Daniella Mestyanek Young was born into the Children of God, as was her mother before her. She left as a teenager and put herself through school and university, then decided to join the military. Her fantastic book Uncultured explores many of the parallels between the cult and the armed forces. The New York Times called it, “A painful and propulsive memoir delivered in the honest tones of a woman who didn't always think she'd live to tell her story."You can support us on Patreon or Acast+, with a one-off donation, or grab some merch. Sarah Steel's debut book Do As I Say is available on audiobook now. Thanks to Audio-Technica, presenting partner for season 5 of Let's Talk About Sects. Use promo code LTAS10 at Audio-Technica's Australian store for 10% off and to support the show!Links:Uncultured — by Daniella Mestyanek Young, Macmillan, 2022Daniella Mestyanek Young — official websiteDaniella's Twitter, Instagram and LinkedInLost In Translation — Daniella's TEDx Tacoma talk, 20 December 2018 Subscribe and support the production of this independent podcast, and you can access early + ad-free episodes at https://plus.acast.com/s/lets-talk-about-sects. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Edward Glaeser is the chair of the Harvard department of economics, and the author of the best books and papers about cities (including Survival of the City and Triumph of the City).He explains why:* Cities are resilient to terrorism, remote work, & pandemics,* Silicon Valley may collapse but the Sunbelt will prosper, * Opioids show UBI is not a solution to AI* & much more!Watch on YouTube. Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or any other podcast platform. Read the full transcript here.Follow me on Twitter for updates on future episodes.If you enjoy this episode, I would be super grateful if you shared it. Post it on Twitter, send it to your friends & group chats, and throw it up wherever else people might find it. Can't exaggerate how much it helps a small podcast like mine.A huge thanks to Graham Bessellieu for editing this podcast and Mia Aiyana for producing its transcript.Timestamps(0:00:00) - Mars, Terrorism, & Capitals (0:06:32) - Decline, Population Collapse, & Young Men (0:14:44) - Urban Education (0:18:35) - Georgism, Robert Moses, & Too Much Democracy? (0:25:29) - Opioids, Automation, & UBI (0:29:57) - Remote Work, Taxation, & Metaverse (0:42:29) - Past & Future of Silicon Valley (0:48:56) - Housing Reform (0:52:32) - Europe's Stagnation, Mumbai's Safety, & Climate ChangeTranscriptMars, Terrorism, & CapitalsDwarkesh Patel 0:00:00Okay, today, I have the pleasure of speaking with Professor Edward Glaeser, who is the chair of the Harvard Department of Economics, and author of some of the best books and papers about cities. Professor Glazer, thanks for coming on The Lunar Society.Edward Glaeser 0:00:25Oh, thank you so much for having me on! Especially given that The Lunar Society pays homage to one of my favorite moments in urban innovation in Birmingham during the 18th century.Dwarkesh Patel 0:00:26Oh wow, I didn't even catch that theme, but that's a great title. My first question is, What advice would you give to Elon Musk about building the first cities on Mars?Edward Glaeser 0:00:35[laughs] That's a great question. I think that demand for urbanism in Mars is going to be relatively limited. Cities are always shaped by the transportation costs that are dominant in the era in which they're created. That both determines the micro-shape of the city and determines its macro future. So cities on Mars are, of course, going to be limited by the likely prohibitive cost of traveling back and forth to the mother planet. But we also have to understand what cars people are going to be using on Mars. I assume these are all going to be Teslas, and everyone is going to be driving around in some appropriate Tesla on Mars. So it's going to be a very car-oriented living experience. I think the best strategy would be to create a fairly flexible plan, much like the 1811 grid plan in New York, that allows entrepreneurs to change land use over time and put a few bets on what's necessary for infrastructure and then just let the city evolve organically. Usually, the best way is to put more trust in individual initiative than central planning–– at least in terms of micromanaging what goes where. Dwarkesh Patel 0:01:58Gotcha. Now, since 9/11, many terrorist groups have obviously intended to cause harm to cities. But by and large, at least in Western countries, they haven't managed to kill off thousands of people like they were able to do during 9/11. What explains this? Do you think cities are just more resilient to these kinds of attacks than we would have otherwise thought? Or are the terrorists just not being creative enough?Edward Glaeser 0:02:20I don't know. There's also the question of what the objectives are. Even for the 9/11 terrorists, their end game was not to kill urbanites in America. It was to effect change in Saudi Arabia or in the Middle East more generally. We've also protected our cities better. If you think about it, two things go on simultaneously when you collect economic activity in one place in terms of defense: one of which is they become targets–– and of course, that's what we saw on 9/11; it's hard to think of a symbol that's clearer than those twin towers. But at the same time, they're also a defensible space. The origin of the urban agglomeration and use for cities and towns was the fact that they could be walled settlements. Those walls that brought together people collectively for