Podcasts about giant robots podcast

Host Victoria Guido interviews Krish Ramineni, founder and CEO of Fireflies, who provides insights into the evolution of Fireflies. This AI meeting assistant transcribes and summarizes meetings in multiple languages. He explains the rapid advancements in AI models that have allowed Fireflies to expand its language support and improve its transcription and note-taking capabilities. The conversation shifts to the broader AI industry, where Krish comments on democratizing AI technology, making it more accessible and practical for various applications beyond just number crunching. He emphasizes the importance of AI in enhancing productivity and enabling small teams to achieve large-scale impacts. Victoria and Krish explore the future of work with AI, discussing the balance between job creation and replacement. Krish argues that rejecting AI is akin to dismissing essential technological advancements like email, highlighting businesses' need to adapt and embrace AI tools. They also touch on Fireflies' journey to enterprise-level adoption, addressing challenges like data security and compliance. Krish shares his optimism about AI's potential to augment human productivity and creativity, positioning AI as a transformative force that can empower individuals and organizations to achieve unprecedented efficiency and innovation. Fireflies (https://fireflies.ai/) Follow Fireflies on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/fireflies-inc/), Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/firefliesapp), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/firefliesai/), YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCZHSvxWARx0TRK77t1AbY0A), or X (https://twitter.com/firefliesai). Follow Krish Ramineni on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/krishramineni/). Follow thoughtbot on X (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Transcript:  AD: We're excited to announce a new workshop series for helping you get that startup idea you have out of your head and into the world. It's called Vision to Value. Over a series of 90-minute working sessions, you'll work with a thoughtbot product strategist and a handful of other founders to start testing your idea in the market and make a plan for building an MVP. Join for all seven of the weekly sessions, or pick and choose the ones that address your biggest challenge right now. Learn more and sign up at tbot.io/visionvalue. VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido, and with me today is Krish Ramineni, Founder and CEO of Fireflies. Krish, great to be here with you. KRISH: It's great to be here. Thanks for having me. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Before we dive into what Fireflies is all about and start talking about AI, just in your personal world, what are you learning right now? KRISH: Well, I'm traveling this summer, and I've always wanted to speak multiple languages, both for functional reasons and to be able to actually enjoy my travel experiences. So, I'm trying to learn Spanish. I took three years in high school, but I forgot everything, and I'm trying to pick that up. I'm also trying to learn Hindi. We have teammates that are in both Latin America as well as India. And so, both of these would be really valuable [chuckles] to learn. I probably need to get a tutor, something that I'm working on right now. VICTORIA: Yeah. How are you learning? Are you using an app? You said you might get a tutor. KRISH: Yeah. I started looking at Duolingo. I started doing flashcards. There are online instructors. So, I'm just trying to learn the quickest way possible so that I can get just the basic, common phrases down that I could understand so that I can ask questions and understand what people are saying when they're giving me directions on the streets. So, that's the plan. I don't expect to be a fluent speaker. You know, I always wondered, too, like, since we work in this AI space, if we could build a tool that, in real-time, could translate what I'm saying into the local language and the local language into English using my voice. That would be pretty cool. So, I think our whole mission is around like, eliminating communication barriers. But as I've been trying to learn new languages, this is something I realized is...it's a big world out there, and a lot of people in the U.S. only know one language, whereas people in other countries know multiple languages. And yeah, something that I didn't really appreciate growing up or being in high school. But now I'm realizing, like, the immense benefits of being able to speak multiple languages. So, I'm trying [laughs]. VICTORIA: Right. And I think the benefits even to your brain health and your way of thinking is really exciting. I also learned Spanish from a really young age and grew up with it. And recently, you know, I moved to San Diego, so I have a lot more exposure to people who are just speaking Spanish all the time and getting to overhear little bits of conversation, or at a restaurant, even though right now I usually end up ordering incorrectly [laughs] and getting a little bit of surprise. But it's, like, really sweet to be able to connect with people in the community at that level. And last year, I went to Japan for a conference for Ruby, and I learned just a little bit of Japanese. And it just made me so happy, for some reason, to be able to say even a couple of words and a couple of phrases and to have other people, like, say that I was doing a good job [laughs]. You know, like, it's just really nice, especially if you're traveling a lot, and you want to actually connect to people to be able to share that language. Yeah, it's interesting about AI translating there. I will say the translators that we had in Japan they may be caught about 60%. Like, you know, and then with context, it was quite difficult. So, yeah, I'd be curious how AI could address that and even get more personal and being able to use a voice and added more information into that, so you get that full translation. KRISH: Yeah. Local languages and, like, the common phrases. So, for example, the Spanish that's spoken in Spain is going to have different phrases than the ones spoken in Mexico or in other places, right? So, that's also really interesting to think about how local dialects, accents all play into it. Growing up, I used to love watching Bollywood Indian movies, and I would need subtitles. And I slowly started to get to a place where I can still understand what's going on without subtitles. It's really interesting that some of those jokes and some of the things that are said don't really translate exactly into English, right? Like, someone that's a native English speaker wouldn't quite get it. There's a lot more to language than just the words that are used. It's like the culture, the phrases, the people. And so, that's the beauty. That's the beauty of this world. There's so much diversity. VICTORIA: So, I'm curious. As a founder of an AI app that takes recordings of people's meetings and turns it into summarized language, are the models based primarily on English, obviously, right away? And how are you thinking about incorporating other languages into your model? KRISH: When we started, it was primarily English. Fireflies would take notes in English. It would transcribe English meetings. And then, this past year, we started support for 60 different languages, including Spanish, French, German, Hindi, and so many more. And on top of the transcription, we now can also do AI note-taking in some of these other languages. So, if you have a meeting in Portuguese, the summaries and notes will be in Portuguese. We have a big global presence today with Fireflies. It's used in over a hundred countries and lots of different languages. And I would say the foreign language segment of our market is growing incredibly quickly. And we also hear requests from people where they have people that speak different languages because they have global teams in meetings. And it would be super helpful to be able to translate and transcribe and so that when they look back, they can get help and understand or clarify certain things. Yeah. I think language when we started, and most of these LLMs (large language models) were primarily built around English, right? Especially transcription and speech. But there are companies coming out that are now building these models that give better representation to other languages. And we will have AI that will be able to understand and speak many different languages. And just the rate at which this technology is changing, I'm super impressed. I read somewhere that they were building a model back in the day before the whole ChatGPT, where they were using reinforcement learning and transfer learning, where they were able to teach it one language. And it was able to quickly pick up another language, even though it wasn't taught to them. So, AI works in very magical ways [laughs]. VICTORIA: That's really cool. I wish that I worked that way with Portuguese because I was like, oh, I know Spanish okay sometimes. And then, I was like, but Portuguese when I read it, the words make sense, but then hearing it, the pronunciation being totally different, it's like [laughs] a long way to go. But that's really interesting. And you've already started to talk a little bit about the changes in the industry and what you're seeing as the new capabilities for AI. Can you tell me more about that? What other changes do you see in the industry in the last, like, year or even, like, a couple of months? KRISH: At least in the last two years, people's perception of how hard it is to deploy AI has changed. Before, you needed to have a PhD. You needed to write a lot of code, and the AI was not practical. Now, AI is just a few lines of code. You don't even have to be technical to deploy AI. And you can ask it to do a lot more than crunching numbers, and that's what's so powerful. And we are getting these generalized models where, in the past, if you had, like, an AI model, it could do one thing like classification or sentiment analysis. Right now, I have AI that can give me French poetry. It can generate images. It can summarize things. It can help me have a conversation with it and learn how to improve my speaking skills. AI is trained on the web, right? And whatever is on the web, it's a reflection of that. So, that also comes with the good and the bad. The good being that it knows what most humans feel and think and can relate to. And the bad, though, is there's a lot of nonsense on the web, so a lot of the bias, a lot of the information that it's getting. AI today can, with confidence say the wrong answer and believe that that is the right answer. So, that is one of the risks. Some people call this hallucination, where the AI goes haywire and wonky. But I'm hoping that with time, that does get solved; we have better guardrails and parameters. Some people will say that hallucination is a feature and not a bug because it's letting the AI be more expressive. But everyone's understanding of truth should not be, I think, different. Like, I think there is one set of truth sometimes, and you don't want the AI to misinterpret that. So, yeah, I think it's an exciting time. And more people like our company are embracing and adopting AI into their core products. And it's causing incredible productivity gains. But it's nowhere perfect. People talk about this AGI, (artificial general intelligence). I think we're a little bit away from that, but we're moving fast. Like, this stuff is happening at an exponential rate. In technology, there was this Moore's law, right? With the number of transistors and how amazing and exponentially better the chips got. We saw that with storage, right? The cost of cloud storage when it first came out was so expensive. Now it's super cheap. If you remember, back in the day, you got, like, a USB card where it could probably store, like, 10 megabytes. Now it can do, like, 10 gigabytes to, like, one terabyte. And the cost is, like, super affordable. If you think about TVs that came out in the past, right? Like, getting a 60-inch TV was super expensive. Like, a 40-inch TV was super expensive. Now everything is, like, LCD. You get, like, 60, 70 inches. And the price is the same as what a 40-inch TV was back then. So, AI is all of that and some more. It's moving at a rapid pace. Like, technology, as an industry, like, it's moving so quickly, and AI is moving more quickly than what most people can keep up with. So, that has pros and cons. We can dive into that more. But, yeah, things are changing on a weekly basis, not on a yearly basis right now. VICTORIA: Right. And there's a few directions we can go in from there, I think, that are really interesting, right? There's, like, the future of work with AI because I can relate to a feeling of fear and anxiety about what is this new technology? Am I going to lose my job? And when I talk about it with people I'm mentoring, I try to position it more as this is going to change the way we work. You're still going to need people to do stuff. But if you're rejecting AI because you think it's just a fad or it's just silly, like, I think it is fundamentally changing the way people are going to do their jobs if you pursue that. And I think if you're capable with using AI as a tool, you're going to be more powerful than you've ever been in your job in most cases. KRISH: Rejecting AI is like someone rejecting email for faxing and sending paper mail by hand. You just cannot compete, right? Imagine if you were a business that said, "I don't believe in AI. I'm going to do everything old school." You'd be like, today, okay, cool. You should do that. And imagine if you're a business today that says, "I don't use email. I will physically mail everything to you handwritten." So, that's what it's going to be like in a few months to a year. Like, this stuff is happening quick. And I always like to say that AI will it create more jobs? Yes. Will AI replace jobs? Yes. But the probability of someone using AI who will replace you is far greater. So, AI isn't going to replace you as much as someone using AI is going to replace you. It's a skill set that we have to all learn, just like how we had to learn to use a computer, to use the internet, to use the smartphone. This is the same thing here. Like, we're going to all have to learn to use it and learn to interact and gel with AI in the workplace. VICTORIA: Absolutely. And how does that relate to what you learned in your journey with Fireflies and talking to people about AI? How have those conversations gone forward? KRISH: Fireflies at the core is this AI meeting assistant that joins your meetings. It takes notes. It helps you remember what was discussed before a meeting, during a meeting, and after a meeting. It helps me recall any information that I talked about. If we met six months ago and I'm meeting you again, it has the notes for me. It lets me search back through it. It lets me ask it questions about what you talked about. What were the next steps? What were the action items? So, it's giving me structure to my life because a lot of my life is having meetings with lots of people and having many conversations, and then recalling those conversations and staying on top of that. It gives me structure in terms of what I do day in and day out. I always believe that work originates from conversations. Meetings are some of the most valuable conversations that we tend to have. It's also very expensive for an organization to have meetings. Because when you get four people in a room who are all making six figures and spending an hour having meetings, that information, whatever is discussed, can have a huge cost to the business. But it can also have a huge potential to move the business in the right direction. So, organizing all of that knowledge that originates from meetings was the initial vision of Firefly. Before all of this AI and ChatGPT hype, that was what we'd set out to do. The LLMs and AI help us do that job better: summarize the meetings better, generate better action items, create meeting outlines, allow you to search back. Instead of searching by keywords, you can now ask specific questions and talk to AI. So, this is what AI enables people to do, especially with Fireflies, is you can now interact with Fireflies like you would with a teammate, and that has changed the way people feel and use our product. And people don't come out and say, "Hey, you're replacing secretaries. You're replacing the intern that I've hired to take notes for me. Like, you are replacing the job that the new hire has to do because it's a rite of passage." 95% of people will not make that argument because it's actually silly because your assistant, your interns, your new hires have better things to do. And these are the mundane, monotonous stuff that you should delegate to AI. Obviously, you can have humans review all of that, have their own, you know, take on it, generate reports. But it's actually leveling them up to be more productive and be more valuable to your organization. So, I think there's a lot of pieces of AI that will do the same. You know, other technologies like, for example, AI that generates images or graphic designs that's not going to replace the graphic designer. It's going to allow the graphic designer to be able to create many iterations, be more creative. Like, if they don't have the technical skills to use certain pieces of software, it can help them ease that barrier to entry and give them more assets to work with. So, I think of AI in the workplace as how can we augment human productivity by giving each and every person a superpower? VICTORIA: And you started this eight years ago now. So, you were really, like, ahead of the curve in terms of all these AI companies coming out. I'm wondering, what challenges did you have early on, and how did you overcome them? KRISH: When we started, this was not obvious, like, that we should be doing this. It sounded obvious to us. We felt like every person in the workplace deserved an AI assistant that takes notes, not just the C-suite who, has a secretary or a business admin. And it felt like it's so obvious. It should exist. We should build it. And we need to create the experience like an assistant that follows you around. But when we started, there were so many uncertainties. Can this technology work? Can this technology scale? Is the transcription going to be accurate? Can you actually even summarize things? And does that stuff make sense? It's a new behavior. Are people willing to entertain AI assistants and meeting assistants? So, every step of the way, there's a technology risk, a go-to-market risk. You are doing a sales risk. Like there are so many like pieces to the puzzle that you have to figure out. And you have to peel each layer of the onion and get to the core. So, I think it's been quite a journey. We've been lucky in a few ways, right? Because I do believe that luck is sometimes about being at the right place at the right time. But those that always keep showing up are going to be able to get lucky from time to time, right? If you take a thousand shots, at least one of them will make it. That was my philosophy. We tried. We built seven or eight different products that all somehow worked or utterly flopped. And eventually, we got closer and closer and closer to the truth of what customers needed. And that led us to build the version of Fireflies that exists today. So, it's definitely not easy, but there were three core phases to Fireflies or three core movements that allowed Fireflies to exist. One is speech recognition and transcription fundamentally got better. It got more accurate and more affordable. Before, it was ridiculously expensive. It would take a dollar per minute of transcription, and you needed humans to do it. But these AI engines, speech engines, got better. The second thing is when we launched Fireflies, the pandemic happened a few weeks later. Everyone went remote. Video conferencing became more mainstream, and people were actually having Zoom fatigue and way too many meetings. And they needed a way to organize all those meetings they're having, jumping from one meeting to the next. And Fireflies got pulled forward, and a lot of people wanted to have it in meetings and help them around. And that helped us grow exponentially, virally. To this day, Fireflies has taken notes for over 16 million people across 300,000 organizations. And since the launch in January 2020 to where we are, the first two to three years were trial and error, right? From 2016 to 2020. We built our product in 2018, 2019, launched in 2020. The pandemic accelerated the adoption. And then, you have this new LLM wave that comes out at the end of 2021, which allowed us to make the product fundamentally more valuable. And everything got better from the notes, to the summaries, to the search. Everything got better. And we crossed the chasm from where people thought, "Huh, this is a cool idea, but I don't think it's going to work," to "Holy crap, this is one of the best use cases for generative AI and LLMs." And yeah, like, it was luck in terms of being there when this movement was happening. I think a lot of AI companies can say that. But it also took a little bit of fortitude to be able to be doing this several years before the stuff came out, right? Once a gold rush occurs, everyone's going to want to go in and then build something. But if you were already there, and you were searching and searching, and you were very close to something, and then you discover the gold rush, you're going to have a head start, and that's what happened with us. VICTORIA: Yeah, you said 7 to 8 product iterations, and I was like, uh, you really had to go through an emotional roller coaster, I'm sure early days. But you were lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time and have a good picture of what the problem space was. It's really incredible to hear that. MID-ROLL AD: Now that you have funding, it's time to design, build, and ship the most impactful MVP that wows customers now and can scale in the future. thoughtbot Liftoff brings you the most reliable cross-functional team of product experts to mitigate risk and set you up for long-term success. As your trusted, experienced technical partner, we'll help launch your new product and guide you into a future-forward business that takes advantage of today's new technologies and agile best practices. Make the right decisions for tomorrow today. Get in touch at thoughtbot.com/liftoff. VICTORIA: Why don't I move forward a little bit into where you are now, where you have GDPR and SOC 2 compliance, and you're, you know, really doing well. Like, what were the challenges in getting that product to enterprise level? KRISH: We let the customers pull us in the direction that needed for us to go. A lot of times, we try to see, okay, what is every friction point along the way? What would it take for larger organizations to adopt it? There is incredible product value. People have been saying it. But I need these sorts of features and capabilities in order to deploy it inside my organization. And we are handling meetings, which is sensitive. And so, we have to be able to give them more access controls, give them more admin features. You know, we have a policy at Fireflies where we say, "We do not train on your data by default." So, most AI companies they're using their customer data to train models. We do not do that. So, we made that explicitly clear. CIOs love hearing that because when they look at us and other potential competitors, those competitors are bragging outside, saying, "Hey, we built this amazing model training on all of this data." And we say, "We don't do that." So, unless you want us to build something custom for you, we will not train on your data by default. The other thing we said is, "Look, you own your data. If you want to delete it anytime, you can. You can request to have the data deleted. If you were a participant on a meeting and you don't feel comfortable with the data, you can request the host to delete it, or you can come to us, and we'll delete that data for you." Like, you have rights to that. And we put everything in a very customer-centric worldview, and that usually aligns with the big enterprises. That aligns well with a lot of the folks that want to use your service. Because when you're using a new technology, the first question people are going to have is, "Does it work?" The second question they're going to have is, "Is it safe?" And with AI, a lot of people think about the safety of using the tech. And when you're building for a B2B enterprise, we had to make sure we put in the hard work to tailor our product to the needs of those customers. VICTORIA: That's really interesting. And maybe you could say more about why would a company want to train a model on their own data and create an LLM like that? KRISH: Are you talking about customers wanting us to train something for them? VICTORIA: Yes. I've heard this idea from a few different people, actually, where they want to be able to build an LLM and build a model based on a company's own knowledge and their own information. So, maybe you could say more about that. KRISH: I think it's really around fine-tuning and personalizing the AI. Now you can train on models. You can do fine-tuning. You can do other parameters. But it's really giving everyone their own personal experience with AI. We can do this today even without training just by understanding your preferences, and we want to continue to build towards that. So, yeah, we believe that every person inside an organization should have their own personal AI note-taker, and no two meeting notes will be the same because each set of notes is unique to you, your meetings, what your team wants. And so, that, to us, is like a vision we try to build towards. AI can bring about insane level of personalization, and that's one of the reasons why people would want to train their own models based on their like, knowledge graph, and information. VICTORIA: How do you think about the cost of building and running these AI tools from an infrastructure cost perspective? How does that translate to your cost for your customers, that kind of thing? KRISH: AI is expensive. The unit economics...I think a lot of people are taking for granted that it is insanely expensive to run these models to use a cloud provider of these AI models. Some people are spinning up their own models. It is insanely expensive. But the good news is the cost is going down at an accelerated pace, and it's just up to whether the pace of the cost decrease will outweigh the amount of spending some of these startups are doing. And that's why some of these companies are raising tons of money as well because they don't really have a monetization strategy. They have no revenue. They're making lofty goals that "This AI is going to do this. It's going to do this. It's going to replace this function in your org." But who's going to pay for it? How are you going to make people pay for it? Is it going to be subscription-based? Is it going to be utility-based? How much upfront cost is going to be there to train these models? And what if you do all that work, and then you deploy an LLM; you're an infrastructure provider, and no one cares? What if you're an application layer, and you're giving all of this stuff away for free and then eventually realize you can't get people to pay for it? So, there are so many open questions for these companies where the technology is changing quickly. The cost is changing quickly, and consumer preferences are also changing quickly. We'll have to see. Only time will tell because there's a hundred companies out there, all raising a hundred million dollars. We know that all of them are not going to make it, a few are. So, it'll be interesting to see what happens once the dust settles. But I think people should take that very seriously because you can't always expect to be bailed out by investors if you don't know how to utilize AI and how to build for cost. And I think a lot of investors tell startups to not worry about that. They say, "Don't worry about the cost. You know, as long as someone's there to pump you money, you just keep building, like, the best product out there." That works for some companies. I just don't believe it should be the only strategy that someone should take. VICTORIA: What if you build it and no one cares? It'd be so heartbreaking [laughs], but it happens, yeah. KRISH: That's 95% of startups that die is because no one cares. VICTORIA: Right. Yeah. And I'm curious, like, what other use cases do you see as being the most relevant for AI? Like, what problems does it really solve very well? I mean, note-taking, obviously, one of them. KRISH: I'm really excited about all of these AI tools that can write code for you. And maybe they can't replace a software engineer, but could you make a developer 10x more productive? And could today AI start off as a copilot for writing code for you to eventually building you full-fledged apps, right? And imagine what that would do in terms of reducing the barrier for so many people to be able to create their own personal apps and tools. Easier said than done. But I think what's really working really well, whether it's with GitHub or some of these other AI tools, is, can it actually write code for you? And I think that's a wonderful use case. It'll still need a lot more fleshing out, but I am bullish on that use case for sure. VICTORIA: Yeah. I'm