gets more complicated, with more states in the state machine that you have to map back to the workflow.Swyx [01:01:15]: It's a lot of ifs.Jake [01:01:16]: Exactly. At Uber, we built a system for doing the state machine and testing it. We've started to build some of those things here because it's grown heavily. It's not quite love-hate. When it works well, it works super well. But if someone who doesn't have full context puts something into the system that invalidates state or causes non-determinism, or spins off a ton of activities, you have to keep track of underlying SRE knobs like activity slots. Those should scale with memory, vCPU, and so on. It becomes a bear to scale.Swyx [01:02:10]: You need a capable sysadmin running things behind the scenes. If you moved off, what would you do?Jake [01:02:19]: We'd build our own workflow engine. We have a few internally that we've worked on.Swyx [01:02:27]: This is one of those classes of things you typically wouldn't vibe code, but I'm wondering if you can.Jake [01:02:33]: I still don't think you should vibe code it. You still want to run decent tests to make sure it works.Swyx [01:02:39]: Timo didn't invent that from scratch either. There are libraries you can run. On top of that, it's just a state machine that you have to map out. Ultimately, you define the instructions you want and run them through a state machine.Jake [01:03:00]: It's very doable. Workflow stuff is interesting. Restate is doing neat stuff here.Swyx [01:03:10]: You're tied into JavaScript. Are you a JavaScript maxi?Jake [01:03:13]: Internally, we have TypeScript, Rust, and Go. We don't add more languages. Actually, we have a little C because we write BPF code and hooks. But those are the languages.Swyx [01:03:28]: Is this for sidecars?Jake [01:03:32]: No. It's for the networking stack, volumes, and things like that. We use TypeScript a lot because it powers the dashboard, but we're moving a lot of workflow stuff off the dashboard stack and into the infrastructure stack.Railpack, Nixpacks, and Content-Addressable FilesystemsSwyx [01:04:00]: Cool. Any other technical infrastructure stuff? Railpacks?Jake [01:04:07]: We built an engine for determining dependencies based on source code. It's called Railpack. We built the first version, Nixpacks, on top of Nix, and then we moved.Swyx [01:04:17]: People have been trying to get me to adopt Nix and NixOS for four years. Is it ever going to be a thing?Jake [01:04:23]: I don't know. We're excited about it, but it has pain points. Think of it as a stack of versioned binaries at specific slices in time. If you want version X and version Y, you bloat the package space, which blows up image size and makes real-world workloads difficult.Swyx [01:04:53]: But you content-address it and cache it. In theory, there are optimizations.Jake [01:05:00]: In theory, yes. But with a large enough user base and disparate enough machines, you run into a problem Meta described in the XFAAS paper, their internal serverless system. It becomes difficult at scale unless you break out specific runtimes.Jake [01:05:24]: We didn't want to do that because we wanted to truly allow you to deploy anything. That was our initial thing with Nix. But we've moved toward interesting work around content-addressable file systems that can lazy-load anything from any point and page it into memory.Swyx [01:05:48]: Amazing.Jake [01:05:49]: The future is very bright. It's crazy, and it's going to be nuts.Coding Agent Spend, Roadmaps, and Token ROISwyx [01:05:54]: Founder journey stuff?Alessio [01:05:56]: Your cloud usage: you tweeted you're going to spend $300K this month?Jake [01:06:01]: I think we got to $200K.Alessio [01:06:02]: Coding agents?Jake [01:06:03]: Yeah.Swyx [01:06:04]: Across the company?Alessio [01:06:05]: You only have 35 people, so I'm sure they're not all spending $10K a month. What's the distribution?Jake [01:06:10]: I think I'm at about $25K. We have power users all the way down. We came back from winter break, and I basically said, “If you're writing code by hand, you're doing this wrong.” The tools are good enough now that you can move extremely quickly. There are issues and pain points, but you should be reviewing the code you are writing instead of writing it by hand.Jake [01:06:40]: Architectural patterns matter more now than ever, but you shouldn't spend your time generating code you would write. If you know how to write it, ask the agent to write it and reconcile it until it looks like you would have written it yourself.Jake [01:06:58]: People misconstrue my propensity to push people toward agents as connected to our growth and some reliability bumps. They're not necessarily related. The tools are good enough to move extremely quickly and build things way larger than you could before.Jake [01:07:19]: To the earlier point about cooling data centers in space: I don't know. But with software, you can ask, “How would I build block storage from scratch? How would I do these things?” I have ideas because I have history and have read papers. Let me work them out and build massive test benches with thousands of tests, because those are now free to author. If you're not using AI systems to speed-run your roadmap and reconcile your existing system onto the future, you're missing a large point of what's happening.Alessio [01:08:12]: What's the path to spending $3 million a month? Is it bound by ideas and things customers can absorb?Jake [01:08:19]: For most companies, it's bound by deployment at this point. That's why we've seen a massive boom in users and companies, from Fortune 50s down, asking how to get developers to move faster. You'll probably hit your CFO before any technical limits because they'll look at the eye-watering amount of money spent on tokens. Inference costs have to come down, but we're inference constrained now. There will be price discovery around what makes sense for an org to adopt.Jake [01:09:06]: I think you'll end up with the F1 driver concept. If someone is really adept at these things, it makes sense to put them in a $3 million car. If they're not, it probably doesn't make sense. You'll take a few people and say, “You can drive the F1 car. We need to go in this direction. Figure out if it works and prototype it.”Jake [01:09:33]: We've done some of that and vastly accelerated our roadmap. We thought we'd ship something in a few years; now we can probably ship it in a few months because we validated it and don't have to build it incrementally. We can skip steps and move toward our vision.Alessio [01:09:58]: A lot of people are realizing the roadmap doesn't always have a business impact, so they say tokens are too expensive. But if your roadmap were built to make more money by the time you built it, you'd have token pricing for it, the same way you do with sales. You'd spend a billion dollars on sales if you knew you would get $2 billion of revenue.Jake [01:10:19]: Exactly. A naive way to measure this is the percentage of tokens that end up in production. If you can measure impact because those tokens end up in production, that's awesome. But the burden of proof will rise. Internally, we have a growing number of pull requests that haven't merged. The question becomes: how do you get this into production? It's about how quickly you can build and deploy software, which is exciting because that's our whole thing.The SDLC Shift: Prompt Requests, Feature Flags, and Safe RolloutsSwyx [01:10:56]: The SDLC is changing. One thesis is that the pull request is dying. It's going to be the prompt request. Beyond that, code review is also kind of dying if you have all the other systems in place. What else is changing about the SDLC?Jake [01:11:19]: The AISRE and the tools to make it happen. AISRE is pie-in-the-sky aspirational. What does it take to get an AISRE? What tools do you need to build?Swyx [01:11:32]: You should expose your tooling to customers at some point. The Central Station command center.Jake [01:11:39]: We have it for template maintainers. Template maintainers can deploy and maintain templates, and they get feedback. We're going to expose those things incrementally.Swyx [01:11:51]: Clustering around incidents. Everyone has a version of that, but I don't think anyone has solved it.Jake [01:11:56]: I won't say we've solved it internally, but it's gotten so good that we can see incidents forming pretty quickly. At some point, those will be things either someone else builds or we build. We've always built things purpose-built for us. If it makes sense to make it useful for users, monetize it, or turn that loop into a profit center instead of a cost center, we want to do that.Jake [01:12:28]: Pull request is definitely dying.Swyx [01:12:29]: Do you do first-party feature flagging and incremental rollout stuff?Jake [01:12:34]: We have a feature-flagging engine we built internally and will eventually roll out.Swyx [01:12:38]: I don't see it as a user. How come you didn't give us what you have?Jake [01:12:43]: We have to beta test it. We care a lot about the quality of the things. There's plenty we've used internally that doesn't make it all the way through the journey because it fails. It works for one service but not multiple services. We'd have to build it for multiple services and know that if we released it, we'd rebuild it again and again. Some things are worth that, but many inform the roadmap.Jake [01:13:18]: We don't want to dilute the experience by saying, “This works, but only for this service,” unless it's a core initiative. Over the next few months, we'll roll out things that work for a single service, then multiple services, then multiple services across the environment. You have to be deliberate. Otherwise you create broken disparate experiences and support load because people ask how to use the feature.Jake [01:13:52]: It's the earlier expansion and compaction pattern. You expand the company to get features, then compact and smooth them out so the experience is stellar. You told me in the hallway, “It's gotten so much better.” Internally we're saying, “This part really sucks. We need to make it significantly better.”Swyx [01:14:11]: I can attest to that over the last three years watching you build Railway. For listeners, feature flagging is a huge part of Uber culture. So much so that they have too many feature flags and another thing to remove feature flags. Facebook has Gatekeeper. Agents are going to need this. It's fundamental to incremental rollouts. OpenAI acquired Statsig. GPT-5 is routing and flagging through different models.Jake [01:14:56]: It's super important. If the software development lifecycle is going to change because we're doing things 1,000 times faster and 1,000 times more concurrently, what becomes important at scale?Jake [01:15:16]: Before I started Railway, I built a feature-flagging product and tried to sell it. It was an easier version of LaunchDarkly. I ran into a problem: anyone small enough to adopt your technology doesn't care about feature flags, and anyone large enough to need feature flags needs so much scale that you have to build out all the infrastructure. I scrapped it.Jake [01:15:42]: But what is old is new again. Companies are trying to move quickly, but you can't YOLO a vibe-coded thing straight into production. You need to say, “Here's my blast radius, my impact, and I want to shadow it for these users.” Feature flags. You're going to need the tools larger companies built to maintain their structures. Everything gets compressed by 1,000x so everybody can build those structures quickly.Jake [01:16:07]: That's exactly where we are: compressing the software development lifecycle, then expanding it and adding more new things.Cattle, Pets, and Clonable InfrastructureSwyx [01:16:15]: Another term that comes to mind for newer developers is “cattle, not pets.” People treat production like a pet. It has a name. You baby it and keep it alive. With cattle, you can mass farm, roll out, portion parts out, and kill them.Jake [01:16:37]: I think that might change. You can move toward having pets as long as you have a cloning machine for your pets.Swyx [01:16:52]: Yeah.Jake [01:16:52]: If you can snapshot every single thing at every frame, it doesn't matter if something gets obliterated because you have a snapshot of it. The things we've built right now are designed to block changes from the hermetically sealed DevOps line. You have to write a Dockerfile because you nee