defense are the ultimate reason why these towns came about. The walls provided protection.I think the same thing has been playing out with cities over the past 20 years. Just as New York was a target, it was also a place where post-2001, the city ramped up its anti-terrorism efforts. They put together a massive group as London had previously done. The cameras that implemented congestion pricing in London were the same cameras that used against the Irish terrorists. So both effects went on. I think we've been fortunate and that we've shown the strength of cities in terms of protecting themselves.Dwarkesh Patel 0:03:52If you look throughout ancient world history, there are so many examples of empires that are basically synonymous with their capital cities (ex. Rome or Athens, or Sparta). But today, you would never think of America as the ‘Washingtonian Empire.' What is the explanation for why the capital city has become much less salient in terms of the overall nation? Is there a Coasian answer here?Edward Glaeser 0:04:20There are specific things that went on with English offshoot colonies where in many cases, because they recognized the tendency of the capital city to attract lots of excess goodies that had been taken from elsewhere in the country, they located the capital city in a remote place. It's actually part of the story of the Hamilton musical in The Room Where it Happens. Part of the deal was about moving the capital of the US to a relatively remote Virginia location rather than having it be in Philadelphia, New York. That was partially to reflect the fact that the South needed to be protected against all of the extra assets going to New York and Philadelphia.So, whether or not this is Canberra or Ottawa, you see all of these English offshoot places without their capitals in the big metropoles. Whereas traditionally, what's happened in these places that have been around for centuries, is that even if the capital didn't start off as the largest city, it became the largest city because centuries of French leaders thought their business was to take wealth from elsewhere in France and make Paris great. I think the French Empire was as synonymous with Paris as most of those ancient empires were with their capital city. I guess the question I could throw back to you is, what are places where this is not true? Moscow, St. Peter's, and Beijing are examples. Do we think that Beijing is less synonymous with China than the Roman Empire is with Rome? Maybe a little–– possibly just because China is so big and Beijing is a relatively small share of the overall population of China. But it's more so certainly than Washington, D.C. is with the U.S. Decline, Population Collapse, & Young MenDwarkesh Patel 0:06:32That's a really interesting answer. Once a city goes through a period of decline (maybe an important industry moved out, or maybe it's had a sequence of bad governance), are you inclined to bet that there will be some sort of renewal, or do you think that things will continue to get worse? In other words, are you a momentum trader, or are you a reversion to the mean trader when it comes to cities?Edward Glaeser 0:06:54I can tell you different answers for different outcomes. For housing prices, I can tell you exactly what we know statistically about this, which is at higher frequencies, let's say one year, housing prices show wickedly large levels of momentum. For five years or more, they show very significant levels of mean reversion. It's a short-term cycle in housing prices followed by decline. Population just shows enormous persistence on the downside. So what happens is you typically will have an economic shock. Detroit used to be the most productive place on the planet in 1950, but a bunch of shocks occurred in transportation technology which made it no longer such a great place to make cars for the world. It takes a century for the city to respond in terms of its population because the housing is sticky. The housing remains there. So between the 50s and 60s, the population declines a little bit, and prices drop. They drop sufficiently far that you're not going to build a lot of new housing, but people are going to still stay in the houses. They're not going to become vacant. So, the people are still there because the houses are still there. During the 60s to 70s, the population drops a little bit further and prices kind of stay constant, but still it's not enough to build new housing. So the declines are incredibly persistent, and growth is less so. So on the boom side, you have a boom over a 10-year period that's likely to mean revert and it's not nearly as persistent because it doesn't have this sticky housing element to it. In terms of GDP per capita, it's much more of a random walk there in terms of the straight income stuff. It's the population that's really persistent, which is, in fact, the reality of a persistent economy.Dwarkesh Patel 0:08:44Interesting. Why don't Americans move as much as they used to a century ago? So you have a paper from 2018 titled Jobs in the Heartland, where you talk about how there's increasing divergence between the unemployment rates between different parts of America. Why don't Americans just move to places where there are better economic circumstances? Edward Glaeser 0:09:04I want to highlight one point here, which is that you said “unemployment rate”, and I want to replace that with non-employment rate. That's partially what we're seeing now. It looks like America's labor force couldn't be better in terms of the low levels of unemployment, but what's happened over