hopeful that companies will figure out how to use AI to level up engineers because right now, we have the problem of the flattening of the middle where you have really senior people who are very in high demand. And then, you have a lot of people with very little experience who really want a career in technology. So, I see that as an opportunity, but also a risk that some people will create things with AI code and sell it. And it'll just be a hot mess [laughs]. But, you know, that's kind of the risk it is even if you're paying real developers at the same time, so... KRISH: Yeah. I think AI will take a C player and make them a B player, maybe a B player into a B plus player. And then, it can take an A player and make them, like, A plus. So, I think it just levels the playing field a little bit, eventually to a point where everyone in the org is going to get a little bit more productive. And I also think that small teams are going to be able to do incredible things. You, as a small team will be able to compete at a larger scale with some of the bigger companies. You know, Sam Altman said maybe there's a chance that a 10-person company is going to build a billion-dollar market cap organization that goes public. So, all of those are possibilities, too. I love the idea of solopreneurs and people that run their own, like, small businesses, you know, three to four people, super lean. Obviously, I'm in a venture-backed world, so I can't necessarily run that, but I am very excited by that potential. And I like those types of people that are entrepreneurial and don't need a lot of CapEx in order to get started. AI will allow a lot more solopreneurs to thrive. If social media created a market for people to have, like, a full-time job as influencers, I think AI can create a market for people to have full-time jobs as creators of products, goods, and services that can be managed with just, like, a few people. VICTORIA: That is really interesting. I'm curious if you want to...let's say you're meeting a founder or an entrepreneur, and they're AI-curious, but they don't really know where to get started or how to step their toe into the water. What advice would you give them? KRISH: I think the best place to start is by building and building something for yourself that you yourself would use. Try all these different AI products that are out there. Look at what's trending in the news in terms of which...every week, some new model is being deployed, some new changes are being rolled out. Google is rolling something out. Facebook is rolling out something. OpenAI is rolling out something. So, try to keep pace. It's going to be tough. And then, go play around and tinker with these tools. Like, you should be a tinkerer first. You should like to build things. You don't have to be an engineer to get started, but you need to be able to go and get your hands dirty, roll up your sleeves, and play around with these tools. The belief and conviction comes with you yourself gaining experience through understanding these tools. You know, you can't tell someone, you know, how to make a music video or make a movie without ever having used a camera before, right? So, it's the same way. You've got to learn how to use the tools first. VICTORIA: And are there any yellow or red flags you would tell people to watch out for if they're thinking about AI or thinking about using a new AI product? KRISH: I think for those founders that want to build large venture-scale businesses, and they're trying to bite off way more than they can chew, you should consider focusing. These are the sort of folks that maybe are not making a sequence of bets. They're trying to throw a hundred darts and see what sticks. And I usually think that's a strategy that will fail. You need to understand why you're building, what you're building, who you're building for. Don't just build it because the technology is cool. You know, not to pick on any products out there, but there's a lot of hardware devices coming out recently that have AI backed into them, right? And you wonder, why the heck is this a hardware device? Couldn't this be just an app on my phone? Like, why do I need to go spend $200, or $600, or $1000 buying this device that has a lot of limitations? The reason you built it because you thought the technology was cool. But by the time it got to production, it has a lot of faults. And you're trying to get people to change their behavior and take money and pay for this? That's tough. And I think VCs are falling for that as well, like, in funding tons of this money into these sorts of companies. Some can argue that it will get better with time and iterations. But I personally stay away from hardware. I don't want to touch anything related to hardware right now because we don't even know what the new form factor is going to be. But the hardware people should ask themselves, "Should this be a standalone device, or could it just be something on my iPhone as an app?" That is something that's really, really interesting. The space that I'm most excited about outside of AI for the workplace is robotics. And I've been seeing a lot of really cool products where they're trying to build these AI humanoid-like robots that can do a series of tasks. They're not like the machines in, like, an industry or a factory. But they can make you coffee. They can clean the dishes. They can cook you some food. I think the market for that is massive. Like, if that stuff works, people are going to be able to pay a lot of money for it. Like, the amount you'd pay for a car, you would pay for a utility-based robot inside your house and, like, with nice financing options and stuff. So, whoever cracks that is going to be really, really successful. There's people companies that have raised a lot of money solving that. While I'm generally not bullish about hardware little devices, I am very bullish about, like, these general-purpose robots that I think the potential is immense. Like imagine every household having one or two of those; what that means for domestic productivity, like, someone's folding the laundry, someone is cleaning up the house, taking out the trash. These are jobs to be done, yeah. VICTORIA: Well, then what would my husband do [laughter]? I'm just kidding. I don't want to replace him. No, I think it's interesting especially just, like, thinking about elder care, and having someone in the home, and watching, and cleaning up, and all of those tasks and being able to live independently. I could see that having a huge potential. So, also, obviously, I think robots are cool. It's the title of the podcast. So, I'm very pro-robot [laughs] in most cases, not all cases. Yeah. Well, that's super interesting. Let's see. Do you have anything else that you would like to promote? KRISH: You know, besides embracing AI and using, you know, these tools and services, I would really be excited to hear about people's ideas on, like, how they're using AI in the workplace. Everyone has so many creative ways to go about it. So, each week, we discover new ways people are using Fireflies, right? Some people use it for taking notes. Some people use it to be able to take customer quotes from calls. So, they can literally ask our AI, "Hey, go through these, like, past two customer calls and pull out all of the nice things they said about us, and then turn that into a soundbite that I can share with my marketing team so we can run a marketing campaign on that" So, there's just so many interesting use cases. I do want to say that voice is going to be a great form factor for AI. We work in the voice space. Like, I love talking to my AI during the meeting. So, I think that's going to be something that I would say is if you are an end user in the workplace, think about how you would use voice to get work done and turn your words into AI. And we're trying to solve that at Fireflies. And if you are interested in that space, we would love to talk to you. And if you have some interesting use cases that you want to see for Fireflies, please send them our way. VICTORIA: I love that. And it's interesting when you bring up voice. One thing I was surprised about with my parents, actually, obviously, a generation older, I got them an Alexa Dot that I got from a conference. I didn't think they would ever use it, but they actually use it all the time. They're, like, asking for recipes, setting timers, and doing things like that. And, yeah, if you have, like, an AI voice, like, "Send an email to this person" or, like, "Open this task and do it." Maybe I would actually get some more tasks done [laughs]. I could just do it over voice. Sometimes like, the keyboard and the screen is part of the delay. That's really interesting. Thank you so much for being on the podcast. Do you have any questions for me before we sign off? KRISH: I'm curious to hear your thoughts on what are the biggest risks with AI you foresee for people, and what makes you more skeptical about AI? VICTORIA: Yeah, you touched on a little bit earlier when you said about the cost of AI and the cost-benefit analysis; I don't think is always there for every single use case, right? There are some use cases where it is so clear there is a benefit for that. Note-taking is one of them. There's a million professions, I think, that would benefit from having AI note-taking apps. I think the risks which we've already seen that impact people, you mentioned the biases, and things like people getting denied health care, getting longer prison term sentences. You know, the way that they might blindly incorporate these algorithms into decisions that really reinforce biases because of this historical data that it's based on. I think whenever someone asks me about the risks of AI and, like, people losing jobs, or, you know, rogue AI taking over the world, I always bring it back to that some AI is already hurting people, and it should be stopped, and people should be educated on it. Like, the big scary AI conversation is almost a distraction to what's really going on, and we need to all be smarter about it. At the same time, I love using AI. I think it really can, like you said, get your productivity up 100%. In some cases, like, you can just do so much more so much faster. And I see that potential. And I think that there's always that balance, right? Like, you have to be able to be aware and embrace both if you're going to stay current. But there are some people who still send faxes and still do everything by mail. But, you know, it's like technology never really dies. There's just more of it in different ways, right? KRISH: Absolutely [laughs]. That's awesome. Well, thank you. This was great. VICTORIA: Wonderful. Yeah, I really enjoyed our conversation. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at: referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions.

Host Victoria Guido welcomes Wendell Adams, CEO of PrimeLab.io, as he talks about his lifelong passion for technology and entrepreneurship. Wendell shares his experiences, from hacking electronics as a child to studying various fields in college and eventually starting his own business. He emphasizes the importance of understanding market needs and leveraging language to make technology accessible. Wendell's drive to improve encryption and data security led to the formation of PrimeLab; a company focused on making encryption functional and accessible without compromising performance. Wendell discusses PrimeLab's strategic direction and market fit. He outlines the challenges and opportunities in the entertainment industry, emphasizing the need for innovative solutions that respect user control and privacy. Wendell also shares insights into how PrimeLab's technology can democratize data access and enhance business processes. The episode concludes with a reflection on the future of AI and encryption technologies and Wendell's advice for aspiring entrepreneurs to think critically and creatively about their ventures. PrimeLab.io (https://primelab.io/) Follow PrimeLab.io on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/primelab-io/), or X (https://x.com/PrimeLab4). Follow Wendell Adams on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/wendell-a-83317895/). Follow thoughtbot on X (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Transcript:  AD: We're excited to announce a new workshop series for helping you get that startup idea you have out of your head and into the world. It's called Vision to Value. Over a series of 90-minute working sessions, you'll work with a thoughtbot product strategist and a handful of other founders to start testing your idea in the market and make a plan for building an MVP. Join for all seven of the weekly sessions, or pick and choose the ones that address your biggest challenge right now. Learn more and sign up at tbot.io/visionvalue.  VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with us today is Wendell Adams, CEO at PrimeLab io. Wendell, thank you for joining us. WENDELL: Thanks for having me. So, question, actually, where'd you guys come up with the name? VICTORIA: You know, I have asked this before, and I think I remember the answer. I might have to go back to the 500th episode to get it, but I think it was just robots was already kind of a theme at thoughtbot. I mean, thoughtbot, obviously, has robot in the name. Joe might have the best answer. And we have our special co-host, Joe Ferris. Who better to answer? JOE: [chuckles] Yes, I'm not sure who better to answer, probably Chad. I don't remember the answer either, but happy to be here to speculate with the two of you. It comes from the blog. We named the blog Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots and then used it for our podcast. But I don't remember where the blog name came from. WENDELL: It kind of reminds me of the Robot Wars thing, like, where they would have competitors driving around the robots and then smashing into each other, trying to flip them over and disable them. JOE: That was excellent. I also watched that. WENDELL: [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, it's a pretty great name. I really enjoy being a host. And, you know, I go out to local San Diego events and meet people and introduce myself as a co-host of Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots. It's usually pretty funny [laughter], which is where I met you, Wendell; we met at a San Diego CTO Lunches, which was super fun. WENDELL: Yeah, I always enjoy any type of tech conversation or anything else. I thought that was a lot of fun to sit down and just talk with people and talk about what they're working on. VICTORIA: I love that, yeah. And before we dive into the tech and get to hear more about PrimeLab, I just want to start a little more socially question. What did you do last weekend, Wendell? WENDELL: It was my father-in-law's birthday party at Legoland. We took my daughters my mother-in-law, and we all went to Legoland. It was a lot of fun. Although, honestly, I prefer the San Diego Zoo over Legoland, so... VICTORIA: Can you please describe what Legoland is to people who may not know? WENDELL: Okay. Legoland is based in Carlsbad, and it's really ideal for, like, four to nine-year-olds. And they have, like, miniatures of all the different cities. Actually, the SF miniature that they have is crazy detailed with Chinatown and everything else. They did an amazing job there. They actually...I think they just redid the San Diego part of it. But the miniatures are really cool, seeing all this stuff. They have different rides performers, but it's definitely, like, one of those things that it's more for kids to go and kind of experience. If you're an adult, you're going to love a lot of the processes that go into place, like how they built things, but mostly, yeah, it's very much kid rides and stuff like that. VICTORIA: I imagined it to be, like, life-size Lego buildings, but maybe I'm...that's very interesting all those other things you could do there. WENDELL: Well, like, they have the One World Trade Center, and I think it's, like, 25 feet tall. It is, like, the replica of it. It's kind of interesting, too, because not all the Legos that they build, they're huge, are solid Legos. So, it's like, they'll do where it's like, on the outside, they'll do a base, and then they'll build it. There's a replica of a Lamborghini. That one's life-size. But it's heavy. It's, like, 2,000 pounds, something like that. VICTORIA: Is that as much as a regular Lamborghini weighs, too, 2,000 pounds? It can't be that far up. WENDELL: I don't know. No, I don't think it...no, it couldn't be. VICTORIA: I have no idea how much cars [laughs] weigh. What about you, Joe? Did you do anything fun this weekend? JOE: Not a lot. It was supposed to be my son's first soccer game ever, but it rained here in Boston, so they postponed it. Sunday he went to my parents' house for a grandma day, and so I did nothing. I ate cookies. WENDELL: [laughs] VICTORIA: Wait, what kind of cookies were they, though? JOE: They were chocolate chip cookies. VICTORIA: That's so good. JOE: They were good. They were brown butter chocolate chip cookies, I should say. VICTORIA: Were they homemade, or did you get them somewhere? JOE: They were. We made them in this home. VICTORIA: Oh, that's the best. Yeah, love that. I got some fancy cookies that someone else made, and they were also [laughs] very good. And then, yeah, I've just been having cookies pretty much every day. So, that's been my time. WENDELL: My mother-in-law recently made me peanut butter cookies, and those are my favorite kind of homemade cookies. VICTORIA: Okay. Noted. You'll get a post-podcast gift of peanut butter cookies [laughter]. I love that. It's so great to hear a little bit more about each of you as, like, in a personal way before we dive into AI. And tell me a little bit more about your background and what led you to PrimeLab. WENDELL: I've always kind of, like, been a hacker, so to speak, just from a technical standpoint. My one grandfather was an engineer. He worked for GM designing, like, assembly arms and stuff like that. And then my other grandfather was a master electrician. So, I've always been the person that, like, just worked on things, got stuff together. You know, there's a lot of stories. Like, there's the story about when I broke my grandmother's workbench, rocking bench out front, and it was all aluminum. I remember telling my grandfather, and he's like, "Oh, what are you going to do?" And I was like, "Buy a new one?" He's like, "You got money?" I said, "No." And he said, "Well, you better figure how to make it then." So, ironically, it's half aluminum, half wood. We took wood, sanded it down, and stuff. So, it's just like I've always been an entrepreneur. I've always been interested in this kind of stuff. I used to hack VCRs, and PlayStations, and all kinds of stuff. I always liked parts and components and rewiring things. And as I got older, I also really liked math and all those things. And I wanted to understand more about how the world works, so to speak, like why it works the way it does, not just from a technology standpoint. But why do people think the way that they do? Why do things behave the certain way they do? So, initially, I started going to college. I thought I might be a math professor, and then decided to get degrees in business, economics, finance, marketing, consumer product goods, and comparative religions. So, while I was in college, I started working on, like, hacking, different video games, writing JavaScript, writing Java, all kinds of stuff. And then, eventually, even writing mobile applications early on, and then just analyzing because I always liked to build phones, too. I would take apart phones. And I really was curious about, like, how to make things faster, more efficient, and better. So, now to bring it down, like, how to make things accessible, where it benefits some of the smallest people and make it where it's a greater opportunity for someone to come out ahead of something. Like, one thing that I learned from my marketing degree is language matters. So, it's like, all the marketing it's not anything special. It's just they intentionally create language barriers that cause people not to feel as accessible with it. And then, like, you hire a consultant or something to just basically teach you about those language barriers. And I think every industry has, like, SAT, or LTM, or something like these abbreviations that mean a lot of different things. And it causes bottlenecks if you don't speak the language. So, understanding the language but also learning about how was very helpful from a standpoint on the marketing side. And I always try to figure out how do I make this accessible to people who don't understand that language? VICTORIA: And what was the turning point where you decided to start PrimeLab, and what made you realize there was a company there? WENDELL: It was a project I've been working on since at least 2011, honestly. And just as a heads up, PrimeLab as a whole works with encrypted data for AI models and to speed that up and everything else. So, early on, I was very obsessed with how advertising works through, like, stealing user data, which stealing is different, here or there, the sense of privacy, the sense of, like, how things could run, and the sense of messaging. And initially, a lot of it was using encryption as an overlay in, like, the pixel application space, which is always a way to hack or get into it. And it slows everything down. So, I had always been working on trying to figure out how do you speed up and embed security so it's actually functional? And it took a while to figure out, like, give encryption functionality, like, make the encryption something that you could actually execute on. And, actually, one of the things that really helped is the blockchain space there's a lot of, like, hash trees and everything else, like, where people are innovating in that. That's really helped innovate encryption as a whole from understanding, like, Merkle trees, hash graphs, and everything else to make it more functional and faster. Because people are trying to speed up distributed networks and stuff, but the actual technology that they built, like Hedera is...What Hedera has done with Hashgraphs and everything else—really amazing. I'm glad that they open-source stuff like that. But it's also really interesting just to see how things push forward. So, like, when I first started, like, RAM was, like, 256 in a phone. So now, you know, you can get multiple gigabytes, which makes it a lot more capable to do encryption, decryption, and work more in the functional space of things. The bigger problem that you have on the data part is how an application communicates because there's so many levels of abstraction. Like, you have the Swift language that communicates into something else that then communicates into something else. Like, right now, we're talking on a system that's recording us over the internet through a browser, all those different things. And it's an approximation of what the data is and what we sound like. It's not an absolute. So, I was really interested in when you have absolutes, and you can verify those absolutes, what can you do with that? A few years ago, I felt like we got to a point where we could actually execute those things and actually deliver on that. So, therefore, I decided to start PrimeLab with my co-founder, who I really liked and enjoyed. And we've had a lot of really great advisors, where people have helped us continuously. Over, you know, the decade-plus of working on this, I've gotten a lot of input from some of the smartest people I know, from people who have designed full server racks for AWS to literally a good friend of mine that built cloud storage. His name's on the patent for it. So, that kind of stuff has really helped me understand and build this where it can communicate the lowest possible level. VICTORIA: Yeah, and to just recap and reflect that back a little bit, it sounds like you were always interested in how to make encryption faster and lighter weight, and so you could build it in and build in security without impacting the performance of the applications. And then meeting your co-founder and the advancement of technology, this time a couple of years ago, led you to think, okay, let's really go forward with this. WENDELL: Kind of rephrasing, I was always interested in control. So, like, one of the things that really interested me...so, I started a video game store buying and selling, like, video games and trading cards and stuff when I was roughly ten and a half or so, and then sold it roughly when I was 17, which is how I paid for quite a bit of college and likewise. But the things that really interested me about that is it went out of business three to four months afterwards because the person who basically bought the rest of it bought too much of Madden. And Madden, at this time, the margins were, like, a buck, as you go all the way through, and the price drops immensely. So, I wanted to really understand why that happened. What you kind of get to is, like, they didn't have control over it, just, like, the bulk orders methodology, where they would buy the whole entire supply. And what I've seen over the years, be it Apple, Google, or anything else, is, like, that was...in that example, that's a game publisher, EA, flexing control, right? But more and more companies are flexing control on a platform like now with Facebook or advertising. If you think about what Google used to do, Google used to provide a lot more insights when you had your own website. You used to know your own keywords. You used to know a lot of things about your users who come through. More and more, Facebook and Google try to stop that. And they're really the ones determining your own user personas for you. So, you become dependent upon them. So, I wanted to say, okay, from a business standpoint, how do you implement control and privacy where it's permissioned? And encryption was one of the answers that I came to. But then it was, how do you make encryption functional then to actually execute on control? Because unless the system is secure, faster, cheaper, better, it's never going to get adopted. VICTORIA: That makes sense. Thank you for sharing that. And you mentioned your founder. I'm curious, how does your founder kind of complete what you needed to be able to get the business up and running and off the ground? WENDELL: He has a robotics degree, so he had launched several products that had failed. And he wanted to learn marketing after they had failed. So, we have a similar like mindset about, like, control and functionality for how something may or may not work, and that allowed us to communicate well. So, like, I have a lot of friends and stuff. But the thing that allows me and my co-founder to work really well is that we come from things in different angles, but we have the same language that we speak. So, like, that's what I was talking about before, like, LTMs or otherwise, like, language really matters from how you can move something forward when you're talking in different industries. And just with him, there's a lot of stuff that you don't have to say. You can skip a lot of filler and then go straight to what something might be or a solution or something. Or if we have to jump to a tech abbreviation, to a market abbreviation, to a financial abbreviation, he's one that can follow along with me really quickly and then teach me a lot of things about operational execution because he's great at operations. I am not great at operations. VICTORIA: That's really interesting. And I think you're making a good point about, like, a shared language. And it reminds me of any product that you're building; if you want to sell it to a company and you want them to adopt it, you have to consider their language, their belief system, how to influence change within the organization. And I wonder if you could talk a little bit more about that with your experience at PrimeLab. WENDELL: I'll give you an example of a market that we decided to go after. So, instead of just working at, like, healthcare markets where you have, like, GDPR...for people who don't know GDPR or HIPAA, HIPAA is for the United States. GDPR is the EU privacy requirements, right? For the right to be forgotten and everything else. So, these are vernaculars that you need to know. But the requirements of each one is very different, and these are markets that we've learned being in tech and likewise. But we wanted to change it up. So, I wanted to go after the entertainment market as a whole, namely because after meeting with some select people, including a stunt man, this is going back a few years ago, I started to realize that the entertainment market was getting kind of screwed over quite a bit from a tech standpoint. Basically, tech goes through this thing where...someone wrote a great article about this. It's called Enshittification. But, basically, where they go they try to take over a whole entire market, where first they're providing great value to your users. And then, gradually, you enshittify your product to provide greater value to your investors. And then, gradually, you suck all of the value out of the room for both. Right now, if you look at Sora, what OpenAI is trying to do in entertainment, [inaudible 16:08], you kind of can see that happening. They're going, "Hey, here's a great value for it." And they're really pushing that stuff off. But the thing about the entertainment market that I think is really interesting is it's