AWS Morning Brief for the week of May 18th , with Corey Quinn. Links:Announcing general availability of Amazon EC2 M3 Ultra Mac instancesAmazon EventBridge Scheduler adds 619 new SDK API actions, including Lambda Managed InstancesAmazon Redshift launches RG instances powered by AWS GravitonAmazon Route 53 Domains adds support for 34 new Top Level Domains including .app, .dev, and .health.ENA Express for Amazon EC2 instances now supports traffic between Availability ZonesStreaming CloudWatch metrics to VPC-based OpenTelemetry collectors using LambdaHow HotelTrader cut inter-AZ cost 95% and latency by 49% with Valkey GLIDE on Amazon ElastiCacheIntroducing Claude Platform on AWS: Anthropic's native platform, through your AWS accountAmazon CloudFront Premium flat-rate pricing plan now supports higher, configurable usage allowancesScalable cross-cloud data migration to Amazon S3 with distributed rcloneDirty Frag and other issues in Amazon Linux kernelsCVE-2026-8178 - Remote Code Execution via Unsafe Class Loading in Amazon Redshift JDBC DriverFragnesia Local Privilege Escalation report via ESP-in-TCP in the Linux KernelOngoing updates on Copy.fail and variantsIssue with Amazon SageMaker Python SDK - Model artifact integrity verification issues (CVE-2026-8596 &: CVE-2026-8597)

1 Оставайтесь на связи Пишите нам: info@linkmeup.ru Канал в телеграме: t.me/linkmeup_podcast Канал на youtube: youtube.com/c/linkmeup-podcast Подкаст доступен в iTunes, Google Подкастах, Яндекс Музыке, Castbox Сообщество в вк: vk.com/linkmeup Группа в фб: www.facebook.com/linkmeup.sdsm Добавить RSS в подкаст-плеер. Пообщаться в общем чате в тг: https://t.me/linkmeup_chat Поддержите проект:

Mock-интервью с Николаем Лебедевым - DevOps/SRE-инженер, 17 лет в Linux, 4 года AWS EKS. Stack: Terraform, Flux, Cassandra, Kafka, Vault, SOPS. Два часа - много практики, много каверзных вопросов. ЧТО СПРАШИВАЛИ ☁️ AWS: EKS и IRSA, VPC с нуля (CIDR, multi-AZ, multi-region), managed K8s vs self-hosted, Elasticache, Golden Signals и метрики SRE.

Today's topic is Network Access Control (NAC) for a wired network. To help walk us through it all is Jennifer “JJ” Jabbusch, a network security architect, public speaker, book author, and co-host of the Packet Protector podcast. JJ and our hosts break down the terms and protocols behind NAC, and explain why the architecture was... Read more »

In this episode, Corey Quinn sits down with AWS Senior Principal Engineer David Yanacek to explore the next evolution of DevOps.After two decades of building systems to reduce operational pain, David shares how AWS's new DevOps Agent is pushing automation to a whole new level, autonomously diagnosing incidents, suggesting fixes, and proactively improving systems before engineers even log in.From pager overload to autonomous remediation, this conversation is a glimpse into a world where software isn't the bottleneck anymore, operations are evolving into something entirely new.If you care about DevOps, SRE, platform engineering, or just want fewer 3 a.m. alerts, this episode is for you.Show highlights: (00:00) DevOps Meets Agents(00:13) Welcome and Sponsor Break(01:29) David Yanacek Backstory(02:34) DevOps Roots at Amazon(04:22) DevOps Agent GA Overview(05:32) LLMs MCP and Any Cloud(08:32) Guardrails and Safe Changes(11:47) Beta Results and Consistency(14:13) Troubleshooting Theory and On Demand(17:29) Future of DevOps and ClosingAbout David: David Yanacek is a Senior Principal Engineer at AWS and a lead advisor on the Agentic AI team. His current work focuses on Kiro, Amazon Bedrock AgentCore, and AWS's operational agents, where he helps shape the future of intelligent, autonomous systems.Over a 19+ year career at Amazon and AWS, David has been at the forefront of building services that simplify life for developers and operators. His experience spans serverless, DevOps, and CloudOps, including launching Amazon DynamoDB and AWS IoT Core, and contributing to the direction of cornerstone services like AWS Lambda, Amazon API Gateway, and Amazon CloudWatch.David also served as the lead publisher for the Amazon Builders' Library, helping customers apply Amazon's hard-earned architectural and operational lessons to their own systems.Outside of engineering, David plays the French horn in a local Seattle ensemble.Links:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-yanacek/Website: https://aws.amazon.com/builders-library/authors/david-yanacek/Sponsored by: duckbillhq.com