the last 50 years is there has been a very large rise in the share of prime-age men who are not in the labor force. So they've stopped looking for work, and those guys are miserable. It's not that those guys are somehow rather productive and happy,–– this is a very bad outcome for prime-age men. I'm separating men from women, not to say that the female labor markets aren't just as important, just as fascinating, just as critical. But labor force participation means something different for many women than it does for men. There are many women who are not in the labor force who are doing things that are enormously productive socially, like caring for their children and caring for their families.I wish it were symmetric across the genders. It just isn't true. I mean, there just are very few men not in the labor force who are doing anything much other than watching television. It's just a very different thing. So yes, there are big differences in the non-employment rate. There are some parts of America where, for much of the past decade, one in four prime-age men have been jobless. It's an enormous gap. The question is, why don't they get out?I think the answer is really twofold: one of which is the nature of how housing markets have frozen up. Historically, the differences in housing costs in the US weren't that huge across places. Most parts of America had some kind of affordable housing, and it was relatively easy to put up. At the dawn of the 20th century, these were kit helms sold by Sears and Roebuck that sprung up by the thousand. You bought the kit from Sears and Roebuck, and you just built it yourself. After World War II, it was mass-produced homes in places like Levittown.For most of the last 50 years, in places like coastal California or the East Coast, building has just become far more difficult. With the decline of mass-produced housing, it's become far more expensive, and it becomes harder and harder for relatively low-income people to find opportunities in places that have high levels of income, and high levels of opportunity. That's partially why there's not just a general decline in mobility, there's a decline in directed mobility for the poor. Historically, poor people moved from poor areas to rich areas. That's pretty much stopped. In part, that's because rich areas just have very, very expensive housing. The other thing is the rising importance of the informal safety net.So if you think about most particularly prime-aged men, they're not receiving significant handouts from the government except if they're on disability. But they will typically have some form of income, some form of housing that's being provided for them by someone other than themselves. A third of them are living in their parent's homes. That informal safety net is usually very place dependent. Let's say you're living in Eastern Kentucky; it's not like your parents were going to buy you a condo in San Francisco. You can still have your own bedroom, but you can't go anywhere else and still get that level of support. And so that's, I think, another reason why we're increasingly stuck in place.The third you mentioned, is that a third of the non-employed population of young men or is that a third of all young men? Non-employed is a third of non-employed prime aged men. So that's 25 to 54. There are a lot of 45 year olds who are living on their parents' couches or in their old bedroom. It's a fairly remarkable thing.Dwarkesh Patel 0:12:49Now, we'll get to housing in just a second, but first, I want to ask you: If the fertility trends in East Asia and many other places continue, what will the impact on cities be if the average age gets much older and the possible eventuality of depopulation?Edward Glaeser 0:12:53That's a really interesting question.The basic age fact on cities is that within the bracket of the sort of high-income or middle-income, for prime-aged parents, cities tend to be relatively bad for them. Once you're in the sort of high end of the upper middle class, the distrust of our public school systems, merited or not, means that that group tends to leave. You have plenty of parents with kids who are lower income, and then you have groups who are part of a demographic barbell that like cities. So this is partially about people who don't feel like they need the extra space and partially because if they're young, they're looking to find prospective mates of various forms.Cities are good for that. Urban proximity works well in the dating market. And they've got time on their hands to enjoy the tremendous amenities and consumption advantages that cities have. For older people, it's less about finding a mate typically, but the urban consumption amenity still has value. The ability to go to museums, the ability to go to concerts, and those sorts of activities continue to draw people in.Going forward, I would have continued to expect the barbell dimension to persist until we actually get around to solving our urban schools and declining population levels. If anything, I would have thought that COVID skews you a bit younger because older people are more anxious and remember that cities can also bring pandemics. They remember that it can be a nice thing to have a suburban home if you have to shelter in place. So that might lead some people who would have otherwise relocated to a dense urban core to move out, to stay out.Urban EducationDwarkesh Patel 0:14:44You just mentioned urban schools, and I'm curious because you've written about how urban schools are one of the reasons people who have children might not want to stay