basically thousands and thousands of small businesses that are constantly going, it's so chaotic. It's not like tech and startups. There's a lot of overlay of, like, you know, people are looking for that top quartile film that's going to make the money back, and then long-term royalties that they can earn off of it, right? Whereas in tech, they're looking for those huge markups as well. So, I was really fascinated by it, but it was something that, like, we had to learn. Like it was something that I didn't know otherwise. So, it was literally...how we learned it was we took our tech stuff, and we would walk SAG-AFTRA strike lines. We would walk strike lines. We would go to entertainment events, and we would demo what we were trying to do, and we would show them. And then, oftentimes, we got really negative feedback right off the bat. And we're like, "No, no, no, so, you know, this is for you. Like, you could control. Like, this is going to help you." And then, after doing that enough times, talking to the SAG-AFTRA lawyers, and everything else from there, and all of the creatives, the creatives were coming to us and giving us ideas how to explain it because there's, like, three different formats. You have tech, business, creatives in the entertainment industry. And it's like, we could talk to the tech people. We could talk to the business people. But you really need the creatives. And, like, the wording of each one, like, each group of those is vastly different. So, having the creatives be able to explain something in 90 seconds that used to take me a couple of hours to dive into became really valuable. And also, in tech, like, you have this thing where it's feature creep, where you're like, oh, I'll add this, this, and this. Just to hear very coldly and bluntly, like, "If it does X, I'm interested. If it does Y, I'm not interested." That was very interesting or refreshing of, like, "Yes, you're going to solve these problems. But I need sign-off for everything in there." And it's kind of weird in the entertainment part, too. Like, you want to solve a problem without being a competitor to another vendor because you need so many different sign-offs. And if you're a competitor to another vendor, to a certain point, maybe that's going to cause a hiccup with sign-offs because there's 18 different cooks in the kitchen, so to speak, just so many different people that need to say, "Yes," all the way through with it. VICTORIA: Thank you. Yeah, that's really interesting. I'm curious, Joe, if you have an answer for that question as well, like, any experiences about navigating change and putting new products in place at different clients, different industries? JOE: I don't think I've had the same kind of resistance. Like, I haven't been on the front lines the way you described, like, literally in the, you know, going and talking to people on strike. I think I have more indirect experience talking to the people who are doing that. And certainly, like, I think there's generally a resistance to bringing in new technology without eliminating the old way of doing things if that makes sense. Like, people want the old ways of backup. Like they want to be able to go back to paper, which I empathize with. But that's frequently been a challenge for the people I've worked with is that they don't fully embrace the new process, which significantly reduces the value they would get from using it. I don't know if that's something you've encountered with PrimeLab. WENDELL: So, we were building another company of mine many, many, many years ago. I was building a website for this lumber company, and I remember showing up, and the owner was there. But it was his son that had commissioned it, and the owner didn't know about the website. And I was like, "Oh yeah, we'll get the website going." He goes, "Oh, this web thing it's a fad. It's never going to happen. You don't need websites. It's faxes." That's how everything would happen. But secretly, what was happening is they would get an order. They would print it off, and then they would fax it. So [laughs], I always thought that was crazy. VICTORIA: I mean, one of my local bars still just writes the order on a ticket and sends it on a clothesline down to the grill. So [laughs], sometimes old is good. But I think that you know, I want to hear more about where you found or how you found a product-market fit for PrimeLab and where that AI really becomes useful and ethical in the industry you're focusing on WENDELL: How I look at PMF (product-market fit)...and if you hear me just say PMF, that's what that means. So, how I look at PMF is I'm a little different in the fact that when I look at a product, or a technology, I don't just look at, like, so you have foundational tech. Like, okay, this is encryption. This is control, right? Now, where's the market that has the biggest problems with it? So, I like to go out and actually talk to those people. Because, like, when you're implementing tech, or you're implementing the product itself, it's different. So, you're like, you have the underlying infrastructure, but whether that's a button or a simple API that you need to build so it works different to hit that PMF...are you familiar with the term build a better mousetrap? VICTORIA: I don't think so. JOE: I'm familiar, but I'd still love to hear you describe it. WENDELL: So, in business school, and likewise, they will tell you "If you build a better mousetrap, people will come, and they will buy your product." So, like, it's a common thing where they're like, "Build a better mousetrap. People will come. They'll be there." And the thing that you learn with consumer product goods and marketing, though, is they actually built a better mousetrap, and it failed. And the reason why it failed is you had a mousetrap that was roughly a cent versus another mousetrap that was three cents. And I think this is in the '60s or so. The other mousetrap was reusable, so it executed a lot better, and everything else is more humane. But what they didn't understand is that it was wives most of the time that would have to actually handle this. And they didn't want the mouse alive, and they didn't want to reuse the trap. They wanted them to actually be disposed of right away. So, by not understanding the market, even though they built a better mousetrap, they'd missed the point. Like, the main problem to solve wasn't killing the mouse or having it be reusable. The main problem to solve was, like, getting rid of the mouse. So like, if you have a solution for getting rid of the mouse, the next thing is your execution for it. Like, does it hit the actual market, which is the fit aspect? Like, every product is a little bit different where you look at, like, how does this fit in? So, in this case, fit is very important for, like, disposing of the mouse, which is why you also have, like, you know, mouse poisons are popular, even though they're terrible because they die somewhere and, hopefully, you don't see them. And it's like sight unseen, right? Now, I'm glad, like, that's changing and stuff. But it's understanding even if you have a solution to something, you need to understand what your market wants out of your solution, and it's not going to be an abstract. It's going to be an emotional, like, execution-based process. So, you kind of have to go, all right, this is my market. This is kind of my fit. But the actual product I'm building is going to change to make sure it works all the way through with this. I was advising a startup many, many years ago, and they were building this CRM software on Android for South America. And I think they were building it for Android 6 or 7 at the time. But the market that they were targeting, they all ran Android 4.1. So, they spent a little over a million dollars building for the wrong version of Android that wouldn't even work on that version of the system. Like, it was one of those things where they were required to build it for that. But they didn't understand the actual market, and they didn't spend enough time researching it. So, it's like you get the Bay Area groupthink. If they had actually spent the time to analyze that market and go, "Oh, they run, you know, an inexpensive phone. It's 4.1. It's low RAM," now you can design a product. If you want it to be a CRM, you're going to, like, chunk up the system more. Like, you're going to change all that instead of just wasting a million dollars building something that now you basically have to start over again from scratch. VICTORIA: That seems like he got off cheap, too. People make way bigger mistakes that cost way more money [laughs] because they [inaudible 24:13] WENDELL: Well, that wasn't me. That was an investor that -- VICTORIA: Oh no. I mean, yeah, not just them. Yeah. WENDELL: He's like, "What would you do?" And I was like, "You should sell this company or sell your stake ASAP because that's a really bad sign." JOE: I have found that the answer nobody ever wants when you're doing product validation or testing product fit is, "You should not build this product." The idea that the software just shouldn't be written is universally unpopular. WENDELL: Yes [laughs]. That's, you know, that's part of the reason why it took me so long to do PrimeLab is because, like, it took a long enough for the software to actually need to be written, if that makes sense. Mid-Roll Ad: When starting a new project, we understand that you want to make the right choices in technology, features, and investment but that you don't have all year to do extended research. In just a few weeks, thoughtbot's Discovery Sprints deliver a user-centered product journey, a clickable prototype or Proof of Concept, and key market insights from focused user research. We'll help you to identify the primary user flow, decide which framework should be used to bring it to life, and set a firm estimate on future development efforts. Maximize impact and minimize risk with a validated roadmap for your new product. Get started at: tbot.io/sprint. VICTORIA: What does success look like now versus six months or even five years from now? WENDELL: I take a different approach to this because I have so many friends that have sold their businesses. They raise and everything else. I look at success as instead of an exit or another large thing, like, literally, we turned down a billion-dollar term sheet offer. I didn't like the terms. I didn't like what it would do from the control standpoint of the technology. What I care about is go-to-market and, like, adoption and actually getting the tech out there in a way that has market penetration but, like, that adds value to every person's life. VICTORIA: Yeah, maybe say more about that. Like how do you see AI and this technology you have with PrimeLab benefiting people and benefiting the industry that you're working within? WENDELL: So, the current AI models are kind of weird. They're basically just filter systems because they communicate in pixel space and then go down to functional space. It's the GPU. GPUs are actually terrible to use for AI. This is why you have dedicated AI chips getting built. Hopefully, the RISC-V chipset does actually do something because that's a chipset that I think it's an open-source chipset, but you can actually especially build models on it. So, I think that we're going to see a lot more in the RISC-V chipset where it's like, this is just for one particular image, or this is just for explosions, or this is just for touching up all these different points in the actual individual, like, microcontroller module data that ends up compiling to move forward with it. But the AI models now it's like you took the internet, and you're trying to ask it a probability question, what I was talking about before, where it's not an absolute. So, it's like, if I want to do an OCR system or anything, I take an image. It's got to say, "This is..." letters; it's going to recognize that. So, there's, like, multiple models and algorithms that need to run on that whole entire process. You even have artificial data, but all of that information is an approximation. It's not an absolute. If you want absolute, you can get a lot of absolute data from the actual hardware devices themselves. You know, take a Sony camera. You could see the lighting. You could see the raw information, everything else there. But because of how expensive it is, people compress it. Like, take YouTube where it's compressed, and now you're training off of it. You're trying to compress it more and then run an algorithm so that you don't have to actually process those large, raw files all the way through. That's just a bad infrastructure for compute. You're trying to reduce, but you're also trying to utilize what you own for rights, same thing, contextual, or anything else there. There's no value in a model. Once a model is out there, it's just weights moving it back and forth. The value is in the data and the applications. So, the actual data itself that's going in. So, if you have just lava scenes, like, having all that data for lava, and I want to put it in a background, now I can do that, but more importantly, it's not about just adding it into the background. The thing that is often missed is contextually the output. So, like, say I want to do a financial report. Rather than having the data of all financial reports out there, what I want as the input is my financial data. And what I want as, like, a fine-tuning output is an example of the reports that were generated. And I don't want those reports as the input to inform the output because that's where you get a hallucination. Maybe it starts grabbing financial data from someone else. And I also think we're in store for a lot more hacks because with not just poisoning data, which we do in the functional space, if someone tries to access it. But, I mean, literally, there's the story...I think the guy was in Hong Kong, where they faked his board all the way through with it. Because you have agents acting and executing on people's behalf, you're going to have systems where people go onto the hardware and start generating fake financial numbers. And now that's going to get reported. Or you pay an invoice that you weren't supposed to pay because someone manipulated your AI agent. And a lot of the stuff that we're seeing now from Microsoft and everything else that's not really where the models will go. It's great to do it, but it's kind of like we're in the dial-up stage of AI. Like [chuckles], dial-up has its use cases and stuff, but it's nowhere near what the tech will look like in the future, and it's nowhere near how it will function. And one of the big pushbacks that you see, like, from Google, from all these different places, like, they want your attention. But at the end of the day, Google's an ad company. Facebook's an ad company. It's not in their best interest to have hyper-localized data that you control for your models and likewise. They want it in the cloud. They want it used there, where they can control that data, and they can monetize and advertise for you. But at the same time, like AI models work the best, and AI applications work the best when the data set is limited, so it can't hallucinate, and when the outputs are actually controlled to what it should be from an informed standpoint. So, where we're at this is just in the beginning stages of stuff. VICTORIA: That's really interesting. Thank you so much for sharing. I think if you could go back in time when you first started PrimeLab and give yourself some advice, what would you say? WENDELL: You know, I lived through the Great Recession. The Great Recession informed me a lot more. The things that I didn't understand this time...like the Great Recession, was market contributors doing stuff that impacted everyone with their spend and their adoption, and how those things were. But the Fed raising interest rates, which is, you know, Silicon Valley Bank failed and stuff like that, that dynamic of those startups and, like, how much startups power everything, like, I would have advised myself to pay more attention to the Fed and those market dynamics going forward. Because what changed is it's not just the Silicon Valley Bank failed it, you know, Rippling went down, for instance, which would pay therapists in Florida and all kinds of stuff. Like, it broke so many different things. It caused bottlenecks in business that we're still going through. Like, everyone's like, "Oh, we're getting back to normal." Really not. It's still, like, delayed all the way through it. The AI aspect is really getting back to normal, where people are really pushing AI. But if you look at SaaS and other industries, it really, really slowed down. And the reason why that matters is, like, in my field, production and timelines matter. So, when you have that plus, you know, the entertainment strike and everything else, you have things where the actual production of things starts slowing down immensely. Whereas AI is one of the few things that you still have innovations because that never really slowed down, same thing with the models. But all the rest of the industries and stuff have really slowed down. And understanding what that means from an operational execution standpoint...it's a good thing I have my co-founder [inaudible 32:24]. It matters quite a bit because it means your team sizes have to change, how you handle certain clients has to change. Because once those companies start downsizing or laying off people for whatever reason like, that's going to change how you're working with them, and their requirements are going to change as well. VICTORIA: And what do you see on the horizon as a challenge or a big hurdle that you face as a company or as an industry? WENDELL: You know, the entertainment market's really interesting from all the different sign-offs. The challenge is more execution of timeline. So, like, if you're doing something with, like, Nvidia and the healthcare thing, it could take years. If you're doing something in, like, the IoT space, you know, also years. If you do something in the entertainment space, it could take weeks to months, except the large studios. The larger studios, it could take a couple of years as well. But going to market, I think, is a very big challenge, not just for us but the whole entire industry. I mean, there's a reason why Sam Altman came down to LA to meet with studios, to try and get stuff moving forward. And I think one of the things that he's forgetting is like, you think of Netflix. Netflix is streaming. In order for that to work, they needed Roku, and they needed Kevin Spacey because [chuckles]...it's crazy to say that, but House of Cards is kind of what made it, right? And Hollywood was mostly boxing them out quite a bit. Same thing with Blockbuster otherwise. They had to drop a hundred million dollars, a large enough bankable star at the time that would really push something forward. And they had to basically really push Roku out there so that they had PMF across the board. What that means, though, is, like, Netflix is paying for content like crazy, right? So, this is kind of enshittification in a process. So, they're paying for content like crazy. So, now Hollywood's making money. They like it. At the studios, they don't love it when their stuff's going there because maybe it's less money, but now they start cutting the seasons short. They start cutting...it's a lot more algorithmic-driven. You have the ad systems that sort of come out. So, now, like, Netflix is not just doing ads where the customer experience is getting worse, but now, also, the business experience for those partners selling stuff is also getting worse, and all that value is getting driven to Netflix. Like, that's the tech system and Hollywood's learned that. But, like, when you're looking at the next adoption, like, they're hesitant for that. Just like a lot of stuff with AI, they're hesitant because they're thinking about all the power and control that they gave up. But you have to show how they're going to make money. You can't just cut costs, right? If you can't show how they're going to make money, you're not going to get adopted. That's kind of what I like there because so much of tech is about saving costs and being more efficient. In the entertainment industry, it's not just those two things. It's how can I make more money? And it's going to, like, ooh, you can monetize your content through training samples and stuff like that. So, our model goes exactly against what the large tech companies have where they want to take content, train on it, like the search engine does, suck the value off Sam Altman's Sora. Ours goes, all right, this is your content. Only you own this. You can take your own content, train it, and then perform this operation on it that is more efficient likewise. And if you choose to monetize it in any way, shape, or form, we can just take the functional space, not all the images and no one will ever see it, and take that functional space for training so that you can actually monetize from that as well. VICTORIA: I love that. Super interesting. Thank you so much for sharing. And do you have any questions for me or for Joe? WENDELL: I've noticed a lot of differences on, like, applications and how systems are built. So, I'm kind of curious about you guys' standpoint about applications, you know, the Apple Vision Pro. Facebook just said they'd start licensing out their AI system, or Meta, whatever. So, you have the comparisons to Android versus iOS that's happening, stuff like that. So, I'm really curious about, like, you guys' thoughts on the Vision Pro and that ecosystem. JOE: Well, I can't speak for all of thoughtbot, but I can say that, to me, it was interesting to see that get released. And it's been interesting to see how aggressively Meta and Apple have been pursuing the various VR markets. Like it reminds me of when television companies and studios worked really hard to get 3D movies to be a thing. WENDELL: [laughs]. JOE: Because I think they just ran out of things that people are asking for. Like, people were interested in getting better resolutions up to a point. Like, they wanted better packaging. But it got to a point where it was like, they didn't want to give anybody anything they were asking for. So, they were like, what if it's in 3D? And, like, for years, it seemed like Apple was really on top of seeing what people really wanted, and being able to present a very well-prepared version of that product before other companies were able to. And, personally, it's not what I saw with the Apple Vision Pro. Like, it wasn't the obvious missing space that was there when the iPhone or the iPad showed up. WENDELL: Yeah, I always go back to, like, the "Why?" question. You know, previously when...even just before we had talked, I was talking about comparative religions, and why that's so valuable is because it really teaches you...again, I've had this conversation before, but the comparative religions, if you think about religion as a tech company, they're always trying to solve why. Like, why did the sun come up? Why did this happen, right? And you always have to do that. So, apply that to technology, Google or Apple, why does this product exist? And when you get to, like, it just existed to make money, I think that's really the 3D thing. Whereas, like, why did the iPhone exist? It existed to solve this problem of being portable on the go and getting information in the way that we communicated, too. VICTORIA: Yeah. I think the Apple Vision Pro appeals to a very specific market segment and that that segment is not me [laughter]. I, actually, during COVID...after...it was, like...yeah, we're still in COVID. But during the pandemic, I moved from DC to California. And to connect with some old friends, I bought a VR headset and decided to go to virtual coffee with them. And it just makes me nauseous. And it actually affects...quite a lot of women get nauseous in VR. For some people, the look—the capability is really exciting. They have the extra money to spend on gadgets, and that's what they like. And it's very appealing, and the, like potential, is really interesting. I just find it for myself. Personally, I'm more drawn to tech that's not maybe cutting edge but solves problems for actual people. And kind of why I'm interested in PrimeLab, what you were mentioning is just how artists can use this technology to protect their creative work. To give that power back to people and that control over their content, I think, is really interesting rather than...I'm not really sure what I would do with the Apple Vision Pro [laughs]. Like, the early ones, I mean, it's cool. It's fun. I definitely enjoy it. Like, I sometimes like to learn about it, but it's not my passionate genre of tech that I normally go for. WENDELL: Going back to what you just said about, like, control, like, part of the thing is because of the hash IDs that we put into place, like, you don't need analytics. You don't need cookies or anything else, like the content holder. Basically, like, if you have a TV set or something and you want to stream content to it, you can actually see that information directly yourself. So, it takes the person generating it and the person viewing it. It forms...we call them function access keys. It forms a one-to-one relationship, basically, where you guys know if you want to know what you want to know, but then you choose to give access to the platform if you want to, which changes the dynamic of control quite a bit. And it's interesting because when you look at platforms like the Apple Vision Pro, and you look at Apple's whole entire system as a whole, just trying to lock in people, I think it's interesting because something like what I just described, Apple can't really stop. It's how compute works. So, if people want to use it, there's nothing they could do to stop it from being used. So, I'm really interested in the product stuff and just more about, like, how...and I'm curious what you guys think on this, too. Especially as you see phones and processors and everything else, I'm really interested in, like, how these things come about, like, how things are actually built and developed and the why for that, like, in the everyday use. So, like, the Apple Watch it started off as a fashion thing, which looked like a money grab, and then the why was, oh yeah, fitness. So, just curious if you guys have seen any other products out there that you're like, oh, this really resonates with me and the why. JOE: Yeah, I'm not really a gadget person, but I think the idea of taking some of the capabilities that we've gotten with the internet and with phones and making them hands-free was interesting. And that, to me, was what I think started pushing the development of products like the Apple Watch or Google Glass. Like, I think that hands-free capability, the trade-off became rewarding in the fitness field, but I think it's more generically applicable. I think that technology it's too obtrusive in other scenarios and too bad at its job to do some of the things it could do. And people got creeped out by Google Glass. But it doesn't really seem like the Vision Pro fits in there. Something being successful hands-free means it becomes less obtrusive, whereas the Vision Pro is like you become a cyborg. VICTORIA: Do you have anything else you would like to promote? WENDELL: I wouldn't say necessarily promote as much as like people with ideas or aspirations, like, I think it's important that you think counter to what everyone else is doing. There's that line of, like, when everyone else is running in one direction, run the other. And it's like, if you have a business or startup idea, really think about your market. Like, think about why you're doing what you're doing, and don't be afraid to just go out there and talk to people. You will get value no matter who you talk to. So, like, I'm a hugely tech-based person. My wife is a therapist, and I learn from her everyday things about emotional intelligence and all kinds of things that I would be an idiot otherwise. But also, learn, like, you can always learn something from someone. Like, take the time to listen to them. Take the time to actually, like, try and figure out what's one thing I can learn from someone, even if, you know, I learn stuff from my daughters even. Like, don't put things in boxes. Like, try to think outside of like, how can I ask a question to learn? VICTORIA: I love that advice. That's great. WENDELL: Have you guys used Suno before? VICTORIA: That's music, right? Music AI. WENDELL: All right, I got to show you guys this. We're going to create you a quick theme song. Like, this is what I mean by, like, it's an interesting solution for why. VICTORIA: That does sound fun. I like the ones...like my friend's a doctor, and she uses AI to take her conversation she's having with patients and automatically fill out her notes. And it saves her, like, 20 hours of documentation every week. Like, I like that kind of app. I'm like, oh, that makes a lot of sense. WENDELL: What's a style of music that you guys really like? JOE: Swedish pop VICTORIA: Like ABBA [laughs]? I'm down for an ABBA Giant Robots theme song. Sounds great. WENDELL: I think you're going to like this. [Music Playing] VICTORIA: These are awesome. They're super fun. Thank you so much. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on X @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time.  AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at: referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions. Special Guest: Joe Ferris.