GitGuardian found 29 million hard-coded secrets leaked in public GitHub commits in a single year, a 34% jump and the biggest spike they've ever recorded. Dwayne McDaniel joins to break down why AI coding tools, MCP servers, and a false sense of security in private repos are making the problem worse, and what it'll actually take to fix it. Check out the report here - https://www.gitguardian.com/files/the-state-of-secrets-sprawl-report-2026. Dwayne McDaniel is a Principal Developer Advocate who has been on a mission to "help people figure stuff out" for over a decade. At GitGuardian, he specializes in secrets security and non-human identity governance across cloud and DevOps environments.FOLLOW OUR SOCIAL MEDIA:➜Twitter: @AppSecPodcast➜LinkedIn: The Application Security Podcast➜YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@ApplicationSecurityPodcastThanks for Listening!~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Time left estimation may be one of the simplest ideas in software delivery, but it directly challenges decades of traditional Agile estimation practices. Instead of treating estimates as fixed promises, the concept focuses on continuously updated delivery confidence. During the discussion with Alex Polyakov, this idea became one of the strongest execution-focused themes of the conversation. The goal is not perfect prediction. The goal is operational awareness. That distinction changes how teams communicate, coordinate, and deliver software. About Alex Polyakov Alex Polyakov is the founder of Project Simple AI, a platform designed to improve software delivery visibility and operational discipline for engineering organizations. His background spans engineering, architecture, product leadership, startup operations, and entrepreneurship across more than two decades in software development. He has led teams as a developer, architect, technical leader, product manager, and founder, giving him firsthand experience with the communication gaps and operational inefficiencies that slow modern software teams. Alex also hosts the "Let's Talk Agile" podcast on YouTube, where he explores software delivery, Agile practices, and modern engineering workflows. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexpolyakov/ Why Traditional Estimation Breaks Down Software teams have experimented with estimation models for years. Story points. Velocity scoring. Capacity planning. No-estimate methodologies. Hybrid systems. Each approach attempts to solve uncertainty while preserving predictability. The problem is that software development is inherently dynamic. Teams uncover unknown dependencies. Requirements evolve. Technical assumptions change. AI accelerates some implementation paths while introducing entirely new verification requirements. Static estimates fail because the work itself evolves. Alex described how many organizations accidentally treat estimates as guarantees. Once a developer says "four hours," stakeholders mentally convert that into a contractual promise. That mindset creates tension immediately. Developers become defensive about estimates. Managers become frustrated when timelines shift. Teams avoid updating reality because changing estimates feels like admitting failure. An estimate should communicate current understanding, not create artificial certainty. Time Left Estimation Creates Operational Awareness The core principle behind time left estimation is remarkably simple. Instead of asking: "How long did you think this would take?" Teams ask: "How much time remains?" That shift sounds small, but it fundamentally changes communication quality. Alex used a driving analogy during the interview. If someone asks where you are and you answer, "I'm in the car," that provides almost no operational value. That resembles many software status updates. "In progress" rarely tells leadership anything meaningful. A better response would be: "GPS says I'm five minutes away." Now stakeholders understand delivery confidence, remaining uncertainty, and expected timing. That is the real value of time left estimation. Why Time Left Estimation Improves Team Coordination One of the strongest operational arguments for this approach is coordination visibility. Modern software delivery is collaborative. Backend engineers hand work to frontend developers. QA teams validate implementation. Architects review integrations. Product teams prepare releases. DevOps engineers manage deployments. Software delivery depends heavily on sequencing. Time Left Estimation Helps Teams Predict Handoffs A continuously updated remaining-time estimate acts like a coordination beacon. It signals: Who is next When dependencies become active Whether blockers are emerging Whether downstream teams should prepare This creates significantly better operational flow than static task ownership systems. Instead of discovering delays during sprint reviews, teams identify delivery movement in real time. Static estimates often hide risk until delivery windows are already compromised. Time Left Estimation Aligns Better with AI Development AI-assisted development makes estimation harder and easier simultaneously. Some implementation tasks collapse from days into hours. Others become harder because AI-generated code requires stronger validation, testing, and architectural review. The conversation highlighted a major shift happening inside engineering organizations today. Developers are increasingly becoming reviewers, validators, and coordinators rather than pure code producers. That changes where uncertainty exists. The coding itself may accelerate dramatically. The verification process becomes more important. Traditional Agile estimation models were not designed for this environment. Time left estimation adapts more naturally because it reflects current conditions instead of relying entirely on original assumptions. The Real Goal Is Confidence, Not Precision One of the most practical ideas from the interview was that software organizations do not necessarily need perfect prediction. They need confidence. Leadership teams can make strong decisions when they understand: Current progress Remaining uncertainty Emerging risks Coordination readiness The problem is not changing estimates. The problem is discovering reality too late. Time Left Estimation Encourages Honest Communication Because remaining-time estimates are expected to evolve, teams become more comfortable updating status honestly. An estimate can decrease when work becomes easier. It can increase when new complexity appears. That flexibility reduces the emotional pressure attached to traditional software estimation. Healthy engineering communication depends more on transparency than forecasting perfection. Why Simpler Estimation Models Matter The transcript repeatedly returned to one consistent theme: software organizations have overcomplicated operational management. Heavy process structures often attempt to create predictability by adding more layers: More ticket fields More ceremonies More reporting More workflows More estimation rituals But complexity itself creates operational drag. Simple systems scale better because teams actually use them consistently. That may be the most important takeaway from Alex's philosophy. Software delivery is already difficult. The management layer should reduce friction, not multiply it. Audit your current estimation process and identify which activities improve delivery versus which only create reporting overhead. Conclusion Time left estimation is not just a different planning technique. It represents a different philosophy about software delivery communication. Instead of pretending uncertainty does not exist, the model embraces changing information and operational transparency. As AI reshapes implementation speed and software organizations continue evolving, delivery systems must become more adaptive, more collaborative, and more visibility-oriented. Teams that improve coordination awareness will outperform teams that optimize only for reporting structure. The future of engineering execution will likely depend less on rigid estimation frameworks and more on dynamic operational visibility. Stay Connected: Join the Developreneur Community

#355 | Dave sits down with Maria Scheifler to talk about why your marketing team might be getting less done as it grows — and what to do about it. Maria makes the case for running marketing like a product team: two-week sprints, a prioritized backlog, and a lightweight intake process that kills approval bottlenecks without losing control. She walks through the context-switching exercise that proves multitasking is destroying your output, how to push back on random requests from across the company without saying no, and why getting team buy-in before rolling out any operational changes is the step most marketing leaders skip.Timestamps(00:00) - - Intro: the problem isn't your strategy, it's your operating system (04:38) - - Maria's background (07:38) - - Why teams get bigger and somehow get less done (10:07) - - The multitasking exercise that proves context switching kills output (17:36) - - Running marketing like a product team: the mindset shift (20:24) - - Building a working agreement with your team (22:56) - - The experimentation guardrail template: killing approval bottlenecks without losing control (28:26) - - Building a prioritized backlog (32:47) - - How the backlog helps you push back without saying no (39:36) - - Two-week sprints: how to plan, commit, and ship (41:48) - - Daily standups: how to keep them short and useful (42:39) - - Sprint reviews: showing the rest of the company what marketing does (44:20) - - Retrospectives (46:19) - - Where to start on Monday Join 50,0000 people who get Dave's Newsletter here: https://www.exitfive.com/newsletterLearn more about Exit Five's private marketing community: https://www.exitfive.com/***Brought to you by:Knak - A no-code, campaign creation platform that lets you go from idea to on-brand email and landing pages in minutes, using AI where it actually matters. Learn more at knak.com/exitfive, or check out the MCP server by clicking this link. Vector - A contact-level ads platform that lets you build audiences from actual people on your site, clicking your ads, and checking out your competitors. Learn more at vector.co, and get on the waitlist for their new MCP server by clicking here. Compound Growth Marketing - A full-funnel demand generation agency that helps high-growth cybersecurity, DevOps, and enterprise software companies drive more pipeline through AI SEO, paid media, and go-to-market engineering. Visit compoundgrowthmarketing.com and tell them Dave sent you.***Thanks to my friends at hatch.fm for producing this episode and handling all of the Exit Five podcast production.They give you unlimited podcast editing and strategy for your B2B podcast.Get unlimited podcast editing and on-demand strategy for one low monthly cost. Just upload your episode, and they take care of the rest.Visit hatch.fm to learn more