in cities. I'm curious why it's the case that American cities have some of the best colleges in the world, but for some reason, their K-to-12 is significantly worse, or it can be worse than the K-to-12 in other parts of the country. Why is it that the colleges are much better in cities, but K to 12 is worse? Edward Glaeser 0:15:19So it's interesting. It's not as if, I don't think there's ever been an Englishman who felt like they had to leave London to get better schools for the kids, or a Frenchman who thought they needed to leave Paris. It's not like there's something that's intrinsic to cities, but I've always thought it's a reflection of the fact that instead of allowing all of the competition and entrepreneurship that thrives in cities and that makes cities great, in the case of K to 12 public education, that's vanished.And your example of colleges is exactly right. I'm in this industry; I'm a participant in this industry and let me tell you, this industry is pretty competitive. Whether or not we're competing for the best students, at our level we go through an annual exercise of trying to make sure we get Ph.D. students to come to our program instead of our competitors, whether it's by hiring faculty members or attracting undergraduates, we occupy a highly competitive industry where we are constantly aware of what we need to do to make ourselves better. It doesn't mean that we're great along every dimension, but at least we're trying. K through 12 education has a local monopoly.So it's like you take the great urban food, leisure and hospitality, and food industries, and instead of having in New York City by a hyper-competitive world where you constantly have entry, you say, “You know what? We're going to have one publicly managed canteen and it's going to provide all the food in New York City and we're not going to allow any competitors or the competitors are going to have to pay a totally different thing.” That canteen is probably going to serve pretty crappy food. That's in some sense what happens when you have a large-scale public monopoly that replaces private competition.Dwarkesh Patel 0:16:50But isn't that also true of rural schools? Why are urban schools often worse? Edward Glaeser 0:17:46There's much more competition in suburban schools. So in terms of the suburban schools, typically there are lots of suburbs, and people are competing amongst them. The other thing that's actually important is (I don't want to over exaggerate this, but I think it is something that we need to think a little bit about) the role of public sector unions and particularly teachers unions in these cases. In the case of a suburban school district, the teachers union is no more empowered on the management side than they would be in the private sector.Dwarkesh Patel 0:17:30So in a normal private sector, you've got a large company, you've got a union, and they're arguing with each other. It's a level playing field. It's all kind of reasonable. I'm not saying management has done awful things, and that unions have done foolish things. I'm not saying that either are perfect, but it's kind of well-matched. It's matched that way in the suburbs as well. You've got highly empowered parents who are highly focused on their kids and they're not dominated.It's not like the teachers union dominates elections in Westchester County. Whereas if you go into a big city school district, you have two things going on. One of which is the teachers tend to be highly involved politically and quite capable of influencing management essentially, because they are an electoral force to be reckoned with, not just by the direct votes, but also with their campaign spending. On top of this, you're talking about a larger group of disparate parents, many of whom have lots of challenges to face and it becomes much harder for them to organize effectively on the other side. So for those reasons, big urban schools can do great things and many individual teachers can be fantastic, but it's an ongoing challenge. Georgism, Robert Moses, & Too Much Democracy?Dwarkesh Patel 0:18:35What is your opinion on Georgism? Do cities need a land value tax? Would it be better if all the other taxes are replaced by one?Edward Glaeser 0:18:41Okay. So Henry George, I don't know any economist who doesn't think that a land value tax is an attractive idea. The basic idea is we're going to tax land rather than taxing real estate values. And you would probably implement this in practice by evaluating the real estate and then subtracting the cost of construction, (at least for anything that was built up, meaning you'd form some value of the structures and you just subtract it).The attractive thing from most of our perspectives is it doesn't create the same disincentive to build that a real estate tax does. Real estate tax says, “Oh, you know what? I might want to keep this thing as a parking lot for a couple of years so I don't have to pay taxes on it.”If it were a land value tax, you're going to pay the same tax, whether or not it's a parking lot or whether or not you're going to put a high rise on it, so you might as well put the high rise on it and we could use the space. So I think by and large, that's a perfectly sensible idea. I'd like to see more places using land value taxes or using land value taxes in exchange for property taxes.Where George got it wrong is the idea that a land value tax is going to solve all the problems of society or all the problems of cities. That is ludicrously not true.One could make an argument that in those places that just have a property