Host Victoria Guido discusses the therapeutic and community-building aspects of converting hobbies into mental health therapy with special guest Hamidah Nalwoga. Hamidah shares how attempting to learn hula hooping through expensive circus school lessons made her realize a need for a more accessible form of skill sharing. Meet Hobi—a platform where people can learn various skills not as a means of professionalization but for personal therapy and community building. Hamidah explains the challenges and insights from starting Hobi, particularly the hurdles of managing a two-sided marketplace and the importance of community support in the mental health space. While aiming to foster both skill development and mental well-being by providing affordable and engaging group sessions in arts, dance, and writing therapy, the platform also offers these sessions at minimal costs. Hamidah and Victoria also talk about the broader impacts of community-focused initiatives on mental health. With an increasing number of people facing mental health issues and lacking adequate support, platforms like Hobi are envisioned as a bridge to accessible mental health care. Sharing the value of creative expression in mental wellness, Hamidah advocates for a shift towards more community-centric and engaging therapeutic practices and highlights the potential for using innovative tech solutions to address the mental health crisis. Hobi (https://gethobi.com/) Follow Hobi on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/hobi-making-your-hobbies-therapy/), Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/hobiplatform/), or Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/Hobiplatform). Follow Hamidah Nalwoga on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/hamidah-nalwoga-78143a255/). Follow thoughtbot on X (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Transcript: VICTORIA:  This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Hamidah Nalwoga, Founder of Hobi, showing you how to turn your hobbies into a form of therapy. Hamidah, thank you for joining me. HAMIDAH: Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you so much for having me. VICTORIA: Well, great. Well, why don't you tell me something that's going on in your world outside of work, just to intro yourself? What are your interests outside of your startup and your job? HAMIDAH: Yeah, my interests outside of, like, work and business, I would say the biggest one is digital art. I used to be really, really into it, but then I took a break, but now I'm finding it again. So yeah, I've been doing that a lot recently. Also, I'm trying to get into, like, audible books. VICTORIA: Ooh. HAMIDAH: I tried reading, but I can't stand it. So, I'm back to audible books [laughs]. VICTORIA: Oh, nice. Audible books, and you said digital art? HAMIDAH: Yeah, digital art. VICTORIA: What kind of digital art do you bank? HAMIDAH: I'm using Krita. It's a software. I use, like, a Wacom tablet and draw stuff like flowers, sunsets, stuff like that. VICTORIA: That sounds really nice. I love that. I've got a little art project myself coming up on Wednesday this week. HAMIDAH: Aw, that's nice. VICTORIA: I'm a big sister of, you know, Big Sister Little Sister. And so, me and my little sister are going to do these, like, oil paint by number kits. So, it's like a mentorship program in San Diego. So, it's a lot of fun for me and for my little, so yeah, I'm excited about that. And I love your idea of your company. So, you know, a lot of people when you tell them you have a hobby, sometimes they think about, oh, you should monetize it, and you should, like, make money off of it. But I like that your take is, oh, you should make therapy out of it. You should get emotional well-being out of your hobby. So, tell me a little bit more about, like, what led you to that idea? HAMIDAH: Originally, I wanted to learn how to hula hoop. I saw this music video, you know, and this person was, like, looking super cool, doing all these tricks, you know, like, it looked amazing to me. So, I was like, you know what? I want to be able to do that. So, that's how my journey started. I tried the YouTube videos, but it wasn't really helping me as much. I'm more of a person who learns in person, like, someone shows me what I'm doing wrong exactly. So, that's why I tried to find an in-person teacher. But I found a circus school that was charging $80 per lesson, which is just about an hour. That was, like, too expensive for me. VICTORIA: Eight dollars for a hula hoop lesson? HAMIDAH: Yeah. VICTORIA: Wow. HAMIDAH: Because they were charging, like, the rate of the circus school. Like, if you want to have any aerial lessons, hula hoop, it would all go into one thing, so it's like $80 an hour. That's why I was like, you know what? I know somebody in Boston who knows how to hula hoop enough that they could teach me how to do it. They may not be a professional hula hooper, but they can at least show me the basics. So, that's where the idea came from of trying to learn skills from your neighbor that isn't really a professional at it. VICTORIA: So, it all circles back to hula hooping. HAMIDAH: Exactly. Yeah. [laughter] VICTORIA: Well, that's awesome. It makes so much sense, right? Like, yeah, you don't necessarily need a professional circus performer to teach you how to hula hoop. There's someone who'd be willing to do it. So, yeah, so you went from that idea, and what was kind of your first step where you knew, oh, maybe I could make something out of this? How did you get there? HAMIDAH: Yeah, and I was looking around, and I couldn't find, like, a good solution to, like, this whole skill-sharing thing. The best thing I found was Skillshare, and it was, like, an online platform where you could learn, like, animation, you know, Photoshop, that type of stuff, but it didn't really cater to, like, the softcore skills, like skating, that type of stuff. So, I was like, you know what? I'm going to do this, you know, like, be like an Uber, but for skills. Yeah, and doing that was extremely difficult, like, resource-wise. And, like, in general, it was a very hard task to tackle. And when I went to startup forums, like, groups, they would tell me that, "You have to be specific. Like, this is not going to work because you have to worry about, like, the two-sided marketplace, you know? And if you add, like, different locations in that, it's going to be very, very difficult." So yeah, I tried doing that for about a year, and I was seeing some growth doing, like, a few skills, mainly like art, cooking. But after a while, I started getting burnt out, mainly because I didn't really have a huge passion for that. By trade, I'm a mental health nurse. I've been one for the past five years. So, I took a break for about a month, and I was thinking, okay, what do I enjoy doing? And if it was to fail, what would I not regret spending a lot of my hours doing? And that was mental health. So, that's where the idea came to me: to make your hobbies a form of therapy. VICTORIA: I love that. And I'm curious what else about your background helped kind of inform your ideas around the therapy side of it. HAMIDAH: I guess this kind of goes into my background. As a nurse, I worked in this emergency room and then also inpatient psych. And I was seeing a lot of patients that come back again and again. They lack a couple of things in their environment outside of, like, a psych unit, for example. On the psych unit, they have a structure. Like, you go to group art therapy, then you talk about your feelings. You have support there around you, you know. And then once they get discharged and back into the community, most people don't have this thing. That's probably why they're in the hospital in the first place, you know. And so, I was thinking, like, what if someone can have this type of structure on the outside without having to be in the hospital? I mean, some people do, but you have to have insurance, you know, it costs a lot of money. So, that's where Hobi was trying to come in to be a structure, you know, like a fun thing that's not just okay...and I'm not putting down psychotherapy at all, but sometimes people don't want to talk about their feelings all the time. You know, sometimes people want to do something fun, like, while also, like, having a mental health professional around to, like, guide them. VICTORIA: Yeah, I totally get that. Like, I had been doing some of the talk therapy, like, apps, you know, like, BetterHelp and things like that. And it was fine, but then I kind of switched to just doing the tarot deck app instead because it's more fun, and it's less, like, just deep thinking about your feelings. It's kind of, like, expressive. And I think the interesting part about your journey here and, like, what I've heard as a repeating theme so far this year on the podcast is that, like, the real answer to a lot of problems is community and having those connections between people. HAMIDAH: Yes. VICTORIA: And, like, I love that you're working on how can tech solve that, and how can you make it affordable for people to build those communities and have access to those support networks and structure? Let me recap a little bit. So, you wanted to learn how to hula hoop, and then you wanted to find someone to teach you, and then you wanted to build an app to get that skill sharing going, but you thought you maybe wanted to make it a little more specific. So, you wanted to kind of bring it in as, like, hobbies as therapy, and that's where you are today, right? HAMIDAH: Yes. It was a long journey. When you say it, it sounds like it's been a couple of months, you know, but it's actually been [laughs]...it's a span of years [laughs]. VICTORIA: So, how would you describe where you're at now in your customer discovery journey and finding your product-market fit? HAMIDAH: Yeah, right now, I would say I have found my customer, but I am in a place where I'm making income from Hobi. It's not enough to, like, be profit. Obviously, I'm still starting out because this...I pivoted about eight months ago to go to, like, the hobbies as a form of therapy niche. And I have found some customers. I have some repeating customers, people who actually enjoy this that, like, you know, "This is actually amazing. This has helped me a lot with my life," yeah. And the way I find these people is by providing community. VICTORIA: So, you found users through your existing community connections and through the group that you're running. Is that right? HAMIDAH: Yeah. VICTORIA: And so, you kind of found that, like, the traditional marketing models where you put out an ad and people click through, like, it wasn't a good enough management of expectations from, like, end to end. So, like, kind of going to the groups first and forming the connection and then being like, "We can use Hobi to facilitate this connection," worked more for you. HAMIDAH: Yes. And also, the other thing, too, that worked for me...because, like, the issue with Hobi it's a two-sided marketplace. So, I have to worry about, like, the therapists that are going to be offering these sessions, as well as the people who are going to be paying to have the sessions. So, it was very tricky to try and balance those two sides, but I did find a medium. Like, the key, if I was to take away from this, if I was to tell anybody the main thing to focus on, is to build, like, a strong relationship with...it doesn't have to be a lot of people. Start with one person and just make sure that you give them what they need, you know, like, they feel like this is something that's worth it to them. And then, from there, trying to replicate that if you can to a second person, and then a third person, like, something like that because you have to personalize it as much as you can. VICTORIA: And what were some of the unique needs of therapy providers and people who would be participating in these community groups that was surprising to you when you started this process? HAMIDAH: Was it surprising to me? I don't know if it was really surprising. When I started, I was trying to find, like, whoever needed the app the most, you know, in terms of both mentors and the student side. And I found, like, there's a lot of people out there that are trying to make money teaching what they know. I found a lot of art therapists that wanted to join Hobi, and it wasn't very difficult to do. But I guess the tricky part or, like, the surprise that I found was not just finding someone who wants to make the money but is willing to take a loss a little bit for you or, like, for that cause. I don't know if that at all answers the question. Because I was finding people that were like, "Yes, I want to make money teaching, like, art therapy to a group of people." But then when they had a class, for example, and nobody showed up, it was, like, a huge blow to them. They're like, "No, I don't want to do this." And that was when I just started with this niche. But then I was lucky enough to find a couple of art therapists that were willing to give it time and actually volunteer their time, like, one hour a month and just give, like, a free session or, yeah, stuff like that. And then, I noticed that over the months, now that mentor...well, like, those that I'm working with are actually now getting a profit. VICTORIA: That's interesting, right? Because you're providing a platform. It's not a guarantee that people are going to make money right away. And you have to have a similar kind of community mindset that you're going to need to put in the time and start showing up regularly, and not everyone's going to be a good fit for that. So, that's really interesting. Yeah, I really like that. Tell us a little bit more about it. What kind of things can you get into on the app or on the website? HAMIDAH: We offer art therapy, dance therapy, and writing therapy, or journaling, and then some cooking classes. So, those are, like, the main things I can get into. And then, for people who are new to this type of, you know, like, therapy, mental wellness, we do have a category called mental wellness skills. They can join there and learn, like, basic coping skills, emotional regulation, and stuff like that. VICTORIA: I love that. I saw all those services, and I was like, oh, this sounds really nice [laughter]. Like, maybe I should sign up. But how do people access the app? Because I know you're trying to balance making that profit and also providing services to people who can't afford it. So, how did you strike that balance? HAMIDAH: Yeah, I'll be super honest. I am still trying to get that balance, but, again, like I said, it depends on finding someone whose priorities fit your priorities. Like for example, I'm not going to go to an art therapist who has, like, ten years of experience used to, like, charging $200 a session and ask them, "Hey, could you join Hobi and take this huge pay cut for me [laughs]?" Like, that's not going to work out. The balance I found through getting the right person to work with me, because, to this person, they actually see a lot of potential, and they actually are making more than they would have without Hobi. And to the user coming to the platform, they're getting someone who is very enthusiastic about what they're doing. And it's actually helping them out a lot at a fraction of the cost of what they would get elsewhere. VICTORIA: Gotcha. Yeah. And I saw you had some different pricing points, too. You could pay just, like, per session that you wanted and join for free, or you could get, like, a regular amount of sessions per month, and things like that. Both sides of the marketplace. I love that. Ooh. So, tell me more about, like, what's the impact that you're seeing? Now that you've gotten some traction and you're starting to see people really use it, tell me more about those stories where people are saying, "You know, it makes my life so much better." HAMIDAH: I didn't really start seeing the impact, again, like, until a couple of months started rolling by because it would take some time, again, to get used to something. First, they go check it out. You know, they're like, "Oh, actually, this is kind of nice, you know." Then they go back again. They're like, "Oh, actually, maybe it's actually really good for me." Then, as they start using it over and over again, they start seeing the value of it, and that's what happened. So, a lot of the good reviews that I was getting are from users who have been using it for, like, three months now. And they like it a lot, again, because of the two main reasons. The instructors are usually very enthusiastic and are wanting to help them, and they can feel that. The other thing is, like, they get a community because it is mostly, like, group sessions. So, people have an option to do one-on-one sessions if they want with the instructors. But, usually, it's just group sessions, and the cost is the same, $5 for all the sessions. So, it's, like, very, very affordable. And people keep coming back. "I'm only paying $5. I get a group that I talk to, make some friends. I have a therapist that I can talk to, you know." It combines and adds up over a couple of months of doing it. VICTORIA: I can imagine that'd be really stabilizing for a lot of people, especially for people who maybe aren't able or can't afford to travel in person to these types of sessions. HAMIDAH: Yeah, I think it's stabilizing, and that's what I was keeping in mind when I was making the platform and talking with the mentors. I try to ask them to create, like, a structure to their sessions, not just, like, random, like, days, you know? So, like, it's usually the same day every week, you know, and the same time every week. So, you know, like, okay, every Monday, I have a support group that I go to to, like, do art journaling, and then talk about how I feel, you know, like, check-in with people, they check in with me, stuff like that. VICTORIA: That's really wonderful. And so, that's an incredible thing to be working on. So, how do you think about what success looks like for you this year or five years from now? HAMIDAH: Yeah. What does success look like? What success would look like, for me, I would say, since this is, like, a self-funded platform and right now I am bootstrapping and I'm kind of in the negative...although I have been steadily, you know, like, the app is growing. I'm very happy for that. I'm getting more users coming back over and over again. I'm getting good reviews. I'm getting new mentors joining, so it is heading in the right trajectory, but it's, like, a slow but steady growth. And I want to keep it that way because we run into some blunders sometimes. And I can't imagine having a whole bunch of people in the app and then having a blunder, you know, and how I would deal with that. But anyway, I digress. What success would look like, for me, is if I am in a profit margin, so, like, not being in the negatives but in the green. You know, I don't have to have, like, a lot of money, but as long as I'm not working in the negatives, that would be success for me. And in terms of the platform in general, success would look like, again, like steady growth, just keep going up, keep going up, and, hopefully, have less blunders along the way. Like, for example, I mean, I'm sure many founders have dealt with this, especially in tech. Like, you build this platform, you know, things were going smooth, then boom, the website crashes, you know. And it's like, people get pissed off, and it's like, "What's happening?" you know. And it's a lot of stress to deal with sometimes. But in that aspect, too, success would look like having less of that happen and having more of the good stuff happen. VICTORIA: Yeah. So, steady profits, steady performance of the application. Those are two great goals. I love it. How did you approach building the tech side of the company? And was there things from your own background that you found were helpful, or did you find people to help you with parts of it? Or how'd you do it? HAMIDAH: That was a very huge huddle for me because my background, again, is in nursing. I don't have any friends who are in tech. I went to a pharmacy college school, like a healthcare university, so they did not have any, like, developing computer science programs. When I had this idea, I was like, how the heck am I going to do this? Because I don't have any connections. You know, I didn't even have a LinkedIn. Yeah, so it was a lot of, like, searching online. I did get scammed twice trying to do this, but I was thankful that because of my job, I'm able to have a steady income. I was able to, like, eat up those losses and learn from my mistakes. And I found a development company that I worked with, and I've been working with for a while now, and they're very good. So, they have been helping me. Like, price-wise, they're great, and product-wise, they're also great. VICTORIA: Yeah, it can be really hard to navigate when you don't have experience or any connections to the community. But I appreciate you sharing that because I think it's a really common story that happens to people, and not a lot of people talk about it. HAMIDAH: Yeah. The other thing, too, that I should warn any new founders out there or people in the community as well, watch out for who you work with, you know, like, really, really do your due diligence because I learned the hard way twice. It was different times, and it was different ways that I got scammed, not the same way, but yeah, people will approach you, and they'll give you a great price point. And if you're, like, really desperate, you know, and you really don't have the money and want to see, like, the results right away, you might get sucked into it, but just always do your due diligence and try to find other options. VICTORIA: Yeah. And, you know, talk to companies like thoughtbot who won't scam you [laughter]. But yeah, no, I'm sorry to hear. And there's, you know, don't feel bad. Also, like, those companies that do that, that's what they do, and they're really good at it, and it could happen to anybody. And same with, like, mental health, and, you know, wanting more connections and struggling with it, it sounds like you could use Hobi to find connection now and find people to help you get through that. So, I really think that's important. MID-ROLL AD: Are you an entrepreneur or start-up founder looking to gain confidence in the way forward for your idea? At thoughtbot, we know you're tight on time and investment, which is why we've created targeted 1-hour remote workshops to help you develop a concrete plan for your product's next steps. Over four interactive sessions, we work with you on research, product design sprint, critical path, and presentation prep so that you and your team are better equipped with the skills and knowledge for success. Find out how we can help you move the needle at tbot.io/entrepreneurs. VICTORIA: [inaudible 19:28] think about, what core values drive your everyday decisions? HAMIDAH: Do things leaner. You know, like, I saw this lecture, like, The Lean Startup. Start as lean as possible and get the fundamental idea running without having to put a lot of money into it. And then, for my core values, I would say, like, integrity, doing what makes me happy, so it doesn't feel like I'm pushing, like, a heavy rock, just doing what feels like...something that just flows. VICTORIA: I like that. Yeah, I think The Lean Startup is really smart. And it is funny when people ask me about app ideas. Like it's so tempting to just want to go build something and just see if people like it. But the answer is always, like, "Well, go talk to people first [laughs] before you, like, spend a lot of time building something," which is a lot harder and scarier to do. And that is why I really appreciate you sharing that. And then, I liked your values: integrity, and, like, a self-fulfillment, self-actualizing feeling, not just, like, being repetitive loops. But yeah, no, that's really nice. And then, what are the biggest challenges in your horizon that you see? HAMIDAH: The blunders that I talked about earlier, whereby something that you didn't expect to happen happens, and something that's usually bad that you didn't expect to happen happens. That's one of the biggest challenges that I'm trying to face. Yeah, I guess, like, how do you plan for the unexpected, you know? And how do you, like, do, like, a backup plan? In case something fails, how do you handle it, you know? Stuff like that. VICTORIA: Yeah, now you're getting into, like, resilience engineering. I love it. Yeah, you're working with your development partner. Have you all talked about service-level objectives or any kind of, like, application monitoring, or anything like that? HAMIDAH: Yeah, we have, yeah. And when I do say blunders, I don't mean, like, the app is crashing every, like, day. It's in terms of...like, one example was what happened. We use this video calling software, and it's not with Hobi. It's through a different third-party video calling software. And we just added their API into our website. And one of the mentors was giving a session one day, and the camera just stopped working, and it happened, like, twice. And it's like, how do you deal with that? Because it's not even, like, the app itself. So, it's not my developers that are causing the issue. It's the third