Open Source is giving AI a real boost, making it easier and faster for organisations to build and experiment with new ideas. As adoption grows, these open ecosystems are helping businesses move quicker, stay flexible, and unlock value with more confidence.This week, Dave, Esmee, and Rob are joined by Richard Harmon, VP & Global Head of Financial Services at Red Hat to explore how Open Source is shaping AI, from mainframes to Kubernetes, and from regulation and sovereignty to a future of AI agents writing code. TLDR00:25 – Introduction00:52 – Hangout: Deep democracy training and “what instrument are you?”03:19 – Dig in: Open‑source culture and AI, do they complement each other?10:02 – Conversation with Richard Harmon51:12 – Sitting in the chair and trying to keep up with AI GuestRichard Harmon: https://www.linkedin.com/in/richardlaurenharmon/ HostsDave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/Esmee van de Giessen:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/esmeevandegiessen/Rob Kernahan:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-kernahan/ ProductionMarcel van der Burg:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/marcel-vd-burg/Dave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/ SoundBen Corbett:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ben-corbett-3b6a11135/Louis Corbett:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/louis-corbett-087250264/ 'Realities Remixed' is an original podcast from Capgemini

Ned and Kyler are joined by Dr. Cat Hicks to discuss her new book “The Psychology of Software Teams.” They talk about software development from a psychological perspective, including how negative stereotypes of developers can lead to them being treated simply as “brains in jars” in toxic environments. They also point out the pitfalls of... Read more »

Ned and Kyler are joined by Dr. Cat Hicks to discuss her new book “The Psychology of Software Teams.” They talk about software development from a psychological perspective, including how negative stereotypes of developers can lead to them being treated simply as “brains in jars” in toxic environments. They also point out the pitfalls of... Read more »

#350: The bottleneck used to be writing the code. Now it is feeding the agent enough context to write the right code. That is Patrick Debois' argument, and given that Patrick coined the term DevOps, it is worth paying attention when he says the discipline is shifting again. The model does not matter. The IDE does not matter. What matters is whether your team can capture the way you actually work and hand it to an agent that does not know any of it. The promise was that AI would let us ship without writing specs. The reality is the opposite. If you want decent output, you need richer specs, more docs, and a way to feed the agent what is unique about your team and your codebase. Viktor admits he stopped writing specs himself. He talks to the agent until he is satisfied, then says write it down. The work did not go away. It moved. A second agent that validates your work tends to take the original spec too seriously and miss what is not there. The interesting validation is not whether the code matches the spec. It is whether the spec matches reality. Patrick's response is harness engineering -- combining verifier agents with deterministic tooling like linters and tests, and mining conversation logs for the moments a user says this is wrong so the missing context can be saved and reused. Memory, hooks, skills, registries -- all just delivery mechanisms for the same underlying thing. Patrick's number one piece of advice if you are starting today is brutal in its simplicity. When the agent does the wrong thing, write it down in your AGENTS.md or claude.md. Do not just re-prompt and move on. Build the context file. That is the new job. Code moved to context. Context, eventually, moves to knowledge -- the way your organization actually works, captured somewhere an agent can use it. Whoever owns that layer wins. The model does not.   Patrick's contact information: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrickdebois/ X: https://x.com/patrickdebois   YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/devopsparadox   Review the podcast on Apple Podcasts: https://www.devopsparadox.com/review-podcast/   Slack: https://www.devopsparadox.com/slack/   Connect with us at: https://www.devopsparadox.com/contact/

Ned and Kyler are joined by Dr. Cat Hicks to discuss her new book “The Psychology of Software Teams.” They talk about software development from a psychological perspective, including how negative stereotypes of developers can lead to them being treated simply as “brains in jars” in toxic environments. They also point out the pitfalls of... Read more »

What does it really take to make AI work at scale inside large organizations? In this episode of Digital Workplace Impact, DWG Chief Executive Nancy Goebel sits down with Melissa Reeve, author of Hyperadaptive: Rewiring the enterprise to become AI-native, to explore why so many AI initiatives stall – and what leaders must do differently to calm the hype and achieve lasting impact. Drawing on her background in Lean, Agile and DevOps thought leadership, Melissa argues that AI is not just a technology shift but a fundamental rewiring of the operating model. She introduces the concept of the ‘hyperadaptive' organization – one that can sense and respond in near real time by compressing decision-making, workflows and governance. Crucially, becoming AI-native is as much about people, culture and leadership as it is about tools. The conversation unpacks the difference between being AI-enabled and AI-native, before examining why rushing to automate without strong foundations erodes trust. Melissa shares her practical five-stage Hyperadaptive Model, explains why dynamic governance and AI literacy matter more than pilots, and makes a compelling case for investing in new roles and learning systems such as AI activation hubs. With encouraging job predictions from the World Economic Forum and a real-world example from Moderna, this episode challenges leaders to think systemically and take a deliberate, long-term approach to AI. Guest speaker: Melissa Reeve, Author of ‘Hyperadaptive: Rewiring the enterprise to become AI-native' Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

AI-powered testing tools are exploding across software engineering teams… but so are the hidden costs. In this episode, Joe sits down with Arthur Hicken to unpack the growing problem of runaway AI token usage, unexpected LLM billing, and the operational risks of deploying AI agents into testing and DevOps pipelines. Inspired by Arthur's article on the emerging "Token Tax," this conversation explores why many teams are underestimating the true cost of AI automation. You'll learn: Why AI-generated testing can create unexpected scaling costs How runaway AI agents and infinite loops happen Real-world examples of massive AI billing surprises Why deterministic problems shouldn't always use LLMs The hidden risks of "vibe testing" and autonomous AI remediation How QA teams can monitor, test, and control token usage Why performance testing and service virtualization matter more than ever in AI systems Practical strategies to avoid expensive AI deployment mistakes Whether you're a software tester, automation engineer, QA leader, or DevOps practitioner, this episode will help you think more strategically about AI testing before costs spiral out of control.

He helped build the infrastructure that runs the modern internet. First AWS. Then Oracle Cloud Infrastructure. Then Heroku. Then Stripe. Now he's at Docker — and he thinks we're about to need a completely new layer underneath all of it.When Mark Cavage, President & COO of Docker, joined the company, the question wasn't whether agents were coming. It was whether the infrastructure underneath them was ready.It wasn't.Before anyone was talking about agentic workloads in production…Before AI tools started writing, running, and deploying their own code…Before CISOs had a framework for reasoning about autonomous systems…There was a simple but uncomfortable realization:Containers were built for immutable, predictable software. Agents want to mutate everything.In this episode of the Future of Data & AI Podcast, Mark Cavage — President & COO of Docker and one of the founding engineers of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure — joins Raja Iqbal for a candid conversation about what the agentic era actually demands from infrastructure.Mark has spent over two decades building the systems that power modern cloud. Through Docker, he's now working on the sandbox layer that lets enterprises deploy agents at scale — without handing over control to a system nobody fully understands yet.This conversation goes beyond the hype.What You'll Discover:Why containers alone aren't enough for the agentic era.Containers were built for immutable software. Agents mutate, write, and act — and Mark explains exactly what breaks, and what Docker built to fix it.What YOLO mode actually means — and why it matters.Agents running without a human in the loop sounds reckless. Mark explains why that's actually the goal, and how the micro VM sandbox makes it safe enough for enterprise.The 1000x risk surface no one is talking about.Every AI-generated pull request, every "authored by Claude" commit, every autonomously deployed dependency is stacking security debt. Mark breaks down what that means for your CISO.Trusted MCP servers and Docker Hardened Images.What they are, why they exist, and why supply chain security for AI tools is about to become one of the most important conversations in enterprise tech.Mark's bets for the next 12 months.CFOs demanding ROI on token spend, the open source project that no one is talking about, and what the future of Agentic AI looks like.This episode is for:ML engineers and DevOps teams building with agentsCISOs and security leaders managing a 1000x larger risk surfacePlatform and infrastructure leads evaluating MCP servers and supply chain securityCTOs and engineering leaders figuring out what "agentic" actually means for their orgFounders deciding where the next infrastructure layer gets builtThis isn't a conversation about demos or roadmaps.It's about the infrastructure that agents actually need to run safely, reliably, and at scale — and whether the industry is building it fast enough.If you're deploying agents in production, managing the security conversation, or trying to understand where Docker fits in the agentic stack… this episode is worth your time.Explore all recordings

This week, we're joined by Lev Andelman to chat about AI and how Platform Engineering and DevOps are evolving to meet it via Harness Engineering.