tax, you could replace it with a land value tax with little loss, but at the national level, it's not a particularly progressive tax in lots of ways. It would be hard to figure out how to fund all the things you want to fund, especially since there are lots of things that we do that are not very land intensive. I think George was imagining a world in which pretty much all value-creating enterprises had a lot of land engaged. So it's a good idea, yes. A panacea, no. Dwarkesh Patel 0:20:20No, that's a good point. I mean, Google's offices in San Francisco are probably generating more value than you would surmise just from the quantity of land they have there. Do American cities need more great builders like Robert Moses?Edward Glaeser 0:20:36Robert Caro's The Power Broker is one of the great biographies of the past 100 years, unquestionably. The only biography that I think is clearly better is Robert Caro's biography of Lyndon Baines Johnson, right? I mean, it's Caro is truly amazing. That being said, I would not exactly call it a fair and balanced view of Robert. I mean, it is true that Robert Moses was high handed, and it is true that there are things that he did that were terrible, that you never want to do again. But on the other hand, the man got stuff built. I mean, I think of myself as a child growing up in New York City, and whether or not it was the public pool that I swam in or the parks that I played in, or the roads that I traveled on, they were all delivered by Robert Moses. There's got to be a middle ground, which is, no, we're not going to run roughshod over the neighborhood as Robert Moses did, but we're still going to build stuff. We're still going to deliver new infrastructure and we're not going to do it for 10 times more than every other country in the world does it.Dwarkesh Patel 0:21:37We're actually going to have sensible procurement policies that bring in things at a reasonable cost, and I think we need to balance a little bit back towards Robert Moses in order to have slightly more empowered builders who actually are able to deliver American cities the infrastructure they need at an affordable cost. Dwarkesh Patel 0:21:57Do we have too much democracy at the local level? You wrote a paper in 2017 titled The Political Economy of Transportation Investments and one of the points you make there is that the local costs are much more salient to people for new construction than the public benefits, and the benefits to newcomers would be. Does that mean we have too much federalism? Should we just have far less power at the city level and not universally? There are lots of good things that local control does.Edward Glaeser 0:22:25I do think we have too much local ability to say no to new housing projects. So that's a particular case that I'm focused on. I think it's exactly right that the near neighbors to a project internalize all of the extra noise and perhaps extra traffic that they're going to have due to this project. They probably overestimate it because they are engaging in a bit of status quo bias and they think the present is great and can't imagine any change.By contrast, none of the people who would benefit from the new project are able to vote. All of the families that would love to move into this neighborhood are being zoned out by the insiders who get a say. I think the goal is to make sure that we have more ability to speak for outsiders. Cities at their best, are places where outsiders can find opportunities. That's part of what's so great about them. It's a tragic thing that we make that so hard. Now I'm not sure exactly that I'm claiming that I want less democracy, but I do want more limitations on how much regulations localities can do. So I think there are certain limitations on local power that I think are fine.I would prefer to call this not a limitation on local democracy, but an increase in the protection of individual rights or the individual rights of landowners to do what they want with their land. Which in effect, is a limit on democracy. But the Bill of Rights is a limit on democracy! The Bill of Rights says that they don't care if 51% of your voters want to take away your right to free assembly. They're not allowed to do that. So in some sense, what I'm just arguing for is more property owners' rights so that they can actually allow more housing in their building.In terms of transportation projects, it's a little bit dicier because here the builder is the government itself. I think the question is you want everyone to have a voice. You don't want every neighborhood to have a veto over every potential housing project or potential transportation project. So you need something that is done more at the state level with representation from the locality, but without the localities getting the ultimate sayDwarkesh Patel 0:24:33I wonder if that paper implies that I should be shorting highly educated areas, at least in terms of real estate. One of the things you mentioned in the paper was that highly educated areas that had much higher opposition were able to foment much more opposition. Edward Glaeser 0:24:49Okay. So here's the real estate strategy, which I have heard that actually there are buyers who do this. You take an area that has historically been very pro-housing. So it's got lots of housing, and it's affordable right now because supply is good. But lots of educated people have moved in. Which means that going forward, they're going to build much less, which means that going forward, they're likely to become much more expensive. So you should, in fact, buy options