party that we worked with that's causing the issue, you know. And it's like, so I had to go and find a different third-party person to work with and hope that that doesn't happen with them. Yeah, it's just, like, stuff like that. How do you predict the unpredictable? You know, like, I guess sitting down and thinking about all the bad possible things that could happen, I don't know [chuckles]. VICTORIA: Yeah. Like, there's a balance between there are some things you could put a lot of structure and process around, and then, like, is that necessary? Like, is that the highest priority use of your time right now? Because yeah, lots of things can go wrong: APIs can break, you know, people push updates; DDoS attacks are happening more and more, ransomware attacks. There's all kinds of things that can happen that, yeah, it's pretty tough. But I think what you've done, where you've built a really strong relationship with your service providers and with your users, will help you in the long run because everyone has issues like that. Like, no app is perfect. So, if you're providing a really good service and the majority of the time it's working, then [laughs], like, you're probably fine. It's like, when do you make that choice between, like, really investing in, like, the application monitoring piece and things like what you're kind of talking? Like, it might be a major architectural change in the app that you would have to, like, invest in. So, that's something that I think about a lot is, like, how are leaders making these decisions? And, like, do you have someone to go to to, like, bounce ideas off of? I'm sure you have mentors in the startup community in Boston that you can, like, go to for advice on those things now. And I actually know that you know Jordyn through the Boston startup network area. How has that community been for you? HAMIDAH: Oh, it's been good. It was a great community. I was there in the accelerator, Prepare 4 VC. I was there from July till September, and I learned a lot from them. They left their arms open. They're like, "If you ever need to come back, you can always come back. Like, we're always here; just reach out. We can always have a meeting anytime you need one." So, it's been very great. And I really, really appreciate being a part of it. VICTORIA: That's awesome. What's the wind in your sails? What keeps you going? HAMIDAH: I don't know if I talked about this, but I remember, like, where I faced a crash at some point where I was like, this is not working [chuckles]. Because I was like, I don't know if I can do this, you know. And that's when I sat with myself, and I was like, what do you see yourself doing forever, whereby you don't care if it pans out or not? It was this, the mental health aspect. And I'm an artist. I like art, you know, I like creative expression. I like dancing, you know, like, with a hula hoop, like we talked about earlier. You know, I like that type of stuff. So, I was like, okay, how do I mix the two together? And this is where this came about making your hobbies therapy. And also, like, community, like, community building. It really all came together. And just knowing that I am building that slowly but steadily, that's what keeps me going. VICTORIA: I really love that. That's really amazing. And did we talk enough about mental health on the episode? I know we wanted to really get into it a little bit about there's a mental health crisis in the United States right now, and I'm sure in other countries as well across the board. So, maybe you wanted to say a little bit more about that and how art could be a part of it. HAMIDAH: Oh yeah, I saw this study that 1 in 5 Americans suffers from mental illness. Half of the people that have mental illness don't actually get treated, and it's for a lot of factors. And, you know, it's expensive if you don't have insurance, especially. There's no access, lack of education around it. So, it's a lot of reasons. That's where Hobi comes in, like, you know, like, it's trying to help a little bit where it can. So, in terms of, like, the financial aspect, sessions are $5. And in terms of accessibility, if you have Wi-Fi and you have a phone, you know, you can access it. And I know, like, not everybody has that, but, like, we're trying to help in that aspect. In terms of community, there's groups, support groups on Hobi based on interests. So, if you like art, you can find an art group. And I'm not going to lie; they're not huge groups, you know? I mean, it's a new concept. It's eight months since the pivot, so it's growing. But there is people in the groups, and people chat sometimes. I remember, like, somebody had posted, like, a cry for help, and somebody else actually replied them. They were actually talking together and then helping each other out. And it made me be like, okay, you know what? I should keep going with this. Like, this is why you're doing this. The aspect in art and mental health is it brings what is in your head on the outside, and that helps take the emotional weight off of you. The best way to explain this, for example, is with journaling. You have all these mini-thoughts going up in your head, you know, like your anxieties, your fears, all these things going on that you internalize, like, you know, you just keep pushing in the back of your head, and then you think about it all day. But if you take the time, for example, you sit down, and you write out how you're feeling, you know, with purpose, you know, like a gratitude journal, you, like, paint what you're feeling, like, express what you're feeling, and if you do this enough, you start to see a pattern. You stop internalizing all these things, and they become an actual thing that you can look at and analyze. So, like, that's the whole point of art and mental health. Like, it helps you bring it out of your head and onto, like, a piece of paper. VICTORIA: That's great, yeah. I think I took a psychology 101 class in college, and she's like, "If you're having circular thoughts, just, like, put them on paper, and then go to bed [laughs]." But yeah, I think that's a really beautiful way to put it. So, thank you for sharing that. Is there anything else you'd like to promote? HAMIDAH: I'm here to talk about Hobi, and so that's what I would like to promote. You can go check out the app. We have a website and an app now. Because I'm a mental health person, you know, don't forget to take care of yourself, and don't forget to be kind to yourself. And it doesn't have to be through Hobi, but try to use art as a form of mental wellness. My task to you, listener, is, try journaling, for example. Try [inaudible 27:46] your feelings. Try dancing out that stress and see if you feel a difference after. VICTORIA: What a wonderful way to end the episode. Thank you so much for coming on and telling us your story and talking about Hobi. You can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. If you have questions or comments, email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on thoughtbot.social@vguido. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. Thanks for listening. See you next time. AD: Did you know thoughtbot has a referral program? If you introduce us to someone looking for a design or development partner, we will compensate you if they decide to work with us. More info on our website at: tbot.io/referral. Or you can email us at: referrals@thoughtbot.com with any questions.

Brendan Schwartz is the Co-Founder and CTO of Wistia, software that makes it easy to find, engage, and grow your audience with video. Victoria talks to Brendan about the latest updates on the platform, interesting problems he found that Wistia was able to remove and help his team get to speed and velocity, and the personal value that drives his decision-making. Wista (https://wistia.com/) Follow Wistia on Twitter (https://twitter.com/wistia) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/wistia/). Follow Brendan Schwartz on LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/in/brendanschwartz/), Twitter (https://twitter.com/brendan), or visit his website (https://brendanschwartz.com/). Follow thoughtbot on Twitter (https://twitter.com/thoughtbot) or LinkedIn (https://www.linkedin.com/company/150727/). Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of Giant Robots! Transcript: VICTORIA: This is the Giant Robots Smashing Into Other Giant Robots Podcast, where we explore the design, development, and business of great products. I'm your host, Victoria Guido. And with me today is Brendan Schwartz, Co-Founder and CTO of Wistia, software that makes it easy to find, engage, and grow your audience with video. Brendan, thank you for joining us. BRENDAN: Thanks so much for having me. VICTORIA: And I believe this will be your third time, at least, on the Giant Robots Podcast, right? BRENDAN: Yes, I think this is my third appearance. Thank you for having me back. VICTORIA: Yes. BRENDAN: Is there anything I receive? What is it when you host SNL in a [crosstalk 00:39]. VICTORIA: You get a jacket. BRENDAN: A jacket, yeah. VICTORIA: Yeah, we should. BRENDAN: [laughs] VICTORIA: We should do a Giant Robots jacket or something from returned guests. I love it. So it's been great to follow along your journey here. So, for those who don't know, like, what is Wistia? And I'll say, just a precursor, that thoughtbot is a client of Wistia. So we use it ourselves. But why don't you just give us a little bit about what is the product and what makes it different? BRENDAN: Sure. And thank you so much for being a customer all these years. You kind of hit it at the top, but we help businesses of all sizes thrive with video. And so we serve mostly marketers. To dive a little bit into the history of the business, we'll be around seven...is that right? 17 years. It sounds like a long time when I say it out loud, [laughs] 17 years this June. And, for most of our history, we were, I'd say, a video-hosting platform for marketers. So if you want to put video on your website, track who's watching it, how they're watching it, and integrate that data with your other marketing systems, that was our focus and what we did. And over, I'd say, the past two years, we've brought in that focus to help businesses with all aspects of their video marketing from creating video...We recently introduced a live video product for webinars and for live events last fall. We just launched last week, which I'm very excited about native video recording in the Wistia platform. So you can record your webcam and your screen. And there's also a very simple video editor in the platform, which has been really powerful for folks to make small adjustments to content or to atomize content, take out highlights or sections of things, and to be able to publish them to their audiences. VICTORIA: Thank you for providing that context. And I'm curious if there were any, like, environmental or market forces that pushed you in that direction with the latest updates on the platform. BRENDAN: So, like I mentioned, we...in a large part, our success came (We're a relatively small team.) it came from being focused. And so for, you know, that decade or more, there were a lot of things that we had heard from the market or from customers. Like, live video was an obvious one we had been asked for a really long time. When will Wistia do live? When will Wistia do live? And, you know, our approach to that is we want to be really good and excellent at the things that we do and be focused. And I think that has served us well over the time that we've existed. And some of that came out of; I'd say, the really early days of the company where...it's funny, [laughs] we've always built Wistia, you know, sometimes we say in the shadow of YouTube, so YouTube and seeing YouTube. My co-founder was the first person who showed me YouTube in 2005, I think it was, and that was part of the inspiration to start Wistia. We are both really into video. And we saw that and having video be more accessible on the web, we knew was something that was going to change the world. There was a question...this sounds kind of dated nowadays to say, but there was a question if you were starting a business, you know, let's say, in 2006 or 2007 or '8, right? What are you going to do when Google enters your space? [laughs] It was a funny one for us to answer because we said...well, I forgot when YouTube was bought by Google. It was maybe in 2006 or something like that. Like, Google is already in our space, and it's free. So that was always an interesting challenge. And the way that we were successful there [laughs]...obviously, YouTube is at a much larger scale [laughs] and level of success than Wistia is. But to the extent we have a business at all against a very well-known and free competitor from those early days, it was being really focused on our customers and keeping the product footprint fairly small. Our business changed a lot during the pandemic. There were some obvious things, right? Video was used a lot more. So existing customers had a lot more usage. We saw an influx of customers, people who maybe were late to adopt video in their organization, and then that became a much obvious way that people could reach their audiences and grow. So that was something of a tailwind for us. And then it also forced us to kind of take a step back and look at the market in general with clear eyes. It was a funny moment, I think, for me and my co-founder because in the years leading up to that, you know, it had been like 12,13 years of doing Wistia, and it felt like we had solved a lot of problems in the product. We were still building new things, but they were for the most mature part of our audience or the most advanced marketers, which was pretty fun. But it felt like a lot of the problems had been solved. We were always, like, is the product done? Is the product complete? And when we took a step back and looked at the market, what we had found was that we had kind of just, like, got ourselves into this, you know, more mature corner of the market. But in a large part, because of COVID, so many businesses, existing and new businesses, were very new to video and were using video in new ways. And people who had been using video, their solutions to do that were super fragmented. You'd have one product that is providing...[laughs] You might have a different product you're using for internal meetings, video meetings, and that's different than a live event product, that's different than a webinar product, that's different than where you might publish your videos or host your videos, which is different than how you'd, like, analyze your performance. And as video became more important to organizations, that fragmentation of the solutions was something that was super painful. And we had heard from a lot of people who were Wistia customers and people who were not...having this as an all-in-one platform was something that they really desired, which I was also kind of, you know, we were, like, cynical about a little bit, right? Because if [laughs] you're in the world of product, it's like you can ask, you know, if you had a magic wand, what would you want? And someone says, "Oh, I want it all in one. And if you could just do everything for me, that would be so great." You know, it's hard to say, is that what people really want? And what gave us more confidence at that was, correct, is when we started digging into some of the details and hearing about existing workflows that existed that marketers have to deal with, including ourselves. We do a lot of content marketing. A lot of the really interesting things you could do in a product that is all in one it opens up new opportunities. And you could just imagine...you've hosted a webinar before. Almost always, it's the best practice that you host a webinar; after you're finished, you probably have a good marketing asset there. You should publish it to your website. You usually need to do some light editing. Maybe you're going to take off the Q&A before you publish it. And you put it on your website. And then, a while later, you're like, was this effective? Did it work? And then you have to, you know, probably have a spreadsheet somewhere. You have to go into the tool used to host the webinar to figure out who was watching it and [laughs] who registered. Did they attend? And then where's the data for how it performed on your website? How many people watched it? Did you get subscribers if you were, you know, had an email gate on that content? It's cumbersome, and it's a mess. And then, you know, the most motivated people who are well-resourced have the time to do that and analyze the performance. But then a lot of marketers who are on smaller teams they just don't have time to do that, which means a lot of content gets under-utilized or under-marketed. So a lot of evidence and motivation to change what we were doing and expand the product footprint. So that had us make a big investment in our product design and engineering teams, and we almost...we doubled them in about 18 months. And then that kind of set us on this journey that we started maybe two years ago to greatly expand what we're doing. VICTORIA: Well, that's great. So just to play that back, staying close and focused on your customers almost had you to a point of being stable with your product until COVID happened. And you have this increased demand for video that opened it up to almost have Wistia be like a startup again and create a whole new feature branch, right? BRENDAN: Yeah, that's exactly right. And that was really fun and motivating. I mean, we...that early-stage energy and not having all the answers to things where stuff is a little bit, you know, less-researched, and it's faster paced is something that I really like. That was a big shift for the company. So there was some, I don't know, I think we had some self-doubt a little bit if I'm honest, of, you know, when you've been so focused for so long. Like, can we do this? Like, will we be able to create something really good with this expanded footprint, and what resources that take? And is it going to take shifting the culture and mindset of the team, like, in ourselves? But, I don't know, that's kind of why I started the [laughs] business in the first, like, the adventure and not knowing what's next is very appealing. So that's been the fun part of it. VICTORIA: And how did you go about shifting that mindset? Or even what was the moment where you realized that you needed to go after this shift? And how did you start lobbying everyone around you to get on board? BRENDAN: A lot of those customer interviews and market interviews, we worked with an outside firm. We worked with Boston Consulting Group, who was a really great partner. We have obviously worked with folks outside. We hadn't worked with somebody; I'd say, at that scale in terms of kind of, like, tie-in with our company strategy today. But that was really helpful to have a partner, especially to push us. We got to something different than we had been doing, I mean, not dramatically so. But it was expanding what we were doing. So that was really helpful. It helped...that put some structure around it to what we had, and the whole company knew this was happening and was along for the ride. So I'd say the communication and getting to a clear strategy was something we did pretty well, and telling that story internally. I'd say where we didn't do as well [laughs] and were maybe late to make some decisions is how the culture would need to change to support that strategy. Again, like I said, we've doubled the product design and engineering teams. That is now feeling in a pretty good spot, but that was a lot of growth for us. And was, I'd say, pretty messy along the way. So the beginning, I'd say, was clear, and I think communicated well. And then I feel like in the middle it was, I don't know, a big mess where we got maybe a year in, and we're like, wow, we have this new strategy, but we really haven't executed much on it. Some of these things we're building are taking a lot longer than we thought. Our velocity doesn't feel great. Like, maybe we didn't plan some of this stuff out. Like, we've hired a lot of people, but, like, are they productive yet? And so, yeah, I think we were in a pretty [laughs] tough spot maybe last summer. We were a year into this strategic shift, but it didn't feel like we were really moving against it as much as we had hoped. VICTORIA: It makes sense that it would take some time to change strategic direction and then get to that high-velocity point that you would expect. Were there other blockers that you found you were able to remove to get the team back up to that high velocity on delivering features for clients? BRENDAN: [laughs] Well, it's funny that you say that. I wish; I mean, that is pretty obvious, I think, and obvious in retrospect. But, for some reason, when you're in this, or when we were in this, you're impatient, and you want it faster. And I think probably [laughs] having some clear expectations would have made the ride a little smoother along the way for this. I feel like I have to remind myself of this pretty frequently. I mean, Wistia is not big. We're 180 people or so but certainly bigger than...I can think back to various other sizes. Doing that strategic shift it takes time for leadership, let's say, or me to shift my mindset about some of those things. And then once you've changed your mind, you kind of... it's easy, or at least for me, to discount the time it took and all the information it took to lead to that, which needs to cascade through an organization. And so that's where some of that impatience...or just the piece you said about, yeah, it makes sense that this would take time. I was like -- VICTORIA: [laughs] [inaudible 11:56] BRENDAN: [laughter] You're like, once you've got it, you're like, wow, this is so exciting. Let's go. Let's go. And everybody is like, what are you talking about? VICTORIA: Yeah. My background has been in, like, Federal IT consulting. So you're used to kind of the pace of things being a little slower. And I think people forget that as an organization gets to any amount of size, that kind of bureaucracy tends to creep in. And, like you're saying, the information just needs to cascade down throughout everybody. I think my original question was, were there any blockers or interesting problems you found that you were able to remove and help your team get to that speed or velocity you really wanted? BRENDAN: Yeah, there were a lot. I think most of them and most of the hardest ones to move centered around cultural change, and they weren't necessarily so clear at the onset. And so, you know, one thing that kind of partway into the strategy change that became clear is, and you had said it, it's like going from, you know, basically thinking of ourselves as being in a late stage or more mature market to being in an early-stage environment. And the type of culture that, you know, succeeds in those worlds is different. One thing that we've learned along the way at Wistia that we have employed and I think been successful with is this concept that when you update your strategy as a company, you should be thoughtful and, like, make conscious updates to your culture and values. And so much is that...so you're saying culture is the way that you work. You want that to be in support of strategy. And I remember when I first heard this concept, and we were earlier into our journey. I was like, what is this, like, corporate nonsense? Culture is just this, like, intangible, you know, it's this sum of how everyone works. And it's, like, this beautiful symphony of values. [laughs] It was a more kind of, like, idealistic [laughs] view of it or more organic view of it, which I think is reasonable. But you can also be intentional about your culture. So when we wrestled with that the first time...this was many years ago when we updated. I forgot even what the strategic changes at the time. But we updated our values, and we set about making a conscious cultural change. So when we changed the strategy this time, we did the same thing. I'd say we were a little bit late doing it, like, getting to it. But we did do it. And so some of that was there were certain things...so, for instance, being so focused. We had a really lean team. And we were optimizing for things like predictability of outcomes and needing to be correct. So, for instance, if you're only going to make...let's just, like, say, on the product side. Like, if you're only going to be able to ship or do, you know, a few big improvements to the product per year, like, you're well served to kind of go slowly and make sure those have a reasonable chance of success. This was, like, the culture and the mode that we were in. That doesn't really work very well when you're in an early-stage environment where things are pretty unpredictable and things are moving really quickly. So that was an example of something that we kind of identified, and we're like, we're going to need to change this. So it was this shift from teams feeling the need to be correct and really well-researched about something to moving towards; I'd say, you need to talk to a lot of customers to build customer intuition in order to make decisions faster. But that shouldn't be the case that; for every product decision you need to