In this episode of the Crazy Wisdom Podcast, host Stewart Alsop sits down with Tyler Cloutier, founder of Clockwork Labs and creator of SpaceTimeDB. They explore how SpaceTimeDB functions as more than just a database—it's essentially a distributed operating system that merges server logic with data storage, enabling real-time applications and time-travel capabilities. The conversation ranges from the technical architecture of databases and operating systems to the philosophy of distributed systems, touching on everything from Unix and Linux to how SpaceTimeDB could revolutionize AI-generated software deployment. Tyler explains how their system reduces the complexity of building real-time applications, makes deployment simpler for both humans and AI agents, and why games like their MMORPG BitCraft Online drove them to create this new infrastructure. They also discuss the future of the internet, the role of bots in gaming, and how SpaceTimeDB fits into the broader landscape of cloud computing alongside tools like Cloudflare, Vercel, and Docker. For more information, visit spacetimedb.com or check out Clockwork Labs on GitHub and Twitter.Timestamps00:00 Stewart introduces Tyler Cloutier, founder of Clockwork Labs, discussing the origin of SpaceTimeDB's name inspired by Einstein's theory and its time travel capabilities that store all operations indefinitely05:00 Tyler explains SpaceTimeDB as more of an operating system than a database, using tables instead of file systems while running code in a sandboxed environment with full atomic properties10:00 Discussion of how SpaceTimeDB replaces both Node.js and Postgres by merging web server and database functionality, eliminating separate deployment concerns15:00 Tyler explains JavaScript execution through Chrome's V8 engine and JIT compiling, leading to Node.js creation for server-side JavaScript development20:00 Explanation of stateless web servers versus stateful game servers, and why games require in-memory state management for real-time performance25:00 Tyler introduces reducers and real-time subscriptions, questioning why more applications aren't real-time when state changes should update immediately30:00 Discussion of Facebook as essentially a text-based MMO, comparing social media architecture to game server requirements and the need for unified systems35:00 Tyler explains ACID properties in databases: atomic, consistent, isolated, and durable, using game item trading examples40:00 Comparing SpaceTimeDB to smart contract systems without cryptocurrency or global consensus, positioning it as a smart database with centralized trust45:00 Tyler reveals SpaceTimeDB uses 43% fewer tokens than Postgres for AI-generated applications, making it valuable for vibe coding platforms50:00 Conversation shifts to bots in games and proof-of-human concepts, with Tyler proposing biometric systems and discussing potential in-person gaming applications55:00 Closing discussion about tracking AI-driven traffic through UTM parameters and finding SpaceTimeDB at spacetimedb.comKey Insights1. SpaceTimeDB is fundamentally a database that runs application code directly inside it, combining what traditionally required separate systems like Postgres and Node.js. Users compile their application logic into WebAssembly or JavaScript and upload it to run within the database itself. This architecture provides high performance because the entire server backend operates inside the database environment. The system also features time travel capabilities, storing every operation and change to data persistently and indefinitely, allowing users to set application state back to any earlier point in time. This makes SpaceTimeDB more accurately described as an operating system rather than just a database, where the abstraction is that everything is a table rather than a file.2. The inspiration for SpaceTimeDB came from building BitCraft Online, an MMORPG where all players exist in a single persistent world and rebuild civilization together. Traditional MMO backends required complex custom solutions to handle real-time state, with game servers storing state in memory and periodically writing to databases. This complexity existed because games cannot afford the latency of constantly delegating to distant databases like traditional web applications can. SpaceTimeDB solved this by making the database fast enough to handle real-time requirements directly, eliminating the need for separate game servers. This same performance advantage that benefits games also applies to web applications, which is why SpaceTimeDB evolved from a game-specific tool to a general-purpose platform.3. SpaceTimeDB functions as a distributed operating system where each database acts like a process in an actor model system, similar to Erlang or Scala Akka. Databases can send messages to other databases and be spawned across a cluster for horizontal scaling. This represents an overlay operating system running on top of Linux rather than competing with it, providing a distributed abstraction across many machines while Linux handles device drivers and hardware support. The vision is for the cloud to function as a single enormous computer running one operating system, where developers simply publish their programs without managing separate services, deployment, routing, networking, or persistence infrastructure.4. The real-time capabilities of SpaceTimeDB address a fundamental limitation in how most web applications work today. Traditional web servers are stateless, delegating all state to databases and accepting network round-trip latency for each request, which is why users often must refresh pages to see updates. SpaceTimeDB allows queries to be subscribed to, maintaining open connections that stream changes whenever query results update. This makes applications like Discord, Facebook, or banking systems naturally real-time without requiring page refreshes. The historical accident that more things are not real-time represents a problem SpaceTimeDB solves by unifying the web world with the game world's real-time requirements.5. SpaceTimeDB implements ACID properties—Atomic, Consistent, Isolated, and Durable—ensuring database operations are reliable and safe. Atomic means operations either fully happen or not at all, preventing issues like item duplication in games when trading between players. Consistent means declared invariants like unique usernames are always enforced. Isolated means concurrent operations do not interfere with each other. Durable means changes persist even if computers restart, with varying levels from in-memory on one machine to disk storage across multiple geographic locations. These properties are managed through reducers, functions inspired by React Redux that fold changes into application state incrementally.6. For AI and large language models, SpaceTimeDB offers significant advantages in building and deploying applications. Testing showed that creating applications with SpaceTimeDB uses 43% fewer tokens compared to Postgres implementations, costs less, has fewer bugs, and is easier to extend. This matters because the primary cost for vibe coding platforms is tokens. As more software gets written in the next twelve months than ever before, there is insufficient focus on infrastructure required to run all this AI-generated software. SpaceTimeDB positions itself as ideal for LLMs to target because of its simplified deployment model where developers just publish code and the system handles everything behind the scenes.7. SpaceTimeDB can be understood as a smart contract system without cryptocurrency or global decentralized consensus. Like blockchain smart contracts, it executes code with atomic, consistent, isolated, and durable properties, but avoids the expense and slowness of requiring all computers worldwide to agree on everything. Instead, it offers centralized trust where users trust Clockwork Labs not to modify deployed contracts, rather than the trustless but extremely costly blockchain approach. This makes it functionally similar to Cloudflare's durable objects but with full relational database capabilities. The system exists before the networking layer where Cloudflare operates, handling deployment, server, and database functions while Cloudflare could provide DDoS protection in front of it.