on that stuff rather than shorting it. You should short if you have a security that is related to the population level in that community. You should short that because the population growth is going to go down, but the prices are likely to go up. Opioids, Automation, & UBIDwarkesh Patel 0:25:29So you wrote a paper last year on the opioid epidemic. One of the points that you made there was that the opioid epidemic could be explained just by the demand side stuff about social isolation and joblessness. I wonder how this analysis makes you think about mass-scale automation in the future. What impact do you think that would have? Assume it's paired with universal basic income or something like that. Do you think it would cause a tremendous increase in opioid abuse?Edward Glaeser 0:26:03I would have phrased it slightly differently–– which is as opposed to the work of two amazing economists, Anne Case and Angus Deaton, who really emphasized the role of deaths of despair; we are much more focused on the supply side. WIth the demand side, meaning just the way that we handled the distribution of large-scale pain relieving medicines, we tell a story where every 30 to 50 years, someone comes up with the same sort of idea, which is we know that human beings love opioids in different forms. We also know they're highly addicted and lead to a terrible cycle. So all of a sudden comes along this innovator says, you know what? I've got a new opioid and it's safe. You don't have to worry about getting addicted to this one. It's magical.It won't work. 100 years ago, that thing was called heroin. 200 years ago, that thing was called morphine. 300 years ago, that thing was called Meldonium. We have these new drugs which have come in, and they've never been safe. But in our case, it was OxyContin and the magic of the time relief was supposed to make it safe, and it wasn't safe.Dwarkesh Patel 0:27:30There's a lot of great work that just shows that the patterns of opioid use was related to the places that just had a lot of pain 30 years ago. Those places came with a lot of tendency to prescribe various things for pain. So when opioids came in, when OxyContin came in, those were the places that got addicted most. Now it's also true that there are links between these economic issues. There are links with joblessness, and I basically do believe that things that create joblessness are pretty terrible and are actually much worse than income inequality. I push back against the universal basic income advocates who I think are basically engaging in a materialist fallacy of thinking that a human being's life is shaped by their take home pay or their unearned pay. I think for most people, a job is much more than that. A job is a sense of purpose. A job is a sense of social connection. When you look at human misery and opioid use, you look at the difference between high-income earners, mid-income earners. There are differences, but they're small. You then look at the difference between low-income earners and the jobless, then unhappiness spikes enormously, misery spikes enormously, family breakups spike enormously. So things like universal basic income, which the negative income tax experimented on in the 1970s, are the closest thing we have for its large-scale experiments in this area, which had very large effects on joblessness by just giving people money. They feel quite dangerous to me because they feel like they're going to play into rising joblessness in America, which feels like a path for its misery. I want to just quickly deviate and some of the UBI advocates have brought together UBI in the US and UBI in the developing world. So UBI in the developing world, basically means that you give poor farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa fairly modest amounts of money. This is a totally sensible strategy.These people are not about to live life permanently not working. They're darn poor. It's very efficient relative to other ways of giving. I am in no sense pushing back on UBI with modest amounts of money in the poorest parts of the world. By all means, it's been deemed to be effective. It's just a very different thing if you're saying I'm going to give $100 to a poor Congolese farmer, or I'm going to give $10,000 to a long-term jobless person in Eastern Kentucky. You're not buying a PS5 for $100 in Congo.Remote Work, Taxation, & MetaverseDwarkesh Patel 0:29:57I want to ask you about remote work. You write in The Survival of the City, that improvements in information technology can lead to more demand for face-to-face contact because FaceTime complements time spent communicating electronically. I'm curious, what distinguishes situations where FaceTime substitutes for in-person contact from situations where it complements FaceTime complements virtual contact?Edward Glaeser 0:30:25So there's not a universal rule on this. I wrote a paper based on this in the 1990s about face-to-face contact complements or substitutes for electronic contacts. It was really based on a lot of anxiety in the 1970s that the information technology of their day, the fax machine, the personal computer was going to make face-to-face contact in the cities that enable that contact obsolete. That discussion has reappeared amazingly in the past two and a half years because of Zoom, and all of those questions still resonate. I think in the short run, typically these things are substitutes.Typically you don't necessarily need to meet some person who's your long-term contact. You can actually just telephone them, or you can connect with them electronically. In