make, you have to talk to 5 or 10 customers to validate that. You should be able to build an intuition to be able to make those decisions faster, and we should be more tolerant of failure. And so, we should work in a more incremental style. I mean, some of this is, like, super familiar to anybody [laughs] listening to this, right? It's like a more agile style. So work more incrementally, like, work incrementally towards great as opposed to, you know, this big thing that's going to be super polished and correct from the jump. VICTORIA: I think that's really interesting. And it's not necessarily wrong to be so thorough in your changes when you're in that steady state, and you, like, know what clients you have, and you have a pretty well-defined product. But it's interesting that it took quite a bit of effort, it sounds like, to shift back into a flow state where you're incrementally doing changes very frequently to get that new product and find those new customers that you're targeting. BRENDAN: And it continues to be. We've made a lot of progress on this. And maybe it's helpful...I don't know if it's helpful to folks listening to dive into some of the details of how we went about making those changes. It's still really difficult, right? There's a lot of things in tension. So I'd say in our previous mode, one thing we were pretty good about is when something was released, it was well-tested. It was high quality. It was, like, well-communicated. Throughout the org, people knew what was coming. Obviously, there were hiccups with that, but, like, that's the side of the spectrum that we were on there. And then in this mode where we're building faster and more incrementally, we have a lot of internal tension in terms of quality, like, is this good enough? Is this first version good enough? Are we going to make a bad first impression? And so, obviously, you do this for a...it's a set of trade-offs, right? There's no free lunch, but that is still very much we're trying to find the right balance. VICTORIA: Right. So, like, in your role as CTO, how do you make people feel comfortable failing [laughs] [inaudible 17:06] describing. BRENDAN: Some of this cultural change, I think, it's been interesting to go through because some of the properties of how we had been working are, you know, things that are part of the way I like to work. Like, it makes me uncomfortable to release something that you know the flaws in it. And that's an old kind of startup advice that I think is generally right. Like, if you release something and it doesn't make you a little bit uncomfortable, you have waited too long. [laughs] Advice is very easy and abstract. It's hard to apply. Like, there's a huge spectrum there of, like, how uncomfortable [laughs] you want to be. But I will say that that's been something that's been, yeah, hard to reconcile with. And I guess that the piece that I'm able to do in my role is, like, remind folks where we're headed, right? So the first version can be a bit rough. What matters is what happens after that. So, if we're quick to listen to customers, to fix those things, to correct that, and people can see that momentum, I think that matters for a lot. And I think that's, like, something...I've been telling that story repeatedly. Internally, I've had other leaders, and that's what we've really been leaning on is, like, we've adjusted how we're delivering customer value. And that we're going to push things out that might be a little bit more raw, but where we ultimately are going to get them to and get them to quickly is something that we're really proud of. So that has helped. And then, I'd say we still haven't figured out, which is, again, like, in these smaller increments, things can be a failure, and that's okay as long as we learn something and correct and move forward. And one thing that's been a little bit tricky to recognize, too, is there's some places where you have some experiment, and you're not actually sure if there's a market or if there's a need for a feature. So you might do something, and it really doesn't land well. And then you learn something about the market or the customer base and say, okay, that isn't what people needed. But, in a lot of places that we're building product, like, let's say, take live video, for example. [laughs] When we launch a live video product, it may be a failure. Like, the first version may not be completely right or may be a failure. But the customer need for [laughs] a live video for a webinar exists, right? So that's not the type of failure that you go, oh, I guess there's not [laughs] a market there. Or, it's like, you go back and say, okay, how do we need to improve this to make it work? I don't think we have the right language internally around that. You know, there are certain areas where it's like a failure, and then it's like, okay, we've learned not to do that again. And there's other areas where it's like, we're going to keep...[laughs] not we're going to keep failing. I mean, there are goals to succeed, right? But we're going to keep improving this until we get it to work because we know there is a market here, and there is a customer need. VICTORIA: Making a culture where it's acceptable to run experiments [chuckles] and as long as you're learning from the failures. And honestly, it sounds like you all are very connected to your customer. Like, you're talking to them regularly. You're testing out features with them and getting that feedback. And that sounds like that's really what you want to focus on and want your whole team to focus on. BRENDAN: Yes, yeah, exactly. Mid-Roll Ad: As life moves online, bricks-and-mortar businesses are having to adapt to survive. With over 18 years of experience building reliable web products and services, thoughtbot is the technology partner you can trust. We provide the technical expertise to enable your business to adapt and thrive in a changing environment. We start by understanding what's important to your customers to help you transition to intuitive digital services your customers will trust. We take the time to understand what makes your business great and work fast yet thoroughly to build, test, and validate ideas, helping you discover new customers. Take your business online with design‑driven digital acceleration. Find out more at tbot.io/acceleration or click the link in the show notes for this episode. VICTORIA: You mentioned a little bit about your values. So, what would you say is, like, your most important personal value that drives your decision-making at Wistia? BRENDAN: So, like I mentioned, we've changed our values over time when we've changed strategy. And we think of our values as a decision-making framework, not as a set of things that we value. For instance, if you go on our website on wistia.com, I think about/values, about/company. It's somewhere. And you can see our values. It's not a list of everything that Wistia values or even the things that we value the most. For example, Wistia has, like, creativity is something that I value a lot that is very built into Wistia's culture that we value a lot, but it's not a listed value. It used to be at one point, and then we found that as a decision-making tool, it wasn't very helpful. [laughs] If you're faced with a decision, and you say, okay, one of the values is creativity, how do I make this more creative, right? VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: That's not usually the question you want to ask. So we have, over the years, shifted towards the values are a decision-making framework. And I'd say the one value that has stood the test of time in there is simplicity, which is not unique to Wistia, but it's something that I care a lot about personally. It's served us well as a business. It's almost always harder to get to a simple solution or answer than it is to get to a complex one. It takes a lot of failure. Sometimes there isn't a simple solution, but I think it's always worth the pursuit of trying to find one. And that's served us well in keeping a focused and easy-to-use product. I think that's fairly self-evident [laughs] why that matters to customers. And it's something that I think it's hard to do as you grow, and add, and get bigger. And it's an important feature of the product. And it's an important feature of, I don't know, companies' internal policies or the employee experience. The simpler something is, it's easier to understand. I think the more someone who works inside your company can wrap their arms around more of that context or, you know, more of the product, more of the all the ins and outs of how it is to work there, the better informed they'll be, the better faster they'll be able to make decisions, and the better work they'll be able to do. So, yeah, simplicity, minimalism, those are things I think that have served us well over the years. VICTORIA: Oh, I appreciate that. I could see how that could apply to how you're writing your code, or how you're designing a feature, or even your pricing structure. BRENDAN: Yeah, and I don't think...we definitely don't always get it right. So, you know, all of this is aspirational, but I think it's the right thing to aspire to. VICTORIA: Right. Oh, I'm familiar. [laughter] It's like that, I mean, the Marie Kondo, like, keeping it simple and organized. It's definitely aspirational [laughter] in my personal life as well. But that makes sense. Okay, I have a fun one for you. What is your favorite viral video style that you think people should do more of on Wistia? [laughs] BRENDAN: Oh, whoa. That's a hot-button one. [laughs] I think we have long said...this, like, feels like it takes me back to when we first started Wistia. The term viral and viral video was a new thing for the internet, I guess because video on the internet was still fairly new. I've always been on the side of this, like, hardworking video. And most of our customers are B2B businesses, so these are, like, marketing teams at B2B companies. I'm sure a lot of people who are listening to this have seen some very cringeworthy, you know, attempts at a viral video made by various corporations. Those usually don't land well. There are some people out there maybe that can crack this and make something that is viral through some art and science, but most everybody else cannot. VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: It's like, not something that can be kind of, like, bottled and captured. So we've always been on the side of, like, be authentic, be yourself, make these harder-working videos. But -- VICTORIA: I think that's generally good advice for businesses that was, like, maybe don't try to just do viral trends...[laughs] Like, make your own authentic content. But you personally now, like, yeah, if you were going to do whatever the latest TikTok trend is, which one would you pick? BRENDAN: You know, okay, maybe here's one. So we have always been, as I described it, on the side of, like, do not do this. It is, like, almost always going to be cringe-worthy. But do you remember...I don't know what year this is from, the Harlem Shake. It was mostly kind of a business trend, right? You'd play this track, the Harlem Shake, and have, like, when the beat dropped, it would go from normal office to everyone dancing in a costume. VICTORIA: Oh, that's fun. BRENDAN: So it was, like, a fun trend. But it was...we were and still are, I'd say, fairly, like, anti-trend. I don't know what, you know, like, contrarian when it comes to marketing trends or things like that. But then, when this happened, we were like, this will be really funny. We should set a calendar reminder to do this, like, ten years in the future. Actually, the last onsite that we had; unfortunately, it was the last day. Our head of production [laughs] who, like, we kind of had this, like, running joke of he randomly saw a news article. I think that it was the 10-year anniversary of the Harlem Shake [laughs] or whatever. He's like, oh, this would be...this is the perfect time to do this, now that it's so, so, so out of vogue. But, you know, people, like, maybe have fond memories of it. And now this is so out of fashion. I think it could be funny to do it. [laughs] VICTORIA: Yeah, right. You don't want to do it just because it's the trend. But if it fits your personality and your business, then I think it would make sense. BRENDAN: Yeah. VICTORIA: I've heard that there might be a Wes Anderson style. [laughs] And I wanted to do a Wes Anderson goes to RailsConf video, but I'm actually meeting this -- BRENDAN: Did you do it? VICTORIA: I didn't do it. I'm not actually good enough. I think tomorrow I'm meeting with the Wistia customer success team. [laughs] I'm going to ask them to help me. BRENDAN: Oh yes, we'll help you. VICTORIA: Yes. BRENDAN: I do like...that trend is nice. That feels like a; I don't know, like, less aggressive. I've seen a lot of those, and they don't feel, I don't know, cringeworthy to me because maybe it's a nice shell in which to put some personality and content, as opposed to -- VICTORIA: Just being goofy or whatever, yeah. [laughs] BRENDAN: Yeah, I don't know exactly how to describe it. But I think that one works better. Yeah, someone at Wistia did that the other day in the office, and people enjoyed it a lot. That was more for, like, internal consumption. But those ones are nice. VICTORIA: Yeah. Well, I like the idea of bringing some of these editing tools to marketing teams where they can maybe not create viral videos all the time but do a lot of very highly editing and having it all in one place as well. Like you mentioned, I do run webinars, [laughs] and I'm familiar with the bouncing around between different tools to get everything to work. And there's even sometimes, like, security issues with different types of video-hosting tools. So I think there's a lot to offer for a marketing team who may not have as many resources to do the individual pieces. BRENDAN: Yeah, that's a story we've heard, yeah, from a lot of customers. And we have a lot of video resources internally because we're a video company, and we invest a lot in that. But even so, yeah, if you talk to folks on our marketing team, they'd say it's hard to get those resources, especially if you have something small that you want to do. I think it's always better if the person who has the need can easily do the thing themselves, right? More and better work gets done that way versus if it's, like, this chain of having to, like, ask other people because then you're like, should I really ask? It's like, do I want to, you know, spend social capital or budget on this thing? Will it work, will it not? But you can be, I think, faster and also experiment more when you have those tools available to you. VICTORIA: Yeah, no, that makes sense. Because I don't know if it's worth [laughs] me spending my team's time to make this Wes Anderson video, but I want to do it for fun. So we'll see if I can do it at RubyKaigi next week. BRENDAN: You should. That's great. That's, like, the perfect example of it because I feel like, yeah, well, maybe not. You might be sheepish to be like, yeah, I'm going to spend, like, ten grand with this, like, contractor to make this Wes Anderson...and to be like, what do you...what? What are you doing? VICTORIA: [laughs] That makes sense. BRENDAN: But if you do it, I think, you know, it's very likely it'll be really well-received, and you'll learn something about your audience. And then that could, like, blossom into, you know, a whole bunch of other things. I feel like that's been the case for us in our content marketing. We've long said, and this is, like, much more commonplace now, but one of the advantages of having a video producer in-house, like, is exactly that you now are employing someone full-time. And so you've, you know, like, maybe knocked off, like, the major pieces of content that a business would make with video, some of the obvious things. But then it's exactly what you're talking about that, oh, we could take a risk, and we could try this. And that's where you learn and figure out new things and things that are different than your competitors might be doing or more creative approaches. VICTORIA: Oh, That's great. You know, something I like to ask everybody who comes on the show, and it will be super interesting since you've been on a few times before, but if you could go back in time to your younger self when you first started Wistia, what advice would you give yourself? BRENDAN: Patient...One funny thing of when we started Wistia, we had really unrealistic expectations. I don't think that's [laughs] unique when starting a business when you're young. But yeah, I was 22 or 23, as was my co-founder, Chris. And we really honestly thought—this is, like, this is cringeworthy to say—that we would either be really successful and, in six months, build this great business and sell it to Facebook or now Meta, right? But that was, like, a hot company at the time. So we'd be wildly successful and sell to Facebook in six months, or we would fail in obscurity. That was, like, our honest-to-goodness business plan, which is so naive. [laughs] And here we are, you know, 17 years later and having a wonderful time. So I guess I would say, I mean, it's the most cliché advice, and you're young, and you never listen to stuff like this, but it's, like, enjoy the journey. [laughter] Things haven't always been easy. And there are, you know, hard challenges and, like, times filled with self-doubt. But even in those moments, if you have support from people around you, if you can learn to enjoy the growth and the journey, that is what keeps you motivated to do something for a long period of time. And usually, you know, people who stay focused on something for a long period of time you figure it out and can be successful. This sounds like the most generic advice as I say this out loud. VICTORIA: [laughs] BRENDAN: It really is. Enjoy the journey. [laughs] VICTORIA: Enjoy the journey. But I think that's common. And even actually talking with Chad a few weeks ago and interviewing him about thoughtbot, is his younger self would tell him to have more fun [laughs] during the whole process and really enjoy it. And I think it's also interesting that you had either the most optimistic and the most [laughs] pessimistic as options and, like, nothing in between [laughter] that you expected would happen. Which is funny because I have people ask me, like, is there still money in building apps and building new products? And it's like, yeah, like, it feels like there's these big people in the space, and they're doing everything you could think of possible. But there's still niche market that you can pursue [laughs], right? And there is still the ways that you can differentiate yourself as a product. BRENDAN: Yeah, I think that's exactly right. What advice would you give to your younger self? VICTORIA: Oh, me? I think, you know, probably something similar. Like, I feel like all of the times in my life where I've been, like, what am I going to do next and been really stressed out about it, within, like, three to six months, I found a new job, or I found something better where life improved a hundred-fold. [laughter]. So I think that's something even now I like to keep in mind is, like, if things turned down badly, like; usually, things turn around in a few months after that, [laughs] and a lot of times for the better. And that's, you know, true with, like, moving to California across the country from DC a few years ago. And yeah, a few other points like that. I think the other part I think about is who I might have invested more time in and who I would have invested less time in. And like what you were saying, like, having the support of people around you, and finding the people who really have your back and support you, and, for people who don't, maybe letting go a little sooner. [laughs] BRENDAN: Oh, interesting. Yeah, that's good advice. Yeah, I feel like both of those things are things I should probably remind myself of more frequently. [laughs] VICTORIA: Right? And have more fun, which means...there's another quote I heard that's, like, when people travel back in time, they're worried about changing a small thing that will affect the future. But people don't think that they can make small changes now that will affect their future big time. BRENDAN: Oh, that's a good one. I haven't heard that. But that's a good one. VICTORIA: Well, super cool. Just to kind of really summarize or go back to some things we mentioned already about video, just how important do you think video really is to marketing in the current landscape for businesses? BRENDAN: I mean, [laughs] I'm a very biased party, but I think it is becoming increasingly more important. I think it is the default way a lot of people want to consume information. This is a whole other tip that we didn't talk about with what's happening in the world of generative AI. And I'm sure a lot of people listening to this have voice cloning and how good those things have been getting. I think it's going to make the value of authentic connections in video much more important in the short and medium term. And there's some challenging questions about how do you tell what's real in an environment where we've gone past the uncanny valley in terms of generating, you know, an avatar of me or you with the perfect voice clone? But I think people are going to rely a lot on video to break through. VICTORIA: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It's going to be just more video world [laughs] as it goes. What does success look like for Wistia six months from now and even five years from now, the longer term? BRENDAN: I think for six months from now, so there's a lot of new areas of the product that we've added. And, in the next six months, we should be able to make pretty substantial progress to have those parts of the product have really solid adoption and repeated usage by customers. I think that's what success looks like, which we're seeing it now for our editors, probably the farthest along, that it has really good adoption among the customer base, and repeat usage, which I think is, like, a really good sign of success for a product. Live is still really early for us. You don't get a lot of shots if something goes wrong with a live event. [laughs] You know, I'd be pretty quick to look for another platform. And that's a pretty mature market where there are a lot of really strong competition. I think if we can get to a place in six months where we've got, you know, a few hundred customers using that every week or every month, we'd feel like we're on a path towards success. And the five-year version, I don't know, we recently started making three-year goals for the company a few years ago that have been pretty helpful to have as an anchoring. We have not made a five-year goal. But the thing I'm very excited about right now and what we're doing is, again, like, live is a small example. The market for live itself is much bigger than the market that traditionally Wistia has been in, and just in terms of video hosting, which itself has always grown a lot over the years. And it's itself a big market, as is video recording and creating video. So we have entered into a bunch of new markets that are all really quite large. And it's pretty humbling to be in a spot where I feel like we have a really solid base with a lot of in-depth knowledge of marketing and our customer to be able to build a really excellent product for that set. We're playing in a much bigger market than I ever thought we would. VICTORIA: It's like, success already achieved. [laughter] BRENDAN: Well, I don't know. It doesn't feel that way. It doesn't feel that way. But -- [laughs] VICTORIA: Maybe next time you come on the podcast, you'll have another success story to share with us. [laughs] BRENDAN: I hope so. Yeah, I feel like that's always the case, right? It's like, yeah, there are moments where we're certainly very proud of what we've been able to achieve. But most of my time is spent [laughs] in the headspace of, you know, why are we so slow? Why is the product not good enough? Why are we, you know, like, all the stuff that's going wrong, right? Which drives you to be better and is exciting. VICTORIA: Right. That makes sense. Well, hopefully, this helps remind you all the good stuff that you all have done so far, too. BRENDAN: [laughs] VICTORIA: I'm really excited to hear about just how your values drive your decisions and then how that goes to the rest of the team and how closely you're listening to your customers, too, on the product. I think those are all just really great cultural examples and ways to build great products. So, thank you for sharing your story with me. And you can subscribe to the show and find notes along with a complete transcript for this episode at giantrobots.fm. And if you have questions or comments, you can email us at hosts@giantrobots.fm. And you can find me on Twitter at @victori_ousg. This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot and produced and edited by Mandy Moore. ANNOUNCER: This podcast is brought to you by thoughtbot, your expert strategy, design, development, and product management partner. We bring digital products from idea to success and teach you how because we care. Learn more at thoughtbot.com. Special Guest: Brendan Schwartz.