AWS Morning Brief for the week of May 11th , with Corey Quinn. Links:Announcing Agent Toolkit for AWS — help AI coding agents build effectively on AWSAmazon CloudFront Announces WebSocket Support for VPC OriginsAmazon EventBridge supports data plane logging to AWS CloudTrailAWS IAM now provides higher maximum quotas for roles, role trust policies, instance profiles, managed policies, and identity providersAWS Marketplace now supports programmatic procurement with Agreements APIThe AWS MCP Server is now generally availableAnnouncing Valkey 9.0 for Amazon ElastiCacheQuery billion-scale vectors with SQL: Integrating Amazon S3 Vectors and Aurora PostgreSQLYou Wanted to Become AI-Native, and All You Got Was a Lousy FoundationCVE-2026-7461 - OS Command Injection in Amazon ECS Agent via FSx Windows File Server Volume CredentialsCVE-2026-7791 - Local Privilege Escalation via TOCTOU Race Condition in Amazon WorkSpaces Skylight AgentCVE-2026-31431

#354 | Sue (Head of Lifecycle Marketing, Monarch Money), Jonathan (VP of Marketing, Seamless.AI), and Naomi (Senior Product Marketing Manager, Customer.io) join Dan for a live Exit Five session on customer marketing. Sue breaks down how Monarch discovered that the best time to promote their referral program was during trial and the data behind a 64% lift in referral shares and half a million dollars in incremental ARR. Jonathan shares how Seamless.AI stopped treating customer engagement like a campaign and built a full 365-day behavioral program, including an AI chatbot that deflected 55% of support tickets and live trainings that flattened their churn curve. Then Naomi walks through how she uses plain-text emails asking for replies to close the feedback loop on new features and shape the product roadmap.Timestamps(00:00) - - Intro (07:15) - - Sue: Why the best time to promote a referral program is during trial, not after (10:15) - - The results: 64% lift in referral shares and $500K in incremental ARR (17:15) - - Sue's background: 16 years in lifecycle marketing from online dating to Calm to Monarch (20:15) - - Jonathan: Stopping treating customer engagement like a campaign (26:15) - - Building a 365-day behavioral multi-channel customer engagement program (27:15) - - The AI chatbot that deflected 55% of support tickets (35:20) - - Live customer training 4x a week and how it flattened the churn curve (40:20) - - Growth plays for NRR: marketing to users inside existing accounts (42:20) - - Jonathan's results: 24% decrease in cancellations year over year (43:20) - - Naomi: Using lifecycle marketing to close the product feedback loop (49:20) - - The MCP server onboarding flow and why she asks for replies instead of clicks (56:20) - - Using beta email campaigns to shape the product roadmap (59:20) - - Live Q&A Join 50,0000 people who get Dave's Newsletter here: https://www.exitfive.com/newsletterLearn more about Exit Five's private marketing community: https://www.exitfive.com/***Brought to you by:Knak - A no-code, campaign creation platform that lets you go from idea to on-brand email and landing pages in minutes, using AI where it actually matters. Learn more at knak.com/exitfive, or check out the MCP server by clicking this link. Vector - A contact-level ads platform that lets you build audiences from actual people on your site, clicking your ads, and checking out your competitors. Learn more at vector.co, and get on the waitlist for their new MCP server by clicking here. Compound Growth Marketing - A full-funnel demand generation agency that helps high-growth cybersecurity, DevOps, and enterprise software companies drive more pipeline through AI SEO, paid media, and go-to-market engineering. Visit compoundgrowthmarketing.com and tell them Dave sent you.***Thanks to my friends at hatch.fm for producing this episode and handling all of the Exit Five podcast production.They give you unlimited podcast editing and strategy for your B2B podcast.Get unlimited podcast editing and on-demand strategy for one low monthly cost. Just upload your episode, and they take care of the rest.Visit hatch.fm to learn more

#353 | Tara (CMO, Optimizely), Julia (Director of AI Adoption, Optimizely), Lily (CMO, Three Play Media), Pejman (CMO, Menlo Security), and Kevin (CMO, CompTIA) join Dave for a live Exit Five session on how real marketing teams are actually using AI right now. Lily shows how she replaced two BDR headcount with a HubSpot prospecting agent and went from an 18% to 46% response rate on inbound leads. Julia walks through how Optimizely's marketing team embedded AI agents directly into their content workflow, from briefing to brand voice checking to traffic monitoring, without anyone having to leave the platform. Pejman shares the framework his team uses to map workflows and find the highest-ROI AI opportunities, plus a custom brand tone tool that turns hours of manual review into minutes. And Kevin talks through what it actually looks like to lead an AI culture change on a small team with limited resources.Timestamps(00:00) - - Intro (06:55) - - Guest intros: Tara, Julia, Lily, Pejman, and Kevin (12:04) - - Tara on why AI adoption needs an internal owner and how to govern it without squashing enthusiasm (15:02) - - Lily: why their first AI initiative failed and what they did differently (17:15) - - How Lovable kicked off team-wide AI excitement at Three Play Media (19:37) - - Lily's HubSpot prospecting agent: 18% to 46% response rate on inbound leads (23:19) - - Julia: embedding AI agents into Optimizely's content workflow (31:20) - - Using AI to monitor content performance and auto-assign optimization work (33:24) - - Pejman: mapping workflows to find the highest-ROI AI opportunities (35:55) - - Building a brand tone checker that scores and rewrites content against brand guidelines (39:55) - - Kevin: making AI a mandate on a small team and building a culture of learning (44:06) - - Group Q&A: optimizing spend vs. shipping faster, budget shifts, and new KPIs Join 50,0000 people who get Dave's Newsletter here: https://www.exitfive.com/newsletterLearn more about Exit Five's private marketing community: https://www.exitfive.com/***Brought to you by:Knak - A no-code, campaign creation platform that lets you go from idea to on-brand email and landing pages in minutes, using AI where it actually matters. Learn more at knak.com/exitfive, or check out the MCP server by clicking this link. Vector - A contact-level ads platform that lets you build audiences from actual people on your site, clicking your ads, and checking out your competitors. Learn more at vector.co, and get on the waitlist for their new MCP server by clicking here. Compound Growth Marketing - A full-funnel demand generation agency that helps high-growth cybersecurity, DevOps, and enterprise software companies drive more pipeline through AI SEO, paid media, and go-to-market engineering. Visit compoundgrowthmarketing.com and tell them Dave sent you.***Thanks to my friends at hatch.fm for producing this episode and handling all of the Exit Five podcast production.They give you unlimited podcast editing and strategy for your B2B podcast.Get unlimited podcast editing and on-demand strategy for one low monthly cost. Just upload your episode, and they take care of the rest.Visit hatch.fm to learn more

The SaaSpocalypse marks the end of traditional CRM with manual data entry, rigid interfaces, and seat‑based software no longer make sense in an AI‑driven world. Success now depends on outcome‑focused plumbing: intelligent orchestration that delivers results, not screens.This week, Dave, Esmee, and Rob are joined by Hannah Datz, Americas Vice President of CRM at ServiceNow, to unpack the major announcements from ServiceNow Knowledge 2026 in Las Vegas and explore how AI is accelerating the SaaSpocalypse and driving a fundamental shift in the future of CRM. TLDR00:34 – Introduction 00:54 – Hang out: Happy Password Day and emerging threats 06:46 – Conversation with Hannah Datz 57:20 – From tennis excitement to the best burger ever GuestHannah Datz: https://www.linkedin.com/in/hannahdatz/ HostsDave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/Esmee van de Giessen:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/esmeevandegiessen/Rob Kernahan:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-kernahan/ ProductionMarcel van der Burg:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/marcel-vd-burg/Dave Chapman:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/chapmandr/ SoundBen Corbett:  https://www.linkedin.com/in/ben-corbett-3b6a11135/Louis Corbett:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/louis-corbett-087250264/ 'Realities Remixed' is an original podcast from Capgemini