Being pregnant is hard, but this tapas episode is good! Steph discovered and used a #yelling Slack channel and attended a remote magic show. Chris touches on TypeScript design decisions and edge cases. Then they answer a question captured from a client Slack channel regarding a debate about whether I18n should be used in tests and whether tests should break when localized text changes. This episode is brought to you by ScoutAPM (https://scoutapm.com/bikeshed). Give Scout a try for free today and Scout will donate $5 to the open source project of your choice when you deploy. Emma Bostian (https://twitter.com/EmmaBostian) Ladybug Podcast (https://www.ladybug.dev/) Gerrit (https://www.gerritcodereview.com/) Gregg Tobo the Magician (https://astonishingproductions.com/) Sean Wang - swyx - better twitter search (https://twitter.com/swyx/status/1328086859356913664) Twemex (https://twemex.app/) GitHub Pull Request File Tree Beta (https://github.blog/changelog/2022-03-16-pull-request-file-tree-beta/) Sam Zimmerman - CEO of Sagewell Financial on Giant Robots (https://www.giantrobots.fm/414) TypeScript 4.1 feature (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-4-1/) The Bike Shed: 269: Things are Knowable (Gary Bernhardt) (https://www.bikeshed.fm/269) TSConfig Reference - Docs on every TSConfig option (https://www.typescriptlang.org/tsconfig#noUncheckedIndexedAccess) Rails I18n (https://guides.rubyonrails.org/i18n.html) This episode is brought to you by Studio 3T (https://studio3t.com/free). Try Studio 3T's full suite of features for 30 days, no payment details needed. Become a Sponsor (https://thoughtbot.com/sponsorship) of The Bike Shed! Transcript: CHRIS: Hello and welcome to another episode of The Bike Shed, a weekly podcast from your friends at thoughtbot about developing great software. I'm Chris Toomey. STEPH: And I'm Steph Viccari. CHRIS: And together, we're here to share a bit of what we've learned along the way. So, Steph, what's new in your world? STEPH: Hey, Chris. There are a couple of new things in my world, so one of them that I wanted to talk about is the fact that being pregnant is hard. I feel like this is probably a known thing, but I feel like I don't hear it talked about as much as I'd really like, especially in sort of like a professional context. And so I just wanted to share for anyone else that may be listening, if you're also pregnant, this is hard. And I also really appreciate my team. Going through the first trimester is typically where you experience a lot of morning sickness and fatigue, and I had all of that. And so I was at the point that most of my days, I didn't even start till about noon and even some days, starting at noon was a struggle. And thankfully, the thoughtbot client that I'm working with most of the teams are on West Coast hours, so that worked out pretty well. But I even shared a post internally and was like, "Hey, I'm not doing great in the mornings. And so I really can't facilitate any morning meetings. I can't be part of some of the hiring intros that we do," because we like to have a team lead provide a welcoming and then closing for anyone that's coming for interview day. I couldn't do those, and those normally happen around 9:00 a.m. for Eastern Time. And everybody was super supportive of it. So I really appreciate all of thoughtbot and my managers and team being so great about this. Also, the client team they're wonderful. It turns out growing a little human; I'm learning how hard it is and working full time. It's an interesting challenge. Oh, and as part of that appreciation because…so there's just not a lot of women that I've worked with. This may be one of those symptoms of being in tech where one, I haven't worked with tons of women, and then two, working with a woman who is also pregnant and going through that as well. So it's been a little bit isolating in that experience. But there is someone that I follow on Twitter, @EmmaBostian. She's also one of the co-hosts for the Ladybug Podcast. And she has been just sharing some of her, like, I am two months sleep deprived. She's had her baby now, and she is sharing some of that journey. And I really appreciate people who just share that journey and what they're going through because then it helps normalize it for me in terms of what I'm feeling. I hope this helps normalize it for anybody else that might be listening too. CHRIS: I certainly can't speak to the specifics of being pregnant. But I do think it's wonderful for you to use this space that we have here to try and forward that along and say what your experience is like and share that with folks and hopefully make it a little bit better for everyone else out there. Also, you snuck in a sneaky pro-tip there, which is work on the East Coast and have a West Coast team. That just sounds like the obvious correct way to go about this. STEPH: That has worked out really well and been very helpful for me. I'm already not a great morning person; I've tried. I've really strived at times to be a morning person because I just have this idea in my head morning people get more stuff done. I don't think that's true, but I just have that idea. And I'm not the world's best morning person, so it has worked out for many reasons but yeah, especially in helping me get through that first trimester and also just supporting family and other things that are going on. Oh, I also learned a pro-tip about Twitter. This is going to seem totally random, but it was relevant when I was searching for stuff on Twitter [laughs] that was related to tech and pregnancy. But I learned...because I wanted to be able to search for something that someone that I follow what they said but I couldn't remember who said it. And so I found that in the search bar, I can add filter:follows. So you can have your search term like if you're looking for cake or pregnancy, or sleep-deprived and then look for filter:follows, and then that will filter the search results to everybody that you follow. I imagine that that probably works for followers too, but I haven't tried it. CHRIS: I like the left turn you took us on there but still keeping it connected. On the topic of Twitter search, they apparently have a very powerful search, but it's also hidden, and you got to know the specific syntax and whatnot. But there is a wonderful project by Shawn Wang, AKA Swyx, on the internet, bettertwitter.netlify.com is the URL for it. I will share a link to his tweet introducing it. But it's a really wonderful tool that just provides a UI for all of these different filters and configurations. And both make discoverability that much better and then also make it easy to just compose one of these searches and use that. The other thing that I'll recommend is, I think it's a Chrome plugin. I'm guessing is what I'm working with here like a browser extension, but it's called Twemex, T-W-E-M-EX. And there's a sidebar in Twitter now, which just seems wonderful and useful. So as I'm looking at a Swyx post here, or a tweet as they're called on Twitter because I know that vernacular, there's a sidebar which is specific to Shawn Wang. And there's a search at the top so I can search within it. But it's just finding their most popular tweets and putting that on a sidebar. It's a very useful contextual addition to Twitter that I found just awesome. So that combination of things has made my Twitter experience much better. So yeah, we'll have show notes for both of those as well. STEPH: Nice. I did not know about those. This may cause someone to laugh at me because maybe it's easier than I think. But I can never remember that advanced search that Twitter does offer; I have to search it every time. I just go to Google, and I'm like, advanced Twitter search, and then it brings up a site for me, and then I use that as the one that Twitter does provide. But yeah, from the normal UI, I don't know how to get there. Maybe I haven't tried hard enough. Maybe it's hidden. CHRIS: It's like they're hiding it. STEPH: Yeah, one of those. [laughs] CHRIS: It's very costly. They have to like MapReduce the entire internet in order to make that search work. So they're like, well, what if we hide it because it's like 50 cents per query? And so maybe we shouldn't promote this too much. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: And let's just live in the moment, everybody. Let's just swim in the Twitter stream rather than look back at the history. I make guesses about the universe now. STEPH: [laughs] On a different note, I also discovered at thoughtbot in our variety of Slack channels that we have a yelling channel, and I had not used it before. I had not hung out there before. It's a delightful channel. It's a place that you just go, and you type in all caps. You can yell about anything that you would like to. And I specifically needed to yell about Gerrit, which is the replacement or the alternative that we're using for GitHub or GitLab, or Bitbucket, or any of those services. So we're using Gerrit, and I've been working to feel comfortable with the UI and then be able to review CRs and things like that. My vernacular is also changing because my team refers to them as change requests instead of pull requests. So I'm floating back and forth between CRs and PRs. And because I'm in Gerrit world, I missed some of the updates that GitHub made to their pull request review screen. And so then I happened to hop in GitHub one day, and I saw it, and I was like, what is this? So that was novel. But going back to yelling, I needed to yell about Gerrit because I have not found a way to collaborate with someone who has already pushed up changes. I have found ways that I can pull their changes which then took a little while. I found it in a sneaky little tab called download. I didn't expect it to be there. But then the actual snippet it's like, run this in your terminal, and this is then how you pull down the changes. And I'm like, okay, so I did that. But I can't push to their existing changes because then I get like, well, you're not the owner, so we're going block you, which is like, cool, cool, cool. Okay, I kind of get that because you don't want me messing up somebody else's content or something that they've done. But I really, really, really want to collaborate with this person, and we're trying to do something together, and you're blocking me. And so I had to go to the yelling channel, and I felt better. And I'm yelling again. [laughs] Maybe I don't feel that great because I'm getting angry again talking about it. CHRIS: You vented a little into the yelling channel; maybe not everything, though. STEPH: Yeah, I still have more to vent because it's made life hard. Every time I wanted to push up a change or pull down someone else's changes, there are now all these CRs that then I just have to go and abandon, which is then the terminology for then essentially closing it and ignoring it, so I'm constantly going through. And if I do want to pull in changes or collaborate, then there's a flow of either where I abandon mine, or I pull in their changes, but then I have to squash everything because if you push up multiple commits to Gerrit, it's going to split those commits into different CRs, don't like that. So there are a couple of things that have been pain points. And yeah, so plus-one for yelling channels, let people get it out. CHRIS: Okay, so definitely some feelings that you are working through here. I'm happy to work together as a team to get through some of them. One thing that I want to touch on is you very quickly hinted at GitHub has got a bunch of new things that are cool. I want to talk about those. But I want to touch [laughs] on an anecdote. You talked about pushing something up to someone else's branch. You're like, oh, you know, I made some changes locally, and I'm going to push them up. I had an interesting experience once where I was interacting with another developer. I had done some code review. They weren't quite understanding where I was. They had a lot of questions. And finally, I said, you know what? This will just be easier. Here, I pushed up a commit to your branch, so now you can see what I'm talking about. And I thought of this as a very innocuous act, but it was not interpreted that way. That individual interpreted it in a very aggressive sort of; it was not taken well. And I think part of that was related to I think of Git commits as just these little ephemeral things where you're like, throw it out, feel free. This is just the easiest way for me to communicate this change in the context of the work that you're doing. I thought I was doing a nice favor thing here. That was not how it went. We had a good conversation after I got to the heart of where we both were emotionally on this thing. It was interesting. The interaction of emotion and tech is always interesting. But as a result, I'm very, very careful with that now. I do think it's a great way as long as I've gotten buy-in from the person beforehand. But I will always spot check and be like, "Hey, just to confirm, I can just push up a commit to your branch, but are you okay with that? Is that fine with you?" So I've become very cautious with that. STEPH: Yeah, that feels like one of those painful moments where it highlights that the people that you work with that you are accustomed to having a certain level of trust or default trust with those individuals, and then working with someone else that they don't have that where the cup is half-full in terms of that trust, or that this person means well kind of feelings towards a colleague or towards someone that they're working with. So it totally makes sense that it's always good to check and just to be like, "Hey, I'd love to push up some changes to your branch. Is that cool?" And then once you've established that, then that just makes it easier. But I do remember that happening, and yeah, that was a bit painful and shocking because we didn't see that coming and then learned from it. CHRIS: I do think it's an important thing to learn, though, because for me, in that moment, this was this throwaway operation that I thought almost nothing of, but then another individual interpreted it in a very different way. And that can happen, that can happen across tons of different things. And I don't even want to live in the idealized world where it's just tech; we're just pushing around zeros and ones; there's no human to this. But no, I actually believe it's a deeply human thing that we're doing here. It's our job to teach the computers to be a little closer to us humans or something like that. And so it was a really pointed clarification of that for me where it was this thing that I didn't even think once about, no less twice, and yet someone else interpreted it in such a different way. So it was a useful learning situation for me. STEPH: Yeah, I totally agree. I think that's a really wise default to have to check in with people before assuming that they'll be comfortable with something that we're comfortable with. CHRIS: Indeed. But shifting back to what you mentioned of GitHub, a bunch of new stuff came in GitHub, and you were super excited about it. And then you went on to say other things about another system. [laughs] But let's talk about the great things in GitHub. What are the particular ones that have caught your eye? I've seen some, but I'm intrigued. Let's compare notes. STEPH: So this is one of those where I hadn't seen GitHub in quite a while, and then I hopped in, and I was like, this is different. But some of the things that did stand out to me right away is that on the left-hand side, I can see all of the files that have been changed, and so that's a really nice tree where I just then immediately know. Because that was one of the things that I often did going to a PR is that I would see what files are involved in this change because it was just a nice overview of what part of the applications am I walking through? Are there tests for this? Have they altered or added tests? And so I really like that about it. I'm sure there's other stuff. But that is the main thing that stood out to me. How about you? CHRIS: Yeah, that sidebar file tree is very, very nice, which I find surprising because I don't use a file tree in my editor. I only do fuzzy finding to jump to files. But I think there's something about whenever GitHub had the file list; these are all the files that are changed. I'm like, this is just noise. I can't look at this and get anything out of it. But the file tree is so much more...there's a shape to it that my brain can sort of pattern match on. And it's just a much more discoverable way to observe that information. So I've really loved that. That was a wonderful one. The other one that I was surprised by is GitHub semantic code analysis; stuff has gotten much, much better over time subtly. I didn't even notice this happening. But I was discussing something with someone today, and we were looking at it on GitHub, and I just happened to click on an identifier, and it popped up a little thing that says, "Oh, do you want to hop to the references or the definition of this?" I was like, that is what I want to do. And so I hopped to the definition, hopped to the definition of another thing, and was just jumping around in the code in a way that I didn't know was available. So that was really neat. But then also, I was in a pull request at one point, and someone was writing a spec, and they had introduced a helper just like stub something at the bottom of a given spec file. And it's like, I feel like we have this one already. And I just clicked on the identifier. I think it might have actually been a matcher in RSpec, so it was like, have alert. And I was like, oh, I feel like we have this one, a matcher specific to flash message alerts on the page. And I clicked on it, and GitHub provided me a nice little inline dialog that showed me all of the definitions of have alert, which I think we were up to like four of them at that point. So it had been copied and pasted across a couple of different files, which I think is totally fine and a great way to start, but they were very similar implementations. I was like, oh, looks like we actually already have this in a couple of places, maybe we clean it up and extract it to a common spec support thing, and ta-da, I was able to do all of that from the GitHub pull requests UI. And I was like, this is awesome. So kudos to the GitHub team for doing some nifty stuff. Also, can I get into the merge queue? Thank you. ... STEPH: [laughs] There it is. That is very cool. I didn't know I could do that from the pull request screen. I've seen it where if I'm browsing code that, then I can see a snippet of where everything's defined and then go there, but I hadn't seen that from the pull request. I did find the changelogs for GitHub that talk about the introduction of having the tree, so we'll be sure to include a link in the show notes for that too. But yes, thank you for letting me use our podcast as a yelling channel. It's been delightful. [laughs] Mid-roll Ad Hi, friends, and now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Scout APM. Scout APM is an application performance monitoring tool that's designed to help developers find and fix performance issues quickly. With an intuitive user interface, Scout will tie bottlenecks to source code so you can quickly pinpoint and resolve performance abnormalities like N+1 queries, slow database queries, and memory bloat. Scout also recently implemented external service monitoring, adding even more granularity when it comes to HTTP requests and API calls. So give Scout a try today with a free 14-day trial and experience first-hand why developers worldwide call Scout their best friend. And as an added bonus for Bike Shed listeners, Scout will donate $5 to the open-source project of your choice when you deploy. To learn more, visit scoutapm.com/bikeshed. That's scoutapm.com/bikeshed. CHRIS: Well, speaking of podcasts, actually, there was an interesting thing that happened where the CEO of Sagewell Financial, the company of which I am the CTO of, Sam Zimmerman is his name, and he went on the Giant Robots Podcast with Chad a couple of weeks ago. So that is now available. We'll link to that in the show notes. I'll be honest; it was a very interesting experience for me. I listened to portions of it. If we're being honest, I searched for my name in the transcript, and it showed up, and I was like, okay, that's cool. And it was interesting to hear two different individuals that I've worked with either in the past or currently talking about it. But then also, for anyone that's been interested in what I'm building over at Sagewell Financial and wants to hear it from someone who can probably do a much better job of pitching and describing the problem space that we're working in, and all of the fun challenges that we have, and that we're hopefully living up to and building something very interesting, I think Sam does a really fantastic job of that. That's the reason I'm at the company, frankly. So yeah, if anyone wants to hear a little bit more about that, that is a very interesting episode. It was a little weird for me to listen to personally, but I think everybody else will probably have a normal experience listening to it because they're not the CTO of the company. So that's one thing. But moving on, I feel like today's going to be a grab bag episode or tapas episode, lots of small plates, as we were discussing as we were prepping for this episode. But to share one little thing that happened, I've been a little more removed from the code of late, something that we've talked about on and off in previous episodes. Thankfully, I have a wonderful team that's doing an absolutely fantastic job moving very rapidly through features and bug fixes and all those sorts of things. But also, I'm just not as involved even in code review at this point. And so I saw one that snuck through today that, I'm going to be honest, I had an emotional reaction to. I've talked myself down; we're fine now. But the team collectively made the decision to move from a line length of 80 characters to a line length of 120 characters, and I had some feelings. STEPH: Did you fire everybody? [laughs] CHRIS: No. I immediately said, doesn't really matter. This is the whole conversation around auto-formatting tools is like we're just taking the decision away. I personally am a fan of the smaller line length because I like to have multiple files open left to right. That is my reason for it, but that's my reason. A collective of the developers that are frankly working more in the code than I am at this point decided this was meaningful. It was a thing that we could automate. I think that we can, you know, it's not a thing that we have to manage. So I was like, cool. There we go. The one thing that I did follow up on I was like, okay; y'all snuck this one in, it's fine, I'm fine with it. I feel fine; everything's fine. But let's add that to the git-blame-ignore-revs file, which is a useful thing to know about. Because otherwise, we have a handful of different changes like this where we upgrade Prettier, and suddenly, the manner in which it formats the files changes, so we have to reformat everything at once. And this magical file that exists in Git to say, "Hey, ignore this revision because it is not relevant to the semantic history of the app," and so it also takes that decision out of the consideration like yeah, should we reformat or not? Because then it'll be noisy. That magical file takes that decision away, and so I love that. STEPH: I so love the idea because you took vacation recently twice. So I love the idea of there was a little coup and people are applauding, and they're like, while Chris is on vacation, we're going to merge this change [laughs] that changes the character line. And yeah, that brings me joy. Well, I'm glad you're working through it. Sounds like we're both working through some hard emotional stuff. [laughs] CHRIS: Life's tricky, is all I'm going to say. STEPH: I am curious, what prompted the 80 characters versus 120? This is one of those areas that's like, yeah, I have my default preference like you said. But I'm more intrigued just when people are interested in changing it and what goes with it. So do you remember one of the reasons that 120 just suited their preferences better? CHRIS: Frankly, again, I was not super involved in the discussion or what led them to it. STEPH: [laughs] CHRIS: My guess is 120 is used...I think 80 is a pretty common one. I think 120 is another of the common ones. So I think it's just a thing that exists out there in the mindshare. But also, my guess is they made the switch to 120 and then reformatted a few files that had like, ah, this is like 85 characters, and that's annoying. What does it look like if we bump it up? And so 120 provided a meaningful change of like, this is a thing that splits to four lines if we have an 80 character thing, or it's one line if it's 120 characters, which is a surprising thing to say, but that's actually the way it plays out in certain cases because the way Prettier will break lines isn't just put stuff on the next line always. It's got to break across multiple lines, actually. All right, now that we're back in the opinion space, I have a strong one. STEPH: This is The Bikeshed. We can live up to that name. [laughs] CHRIS: So I do want an additional configuration in Prettier Ruby. This is the thing I'll say. Maybe I can chase down Kevin Newton and see if he's open to this. But when Prettier does break method call with arguments going into it but no parens on that method call, and it breaks out to multiple lines, it does the dangling indent thing, which I do not like. I find it distasteful; I find it noisy, the shape of the code. I'm a big fan of the squint test. I know that from Sandi Metz, I believe, or maybe it's Avdi Grimm. I associate it with both of them in my mind. But it's just a way to look at the code and kind of squint, and you see the shape of it, and it tells you something. And when the lines break in that weird way, and you have these arbitrary dangling indents, the shape of the code is broken up. And I don't feel so strongly. I actually regularly stop myself from commenting on pull requests on this because it's very easy. All you need to do is add explicit parens, and then Prettier will wrap the line in what I believe is a much more aesthetically pleasing, concise, consistent, lots of other good adjectives here that are definitely just my preferences and not facts about the world. But so what I want is, Prettier, hey, if you're going to break this line across multiple lines, insert the parens. Parens are no longer optional for breaking across multiple lines; parens are only optional within a given line. So if we're not breaking across lines, I want that configuration because this is now one of those things where I could comment on this. And if they added the optional parens, then Prettier would reform it in a different way. And I want my auto formatter don't give me ways to do stuff. Like, constrain me more but also within the constraints of the preferences that I have, please, thank you. STEPH: I love all the varying levels there [laughter] of you want a thing, but you know it's also very personal to you and how you're walking that line and hopping back and forth on each side. I also love the idea. We have the idea of clean code. I really want something that's called distasteful code now [laughs] where you just give examples of distasteful code, yes. Well, I wish you good luck in your journey [laughs] and how this goes and how you continue to battle. I also appreciate that you mentioned when you're reviewing code how you know it's something that you really want, but you will refrain from commenting on that. I just appreciate when people have that filter to recognize, like, is this valuable? Is it important? Or, like you said, how can we just make this more of the default so then we don't even have to talk about it? And then lean into whatever the default the team goes with. CHRIS: Well, thank you. I very much appreciate that because, frankly, it's been very difficult. STEPH: I do have something I want to yell about but in a very positive way or pranting as we determined or, you know, raving, the actual real term that wonderful listeners pointed out to us. CHRIS: Prant for life. That's my stance. STEPH: We had a magic show at thoughtbot. It was all remote, but the wonderful Gregg Tobo, the magician, performed a magic show for us where we all showed up on Zoom. And it was interactive, and it was delightful, and it was so much fun. And so if you need something fun for your team that you just want to bring folks together, highly recommend. I had