Eyvonne and William sit down with Joseph Nicholson, a Network Operations Engineer with NTT DATA, to share how public speaking transformed his career and technical experience. Joseph went from a terrifying ten minute lightning talk at AutoCon 2 to presenting 45-minute sessions at conferences like NANOG. Together they discuss how conversations in conference halls influenced... Read more »

Peter Merel: AI Alignment Is the Agile Coach's Next Frontier — Using Throughput Accounting and Pull-Based Transformation to Prove Value Read the full Show Notes and search through the world's largest audio library on Agile and Scrum directly on the Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast website: http://bit.ly/SMTP_ShowNotes.   "Our jobs ARE about alignment. Alignment is how do we get all of the people and all of the tools to work together for mutual benefit." - Peter Merel   Peter Merel brings a provocative perspective on the biggest challenge facing agile professionals today: AI and agile alignment. With AI rapidly advancing, Peter observes that everyone in the agile community is afraid for their jobs — but argues this fear is misplaced. The real challenge isn't replacement; it's alignment. How do we get biological and electronic entities to work together for mutual benefit? Peter's answer begins with pull-based transformation — building a thin steel thread from business through to DevOps, proving it works with a small group, then growing it. He connects this to Goldratt's throughput accounting, arguing that throughput (operating expense plus net profit) is the only metric immune to Goodhart's Law. From throughput, Peter derives three flows: value flow (throughput itself), workflow (the first derivative — what increases value flow), and learning flow (the second derivative — what improves workflow). He then introduces the pirate metrics (AARRR) — acquisition, activation, retention, referral, and revenue — as market constraints that can be analyzed through Theory of Constraints. Peter's frustration is that 25 years after Agile began, most business stakeholders still can't identify their market bottleneck. Without that knowledge, he argues, priorities are meaningless. The path forward for agile coaches? Bring scientific rigor to transformation, measure what matters, and prove value before scaling.   In this episode, we refer to FAST Agile, Joe Justice's work with Tesla and WikiSpeed, and the connection between throughput accounting and agile transformation metrics.   Self-reflection Question: Can you identify the single biggest market constraint limiting your organization's throughput right now — and if not, how confident are you that your current priorities are the right ones?   [The Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast Recommends]

Peter Merel: When a Hub-and-Spoke Executive Hijacks Your Agile Transformation — And What to Do About It Read the full Show Notes and search through the world's largest audio library on Agile and Scrum directly on the Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast website: http://bit.ly/SMTP_ShowNotes.   "Either you're going to do what you know works, or you're going to step away. Either way, you're not going to do damage to your client." - Peter Merel   After a successful transformation at Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Peter Merel moved to Westpac, another major Australian bank, expecting to replicate the same approach. He found an executive who appeared eager to support an agile transformation — but this executive saw agile as the ideal form of micromanagement. Everything and everyone revolved around this one individual, and as Peter began facilitating conversations that didn't hub on the executive, the executive felt disempowered. Peter was blind to this dynamic — he had never encountered it before. The situation deteriorated because Peter had been hired to run a push-based transformation, when he knew from experience that only pull-based transformation works. At Commonwealth Bank, he had built a thin steel thread from business through to DevOps with a small group, proved it worked, and then grown it organically. At Westpac, he let himself be persuaded to push change into the organization, and it compromised everything. The lesson Peter shares is stark: if you can't do what you know works, and you can't step away, then you are the problem. He also warns that when coaches fail this way, they make life harder for whoever comes next — a responsibility that's easy to overlook in the moment.   In this segment, we talk about pull-based transformation and why push-based change programs consistently fail in large organizations.   Self-reflection Question: Are you currently in a situation where you've compromised on your approach to change — and if so, are you doing more damage by staying than you would by stepping away? Featured Book of the Week: The Agile Way by Peter Merel Peter's own book, The Agile Way, is his modern translation of the Tao Te Ching — a 3,000-year-old text he argues was originally about how to achieve agile development in organizations large and small. Peter first started translating this text in 1989, and after decades of iteration, the book draws connections between ancient wisdom and modern agile practices — XP, Lean, Theory of Constraints, throughput accounting, and permaculture. As Peter explains, "The sage in Lao Tzu is Shang Ren — agile people. This is a book about agile people, agility, and it always was." The book is available at agile.way.pm, and Kent Beck, who wrote the foreword, calls it "a dangerous little book" — dangerous in the same sense as the word extreme.   [The Scrum Master Toolbox Podcast Recommends]

Welcome to episode 353 of The Cloud Pod, where the weather is always cloudy! Justin, Ryan, and Matt are in the studio this week and ready to bring you all the latest news, including earnings from the big 3, a new agreement between the DOW and Google (Don’t be Evil), AI Agents, and more OpenClaw news (that your security team may not appreciate). Plus, DataCenters may not be great for the environment. Who knew?  There's a lot to cover, so let's get started! Titles we almost went with this week Who Let the Bots Out? AI Governance Has No Answer  Microsoft Loses Its OpenAI Monopoly But Keeps the Parking Spot  AWS But Make It Forklifts and Freight Bezos Built a Money Printer That Prints Data Centers GPT-5.5 Instant Arrives Faster Than Your Last Existential Crisis When Your AI Coding Tool Ghosts You for Seven Weeks No More Goldfish Brain for Your AI Agents Amazon Quick Connects Everything Except Your Work-Life Balance AWS WAF Now Knows Which AI Is Crawling Your Stuff Stop Pushing Broken Code to Staging Like a Caveman Your AI Agent Called It Needs Automated Therapy OpenAI Moves In, and AWS Didn’t Even Change the Locks AI Interviews Candidates So Recruiters Can Nap Foundry Gives AI Agents Long-Term Memory and a Diary Cloud Earnings are Up… but some day the Capex Bell will Toll for the AI Reckoning Who Let the Bots Out? AWS WAF now shows you A big thanks to this week's sponsors: There are many cloud cost management tools out there, but only Archera provides insured commitments. It sounds fancy, but it’s really simple. Archera gives you the cost savings of a 1 or 3-year AWS Savings Plan with a commitment as short as 30 days. If you do not use all the cloud resources you have committed to, Archera will literally cover the difference. Other cost management tools may say they offer “insured commitments”, but remember to ask: Will you actually give me my rebate? Because Archera will.  Check out thecloudpod.net/archera to schedule a demo today.  We also wanted to tell you about something coming to the US for the first time — WeAreDevelopers World Congress!  They’ve been doing this in Europe for years, 15,000-plus attendees in Berlin, it’s one of the biggest developer events over there. Coté from Software Defined Talk is actually speaking at their Berlin event this summer, so we’ve got some firsthand context here. In September, they’re launching the North America edition. San José, September 23 to 25. 500-plus speakers, 18 tracks — cloud, infrastructure, DevOps, security, AI, data engineering, all of it. Speakers from Datadog, Honeycomb, Sentry, Google, LinkedIn, and Stack Overflow. Olivier Pomel, Christine Yen, Milin Desai, Kelsey Hightower – plus workshops and masterclasses, not just talks. These are people who know how to do a developer conference at scale. wearedevelopers.us, code DEVPOD26 for 15% off. Group rates on top of that for 4 or more. Follow Up It's Earnings Time!  01:23 Microsoft (MSFT) Q3 earnings report 2026 Microsoft posted Q3 2026 revenue of $82.89 billion, up 18% year over year, with Azure cloud services growing 40%, slightly ahead of analyst expectations in the 38-39% range. Capital expenditures came in at $31.9 billion, about $3 billion below the analyst consensus of $34.9 billion, contributing to the stock dipping 2% despite the earnings beat, reflecting investor sensitivi