no idea I was going to enjoy a magic show this much, but it was a lot of fun. So I'll be sure to include some links in the show notes in case that interests anyone. But yeah, magic. I'm doing jazz hands. People can't see it, but magic. I like how you referred earlier, saying that today is more of like a tapas episode. And I'm realizing that all of my tapas are related to being pregnant, yelling, and magic shows, and I'm okay with that. [laughs] But on that note, what else is on your tapas plate? CHRIS: Actually, a nice positive one that came into the world...I always like when we get those. So this is interesting because I was actually looking back at the history, and I had Gary Bernhardt on The Bike Shed back in Episode 269. We'll include a link in the show notes. But we talked a bunch about various things, including TypeScript. And I was lamenting what I saw as a pretty big edge case in TypeScript. So the goal of TypeScript is like, all right, JavaScript exists, this is true. What can we do on top of that? Let's not fundamentally change it, but let's build a type system on top of it and try and make it so that we can enforce correctness but understand that JavaScript is a highly dynamic language and that we don't want to overconstrain and that we've got to meet it where it is. And so one of the design decisions early on with TypeScript is if you have an array and you say like it's an array of integers, so you have typed that array to be this is an array of int, or it will be an array of number in JavaScript because JavaScript doesn't have integers; they only have numbers. Cool. [laughs] Setting aside other JavaScript variables here, you have an array of numbers. And so if you use element access to say, like, say the name of array is array of nums and then use brackets and you say zero, so get me the first element of that array. TypeScript will infer the type of that to be a number. Of course, it's a number, right? You got an array of numbers, you take a number out of it, of course, you're going to have a number, except you know what's also an array of numbers? An empty array. Well, of course. So there's no way for TypeScript because that's a runtime thing, whether or not the array is full of things or not. Or imagine you get the third element from the array. Well, JavaScript will either return you the third element, which indeed is a number, or undefined because there's no third element in this array. So that is an unfortunate but very understandable edge case that TypeScript was like, listen, this is how JavaScript works. So we're not going to…frankly, we don't think the people embracing TypeScript and bringing it into their world would accept this amount of noise because this is everywhere. Anytime you interact with an array, you are going to run into this, this sort of uncertainty of did I actually get the thing? And it's like, yeah, no, I know how many things are in the array that I'm working with. Spoiler, you maybe don't is the answer. And so, we ran into this edge case in our codebase. We were accessing an element, but TypeScript was telling us, "Yes, definitively, you have an object of that type because you just got it out of an array, which is an array of that type." But we did not; we had undefined. And so we had, you know blah is not a method on undefined or whatever that classic JavaScript runtime error is. And I was like, well, that's very sad. But now we get to the fun part of the story, TypeScript, as of version 4.1, which came out like the week that I recorded with Gary Bernhardt, which was interesting to look at the timeline here. TypeScript has added a new configuration. So a new strictness dial that you can configure in your tsconfig called noUncheckedIndexedAccess. So if you have an array and you are getting an element out of it by index, TypeScript will say, "Hey, you got to check if that's undefined," because to be clear, very much could be undefined. And I was so happy to find this. We turned it on in our codebase. It found the error in the place that we actually had an error and then found a few others that I think probably had errored at some times. But it was just one of those for me very nice things to be able to dial up the strictness and enforce correctness within our codebase, and so I was very happy about it. Other folks may say that seems like too much work. And, you know, I get that, I get that take. I'm definitely on the side of I'm willing to go through the effort to have enforced correctness, but you know, that's a choice. STEPH: Yeah, that's thoughtful. I like that, how you said you can dial up the strictness so then as you are introducing TypeScript, then people have that option. There is an argument there in the back of my head that's like, well, if you're introducing types, then you want to start more strict because then you're just creating problems for yourself down the road. But I also understand that that can make things very difficult to then introduce it to teams in existing codebases. So that seems like a really nice addition where then people can say, "Yeah, no, I really want the strictness. This is why I'm here," and then they can turn that on. CHRIS: So TypeScript in the configuration has strict mode, so you say strict true. And that is a moving target with each new version of TypeScript. But it's their sort of [inaudible 28:14] set of things that are part of strict, but apparently, this one's not in it. So now I'm like, wait, can I have a stricter? Can I have a strictest option? Can I have dial it to 11, please? [laughs] Really rough me up and make sure my code is correct. But it is the sort of thing like when we turn any of these on; it will find things in our codebase. Some of them, we have to appease the compiler even though we know the code to be correct. But the code is not provably correct as it sits in our file. So I am, again, happy to make that exchange. And I like that TypeScript as a project gives us configurability. But again, I am on team where's the strictest button? I would like to push that as hard as I can and live that life. STEPH: Yeah, I like that phrasing that you just said about provably correct. That's nice. CHRIS: That's the world I want to live in, everything you own in the box to the left, which is probably correct. STEPH: [laughs] That's how that song goes. CHRIS: Yeah. This is a reference to move errors to the left, which I think I've referenced before. But now that I'm just referencing Beyoncé and not the actual article, it's probably worth referencing the article, but the idea of, like, if a user hits an error, that's not great. So let's move it back to QA, that's a little further to the left in sort of the timeline. But what if we could move it to an automated test in CI? But what if we could move it into your editor? What if we could move it even further to the left? And so, a type system tends to be sort of very far ratcheted up to the left. It's as early as possible that you can catch these. So again, to reference Beyoncé, everything you own in a box to the left. STEPH: [singing] Everything you own in the box to the left. CHRIS: Thank you for doing the needful work there. STEPH: [laughs] Mid-roll Ad And now a quick break to hear from today's sponsor, Studio 3T. When you're developing applications, it can often be a chore to work with your underlying data. Studio 3T equips you with a complete set of tools to work with MongoDB data. From building queries with drag and drop, to creating complex aggregation pipelines; Studio 3T makes it easy. And now, there's Studio 3T Free, a free edition of Studio 3T, which delivers an essential core of tools. This means you can get started, for free, with Studio 3T Free, and when you're ready, you can upgrade and enjoy even more features through Studio 3T Pro and Studio 3T Ultimate. The different editions unlock more tools and additional integrations with MongoDB, SQL, Oracle, and Sybase. You can start today by downloading Studio 3T Free, which also includes a 30-day free trial of all the features of Studio 3T Ultimate, so you can try out some of the enterprise features as well. No credit card required. To start your trial, head to studio3t.com/free that's studio3t.com/free. STEPH: I have a question for you that I'd really love to get your opinion on because I myself I'm waffling back and forth where someone brought up some really great points about a concern or just a question they had brought up around testing and i18n specifically. And I agree with the things that they're saying, but yet, there's also a part of me that doesn't, and so I'm Stephanie divided. And so, I'm trying to figure out where I stand on this. So let me dive in and give you some context; I'm going to share the statement/question that they had asked. So here we go. "One of my priorities has been I should be able to review a test without having to reference any other code. References to i18n means that I have to go over to YAML and make sure the right keys have the right values, and that seems error-prone. In some cases, a lack of a hit in the YAML defers to defaults. If the intent is to override the name of model attribute and error messages and it is coded incorrectly, the code fails silently without translating and uses the humanized attribute name, and that would go undetected. If libraries change structure, it might also fail silently as well, so to me, the only failsafe way is to be fully explicit in test." So this goes with the idea that if you're writing tests and then you're testing text, but it's on the screen or perhaps an email, that you're actually going to assert against that string that is shown to the user instead of referencing the i18n keys. And then that also backs up this person's idea that you really want to not have to jump around. If you're reading a test, everything you really need to know about that test should live very close by. And I really agree with that initial statement; I want everything that's very close to the test, especially if it's anywhere in that expectation line, I really want it close, so I can understand what's the expectation, what's under test, what are the inputs, what's the expected outcome. So I wholeheartedly support that idea. But yet, I am in the camp that I then will use YAML keys instead of providing that exact string because I do look at i18n as a helpful abstraction, and I want to trust that i18n is doing its job. And so that way, I don't have to provide that string that's there because then we're also choosing, okay, well, which language are we going to always use for our test? So this is the part where I feel divided. So I'm going to walk you through some of the reasons that I really support this idea and other reasons that I still use the i18n keys and then get your take on it. So there is a part of me that when I'm using the i18n YAML keys, it does make me sad because it reduces the readability in tests. Sometimes the keys are really well named where maybe it's a mailer.welcomemessage. And I'm like, okay, I understand the gist. I don't need to go see the actual string. I also think they highlighted a really good use case where if you're overriding behavior and it could default to something else, your test is still going to pass, and you don't actually know. So I could see the use case there where if you are overriding, then you want to be explicit about the string that you expect back. I also think there are some i18n messages that are fairly complex, and where then I really would like to see the string. So if you are formatting a date or a time or you're passing in just a lot of variables, then there's a chance that I do want to see how did that actually get generated for the person who's going to be reading it versus just maybe it's garbage text that came out? And I want to validate that the message that we think we're crafting is actually the one that the user is going to see. The case against actually being explicit, my biggest one is because then I do see i18n as a helpful abstraction. And I want to trust this abstraction that it's doing its job and it's doing it well. Because then if I do use explicit strings, it makes me sad if I change text from like hello to welcome, and now I have a failing test. I don't like that idea either. So I'm torn between these two worlds of it is very nice to have everything that you need in a test to be able to understand what is the expectation, but then I also lean into this abstraction and reference the i18n keys. So, Chris, with all of that, that was a bit of a whirlwind, [laughs] what are your thoughts? How do you test this stuff? CHRIS: Honestly, I'm surprised that you've got that much division in your own answer because for me, this is very obvious there's one...no, I'm kidding. This is obviously complicated. Similar to you, I think I'm going to have to give a grab bag of answers because I don't have a singular thought of like it is concretely this or that. I tend to go for explicit strings and tests all the way to...so like the readability of a test, and the conciseness of a test is interesting. I will often see developers extract. Say they're creating a user with a specific email, and then they log in with that email later, and then they expect something else. And so the email is referenced a few times, and they'll extract that into a variable called email. And I personally will tend to not do that. I will inline the literal string like user@example.com, and I'll do it in a few places. And I'm fine with that duplication because I like the readability of any given line that you're reading. So I will make that trade-off within tests. This is the thing I think we've talked about before, but the idea of DRY in tests is like I want to be careful applying that idea, Don't Repeat Yourself, to break apart the acronym. Those abstractions I will use them less than tests. And so I want the explicitness, I want the readability, I want to tell a little story, all of that feels true. That said, to flip it around, one of the things that I'm hearing...so I think I'm hearing a part of this that is around well, we can fail silently because we fail symmetrically in both the implementation and our test. Then an assertion may actually match even though it's matching on a fallback. I think that's a configurable thing. I would actually want my test to raise if I'm referencing an i18n key that is not defined. Now, granted, that's different for languages. And maybe this becomes a more complex story of like in production; in a different locale, it will fail because we don't have 100% parity across all our locale files. But fundamentally, I want to make sure that at least exists in our base, which I think typically would be en-US as the locale. I want to make sure all keys are looked up and found, and it's an error otherwise in our test. So that's a feeling. But am I misunderstanding that part of the story or how that configuration typically works? STEPH: No, I think you've got it. But just to make sure we're on the same page, so if you reference a key that doesn't exist, then it is going to fail. So at least you have your test failure is going to let you know that you've referenced something that doesn't exist. But if you are referencing, like if you want to override the defaults that Rails or i18n has provided for a model and say for an error message, if you reference that, but you want to override it, but then you've forgotten, that does exist. So you're not going to get the failure; you're going to get a different message. So it's probably not a terrible experience for the user. It's not going to crash. They're going to see something, but they're not going to see the custom message that you intended them to see. CHRIS: Gotcha. Okay, well, just to name it, the thing that I was describing, I don't know that that would be the configuration for every system. So I would strongly encourage any system where i18n just has a singular behavior which is we fall back to the key. I want my test to absolutely tell me if that's happening. And that should be a failure of the test. But to the discoverability documentation bit, I do wonder if tooling can actually help answer the question. And as I was describing the wonderful experience I had on GitHub the other day, viewing code as just static characters in a file is both true and also, I think increasingly, a limited view of it. We have editors, and we have code hosting tools that can understand semantically our code a little bit better. There's got to be like 20 Different VS Code plugins that, when you hover on an i18n reference, it will do the lookup for you. That feels like a thing that exists, and if it doesn't, well, now I've nerd-sniped myself, and I got a weekend project. JK, I'm definitely not building that this weekend. But that feels like can we use that to solve this? Maybe not. But that's just another thought of where we have these limitations where it's static, like those abstractions can be useful. But if we can very quickly dereference them, then the cost of the abstraction or that separation becomes smaller, and so the pain is reduced. And I wonder if that's a way to sort of offset it. STEPH: If I can poke at that a little bit more, because I think you're touching on something that I haven't expressed or thought through explicitly, but it's the idea of, like, why do I like the abstraction? What is it that's drawing me towards using these keys? And I think it's because most of the cases, I don't care. I don't care what the string is, and so that feels nice. Like, I understand that, yes, we're referencing something. If that key didn't exist, I'm going to see a failure. So I know that there's text there, and that's why I do lean into referencing the keys instead of the text because it feels good to not have to care about that stuff. And if we do make changes to the text, then it suddenly doesn't fail, and then I have to go update a test because we added a period or added a comma. I think that's the path of more sadness for me. And my goal is always a path of least sadness. So I think that's why I lean into it [laughs], I'm guessing. Is that why you lean into it as well? Or what do you like about referencing the keys over the explicit text? CHRIS: No, I think I share your inclination there, and the reason that you're in favor of it, and I think the consistency like if we're going to use i18n, then we should lean in because it's a non-trivial thing to do like porting to i18n projects, and they're tricky. Getting it right from the first step is also tricky. If you're going to do it, then let's lean in, and thus let's use that abstraction overall. But yeah, same ideas as you. STEPH: Cool. I think that helps validate where I'm at in terms of how I rationalize about this where ultimately, I do like leaning into that abstraction. And as you'd mentioned, some of those porting projects, I haven't been on one specifically, but I've seen that they are a lot of work. And so, if we have that in our system, then we want to continue to use it. It does reduce some of the readability. Like you said, maybe there's a VS Code plugin or some way that then we can help people be able to see if they want that full context in the test and not have to jump over to YAML. But yeah, otherwise, unless it's overriding default behavior or complex, then that's what I'm going to go with is with the keys. But I really appreciate this person's very thoughtful question and approach to testing because, normally or typically, I fully agree with I want full context in the test. And this one was one of those outliers that came up for me, and I had to really think through all the feelings and the reasons that I have for those feelings. On that note, shall we wrap up? CHRIS: Let's wrap up. The show notes for this episode can be found at bikeshed.fm. STEPH: This show is produced and edited by Mandy Moore. CHRIS: If you enjoyed listening, one really easy way to support the show is to leave us a quick rating or even a review on iTunes, as it really helps other folks find the show. STEPH: If you have any feedback for this or any of our other episodes, you can reach us at @_bikeshed or reach me on Twitter @SViccari. CHRIS: And I'm @christoomey. STEPH: Or you can reach us at hosts@bikeshed.fm via email. CHRIS: Thanks so much for listening to The Bike Shed, and we'll see you next week. ALL: Byeeeeeee!!!!!! ANNOUNCER: This podcast was brought to you by thoughtbot. thoughtbot is your expert design and development partner. Let's make your product and team a success.

There’s no need to ask them who they are, what they do, businesses and products they built because listeners know them through their stories. After a lot of random, but worthwhile conversations, they’re getting good at being podcast co-hosts. How long does it take to listen to all episodes of Ben and Derrick’s Art of Product (AoP) podcast? Who knew it would be binge-worthy? One more down, one to go before they reach Episode 100! Today’s Topics Include: Tuple 1.0: App is available, despite instant self-serve checkout setback Tuple customers are expanding their use, but there’s still room for more users One-time lump sum: Tuple pricing model that makes sense StaticKit Beta: Start small with kernel of a product to keep funnel constrained Marketing Research and Product Risk: StaticKit to stand on its own or grow Drip and Deleted Emails: Save copies to maintain confidence in critical path Negative Churn: Influence users to upgrade pricing for expansion revenue Links and resources: Art of Product on Twitter (https://twitter.com/artofproductpod) Derrick Reimer (http://www.derrickreimer.com) Website Derrick Reimer on Twitter (https://twitter.com/derrickreimer) Ben Orenstein (http://www.benorenstein.com/) Website Ben Orenstein on Twitter (https://twitter.com/r00k?lang=en) Tuple (https://tuple.app/) Tuple’s Pair Programming Guide (https://tuple.app/pair-programming-guide) StaticKit (https://www.statickit.com/) Level (https://level.app/) Level Retrospective (https://www.derrickreimer.com/essays/2019/05/17/im-walking-away-from-the-product-i-spent-a-year-building.html) Level Manifesto (https://level.app/manifesto) Giant Robots Podcast (https://giantrobots.fm/) Steve Schoger (https://www.steveschoger.com/) Userlist  (https://userlist.io/) Adam Wathan on Twitter (https://twitter.com/adamwathan) Tailwind CSS (https://tailwindcss.com/) Product Hunt (https://www.producthunt.com/) Ray Ozzie (https://www.linkedin.com/in/rayozzie) WordPress (https://wordpress.com/) Drip (https://www.drip.com/) Refactoring Rails (https://www.refactoringrails.io/)

Panel: Charles Max Wood Guest: Ben Orenstein This week on My Ruby Story, Charles talks to Ben Orenstein. Ben recently just got a new job refactoring Rails apps, runs a podcast, called The Art of Product, and just finished up The Code Quality Challenge. He first got into programming when he was a Senior in high school and took a computing class at the local college where they taught him C, and he really fell in love with programming. He is really proud of his contribution to the education side of the programming world and enjoys being able to teach really complicated concepts. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge How did you first get into to programming? Gorilla.bas Cue Basic First taught C How did you get into programming with Ruby? Studied Computer Science in college IT consulting Worked with Ruby at Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Pragmatic Programmers book What have you done with Ruby that you’re proud of? Rails apps Thought Bot Really enjoys teaching programming Giant Robots Podcast What are you working on now? Refractory Rails Course Mackey Haskell His newsletter You learn so much when you watch someone work and see the process live And much, much more! Links: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Ruby Pragmatic Programmers Book Rails Thought bot Giant Robots Podcast Refactoring Rails Course Mackey Haskell Ben’s Newsletter @R00K Picks: Charles Creating a Blockchain with JavaScript Stimulus Dave Thomas Elixir Course Ben Astrophysics for People in a Hurry by Neil deGrasse Tyson An Outsider's Guide to Statically Typed Functional Programming by Bryan Marick

Panel: Charles Max Wood Guest: Ben Orenstein This week on My Ruby Story, Charles talks to Ben Orenstein. Ben recently just got a new job refactoring Rails apps, runs a podcast, called The Art of Product, and just finished up The Code Quality Challenge. He first got into programming when he was a Senior in high school and took a computing class at the local college where they taught him C, and he really fell in love with programming. He is really proud of his contribution to the education side of the programming world and enjoys being able to teach really complicated concepts. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge How did you first get into to programming? Gorilla.bas Cue Basic First taught C How did you get into programming with Ruby? Studied Computer Science in college IT consulting Worked with Ruby at Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Pragmatic Programmers book What have you done with Ruby that you’re proud of? Rails apps Thought Bot Really enjoys teaching programming Giant Robots Podcast What are you working on now? Refractory Rails Course Mackey Haskell His newsletter You learn so much when you watch someone work and see the process live And much, much more! Links: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Ruby Pragmatic Programmers Book Rails Thought bot Giant Robots Podcast Refactoring Rails Course Mackey Haskell Ben’s Newsletter @R00K Picks: Charles Creating a Blockchain with JavaScript Stimulus Dave Thomas Elixir Course Ben Astrophysics for People in a Hurry by Neil deGrasse Tyson An Outsider's Guide to Statically Typed Functional Programming by Bryan Marick

Panel: Charles Max Wood Guest: Ben Orenstein This week on My Ruby Story, Charles talks to Ben Orenstein. Ben recently just got a new job refactoring Rails apps, runs a podcast, called The Art of Product, and just finished up The Code Quality Challenge. He first got into programming when he was a Senior in high school and took a computing class at the local college where they taught him C, and he really fell in love with programming. He is really proud of his contribution to the education side of the programming world and enjoys being able to teach really complicated concepts. In particular, we dive pretty deep on: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge How did you first get into to programming? Gorilla.bas Cue Basic First taught C How did you get into programming with Ruby? Studied Computer Science in college IT consulting Worked with Ruby at Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Pragmatic Programmers book What have you done with Ruby that you’re proud of? Rails apps Thought Bot Really enjoys teaching programming Giant Robots Podcast What are you working on now? Refractory Rails Course Mackey Haskell His newsletter You learn so much when you watch someone work and see the process live And much, much more! Links: The Art of Product Podcast The Code Quality Challenge Dana Farber Cancer Institute Ruby Ruby Pragmatic Programmers Book Rails Thought bot Giant Robots Podcast Refactoring Rails Course Mackey Haskell Ben’s Newsletter @R00K Picks: Charles Creating a Blockchain with JavaScript Stimulus Dave Thomas Elixir Course Ben Astrophysics for People in a Hurry by Neil deGrasse Tyson An Outsider's Guide to Statically Typed Functional Programming by Bryan Marick

thoughtbot CEO Chad Pytel joins Ben to discuss our recent office closings and reasons necessitating this decision, what this means for the product team, and the future of thoughtbot. Also, a teaser of what to expect next from Giant Robots Podcast. Upcase FormKeep Hound Chad on Giant Robots from last year Chad on Twitter

In Episode 0 of Season 1 of Reboot, Chad talks to Adarsh Pandit, thoughtbot SF Managing Director & host of the Reboot podcast, about his personal journey which inspired this, our newest show. This episode originally aired as #125 on the Giant Robots Podcast (http://giantrobots.fm/125) Reboot "The Pickaxe" Agile Development with Rails Learn to Program apprentice.io Adarsh on Twitter

Earlier this month, I had the good fortune to sit down with Ben Orenstein (@r00k), who is the host of Thoughtbot’s Giant Robots Smashing into other Giant Robots Podcast.  (He has quite the slick recording arrangement there, with pop filters, “real” microphones, and even a producer that knows what he’s doing…hi Thom!) Anyway, we had […]

This week on The Giant Robots Podcast, Ben Orenstein chats with Nathan Barry about book writing, teaching and self employment. Nathan's Twitter Nathan's Website The App Design Handbook