AWS Morning Brief for the week of May 4th, with Corey Quinn. Links:AWS Management Console now supports settings to control service and Region visibility - AWSAmazon CloudWatch adds visual agent configuration to the EC2 consoleAWS Announces Amazon Connect DecisionsAmazon Connect Talent for AI-powered hiring (now available in Preview)Introducing Amazon EC2 R8in and R8ib instancesAmazon OpenSearch Service now supports index-level encryptionAmazon Redshift Serverless AI-driven scaling is now the default for new workgroupsAWS Cost Optimization Hub now supports CSV downloadAWS KMS now tracks last usage of all KMS keysAWS Lambda adds support for Ruby 4.0AWS Marketplace Management Portal now supports bank account deletionAmazon Bedrock now offers OpenAI models, Codex, and Managed Agents (Limited Preview)Amazon CloudFront now supports invalidation by cache tagIntroducing Amazon EC2 C8ine and M8ine instancesIdentifying security risks using AWS Cost and Usage Report dataAmazon Q Developer end-of-support announcementIssue with AWS Ops Wheel (CVE-2026-6911 and CVE-2026-6912Issues in tough library and tuftool CLI utilityCVE-2026-7191- Arbitrary Code Execution via Sandbox Bypass in QnABot on AWSIssue with FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP - MAC Address Validation Bypass and ICMP Echo Reply Integer UnderflowCVE-2026-7424 - Integer Underflow in DHCPv6 Sub-Option Parser in FreeRTOS-Plus-TCPIssue with FreeRTOS-Plus-TCP - IPv6 Router Advertisement Memory Safety Issues

Autonomous software development creates a dilemma for leaders in regulated industries: adopt AI coding at scale or fall behind on product velocity without compromising auditability and code quality. In CXOTalk episode 917, Kris Tokarzewski, Group Chief Technology Information Officer at Vitality, describes how a 14,000-employee multinational insurer is rebuilding its software development life cycle around AI. This episode examines the impact of agentic AI on software development in the enterprise.Recorded at Blitzy's headquarters, the conversation examines deterministic code generation, Blitzy's infinite code context, context engineering, test-driven development, and the shifting bottlenecks that surface as throughput accelerates.YOU'LL DISCOVER✅ Why regulated industries require deterministic, auditable code rather than the probabilistic output most AI coding systems generate✅ How Blitzy's infinite code context (ingestion of codebases, engineering standards, and business rules) creates high-quality software aligned with compliance requirements✅ How Vitality reverse-engineers legacy systems with autonomous AI, achieving a measured 5x acceleration over manual methods✅ Why optimizing end-to-end SDLC throughput matters more than local efficiency at any single stage✅ How code review of 50,000 to 100,000-line pull requests becomes the next limiting factor, and how AI reviewers close the gap✅ How test-driven development pairs with autonomous code generation to raise quality and compliance pass rates✅ How the roles of requirements engineers, software engineers, and product teams converge inside an AI-native SDLC✅ How to instrument AI spend against velocity, quality, end-to-end throughput, and customer value rather than isolated gainsTIMESTAMPS0:00 Deterministic code vs. probabilistic AI output0:14 Meet Kris Tokarzewski, Group CTIO of Vitality0:32 Why Vitality is modernizing legacy insurance systems1:30 Event-driven architecture as agentic AI's natural partner3:00 Building an AI-native software development life cycle with Blitzy4:28 Throughput optimization versus local efficiency6:02 Reverse engineering legacy systems and deterministic code generation9:05 Infinite code context: ingesting codebases, standards, and rules10:00 Test-driven development with autonomous code generation10:49 Results: 5x faster legacy reverse engineering13:17 Product, engineering, and DevOps convergence15:04 Roles level up: requirements engineers and software engineers16:18 Reviewing 50,000 to 100,000-line pull requests17:56 Instrumenting AI spend against business outcomes19:16 Executive sponsorship for autonomous development20:16 Advice for CIOs and CTOs adopting AI-driven development

Ever wondered why one song can instantly give you chills… while another makes you feel nothing at all?In this episode, Selina Meere, COO of Trevanna Tracks, pulls back the curtain on the invisible system behind the music you feel in films, ads, and media. From navigating complex rights and scaling music operations for global brands to leading without a playbook, this conversation dives deep into what it really takes to operate at the intersection of creativity, technology, and leadership.They explore the realities of being a COO, managing elite teams, making high-stakes decisions, and building trust in environments where there are no clear answers.If you want to understand how world-class operators think, lead, and execute under pressure, don't wait. The cost of staying reactive instead of strategic is too high. Hit play now for insights you won't hear anywhere else.Timestamped Highlights[00:00] – The hidden force behind why certain songs instantly trigger emotion in movies and ads[02:14] – Why music licensing became exponentially more complex, and what most people don't realize[04:21] – The “Excel breaking point” that led to building a completely new category in media[06:37] – From book publishing to COO, the unexpected career pivot that changed everything[11:00] – The moment she had to learn DevOps, Agile, and engineering… from scratch[13:40] – The leadership mistake most companies make during major internal transformations[17:11] – How top teams actually prioritize when every client thinks their request is urgent[19:01] – The hardest part of being a COO, and why there's no such thing as a playbook[28:12] – The real way to build confidence when making big, high-risk decisions[31:54] – Why asking questions can quietly destroy trust, and how to fix itAbout the GuestSelina Meere is the COO of Trevanna Tracks, a pioneering music rights and workflow platform serving some of the largest media and entertainment companies in the world. With a background in publishing and PR, she has built a career partnering closely with founders to scale businesses, optimize operations, and drive growth across industries. Known for her adaptability and strategic thinking, Selina specializes in leading high-performance teams in complex, fast-evolving environments.

Today's episode is part one of a three part series to break down Network Access Control (NAC). Ethan and Holly start simple by explaining what NAC is at a high level and all of the jargon and acronyms that come with it. They also cover where and when network access control is applied, whether NAC... Read more »

AI agents are moving fast,  but the infrastructure behind them is still catching up. In this episode of Screaming in the Cloud, Corey Quinn sits down with Paper Compute CEO Brian “B Dougie” Douglas to explore building telemetry for AI agents, open-source infrastructure, token economics, and what it takes to create developer tooling in the AI era. From local-first observability to agent runtimes and the future of AI workflows, this conversation dives into what's next for AI-powered development.Show highlights: (00:00) Open Source Trust Signal(00:16) Show Intro and Sponsor(01:07) What Paper Compute Builds(01:55) Telemetry for Agents Explained(04:10) Local First Data and Sharing(06:18) Second Time Founder Story(09:06) Token Costs and Pricing Psychology(14:20) Stereos VM and Safer Runtimes(20:34) Open Source Strategy and Vibe Coding(24:54) Whats Next and Wrap UpAbout Brian: Brian is the founder of the Paper Compute Company, a distributed systems primitives for AI agents.Brian previously founded Open Sauced, a company dedicated to increasing knowledge and insights of open-source communities. In 2024, Open Sauced joined the Linux Foundation, further solidifying Brian's commitment to advancing open-source initiatives. With a passion for open source, Brian has consistently supported and mentored new contributors through Open Sauced, empowering developers to excel in the open-source ecosystem.Previously, Brian also led Developer Advocacy at GitHub, where he fostered a community of early adopters through content creation showcasing the newest GitHub features. His experience spans across notable companies in the tech industry, including Netlify, where he worked as an advocate. Brian's dedication to open source extends beyond his professional endeavors. He currently hosts two podcasts Open Source Ready and The Secret Sauce: A podcast focusing on developer insights and experiences.Through these platforms, Brian continues to share valuable knowledge and promote open-source culture within the developer community.Links: LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/brianldouglasWebsite: https://b.dougie.devSponsored by: duckbillhq.com

Kyler and Ned are joined by Enrico Teotti, an independent consultant with over 25 years of experience. Enrico has worked with clients on real-world AI implementations, and he’s here talk about what he’s learned, including using AI to query databases, and for debugging and performance analysis. They also touch on the importance of using AI... Read more »