the long run, they seem to be much more likely to be complements, in part because these technologies change our world. The story that I tell over the last 40 years is that, yes, there were some face-to-face contacts that were made unnecessary because of electronic interactions. But it's not just that cities did well over the past 40 years–– business travel went through the roof over the past 40 years. You'd think that that would have been made unnecessary by all these electronic interactions, but I think what just happened was that these new technologies and globalization created a more interconnected world, a world in which knowledge was more important, and we become smart by interacting with people face-to-face. This world became more knowledge and information intensive and more complicated, and as things get more complicated, it's easier for ideas to get lost in translation. So we have these wonderful cues for communicating comprehension or confusion that are lost when we're not in the same room with one another. So I think over the longer time, they tend to complements, and over the shorter term, they tend to be substitutes.One of the things I think was helpful in my earlier work on this was looking at the history of information technology innovations. I think probably the first one is the book. It's hard to imagine an innovation that did more to flatten distance. Now you can read stuff that people are saying hundreds of miles away. Yet there's not a shred of evidence that the book led to less urbanization in Europe or to less connection. It helped create a totally different world in which people were passionate about ideas and wanted to talk to each other. They wanted to talk to each other about their books.Flash forward 350 years when we have the telephone. Telephones started being used more in cities, and they were used mostly by people who were going to meet face-to-face. There's no evidence that this has created a decline in the demand for face-to-face contact or a decline in the demand for cities. So I think if we look at Zoom, which unquestionably has allowed a certain amount of long-distance contact, that's very, very useful. In the short run, it certainly poses a threat to urban office markets. My guess is in the long run; it's probably going to be likely to be neutral at worst for face-to-face contact in the cities that enable that contact. Dwarkesh Patel 0:33:37I think that my podcast has been a great example for me about this. I mean, right now we're talking virtually. So maybe, in a way it's substituted, and perhaps I would have interviewed in person without the podcast. However, in another way, I've also met so many people that I've interviewed on the podcast or who have just connected with me because of the podcast in person. The amount of in-person interactions I've had because of a virtual podcast is a great anecdote to what you're talking about, so that makes total sense.Edward Glaeser 0:34:05Absolutely.Dwarkesh Patel 0:34:06Why do even the best software engineers in India or in Europe make so much less when they're working remotely from those locations than remote engineers working in America make? I mean, why don't employers just pay them more until the price discrepancy goes away?Edward Glaeser 0:34:23That's interesting. I don't fully know the answer to that question. I would suspect some of it just has to do with the nature of supply and demand. There are some things that are just very hard to be done remotely. Either because you have very precise informational needs that you have that are easier to communicate to people who are nearby or the person who's nearby has evolved in ways in terms of their mind that they actually know exactly what you want and they have exactly the product that you need. So even though the remote call center worker and the local one may be totally equivalent on raw programming talent, you may still end up in equilibrium and be willing to pay a lot more to the local one just because, right?So there's a slightly differentiated skill the local one has, and look, there's just a lot of competition for the remote ones, so the price is going to be pretty low. There's not that much supply of the one guy who's down the hall and knows exactly what you're looking for. So that guy gets much higher wages, just because he can offer you something that no one else can exactly reproduce.Dwarkesh Patel 0:35:27Let me clarify my question. Even remote engineers in America will make more than remote engineers in Europe or in India. If somebody is working remotely but he just happens to live in the US, is that just because they can communicate in English in the same way? Edward Glaeser 0:35:54I would take the same stance. I would say that they're likely to have just skills that are somewhat idiosyncratic and are valued in the US context.Dwarkesh Patel 0:35:56Are you optimistic about the ability of the metaverse and VR to be able to better puncture whatever makes in-person contact so valuable?Edward Glaeser 0:36:19No, I do not think the metaverse is going to change very much. I do think that there will be a lot of hours spent on various forms of gaming over the next 20 years, but I don't think it ultimately poses much of a threat to real-world interactions. In some sense, we saw this with the teenage world over the last three years. We saw a lot of America spend an awful lot of time, 15, 16-year-olds, 17-year-olds, gaming and connecting entirely virtually during the whole time of the pandemic lockdowns.Every single person that I've seen in that cohort, when you allowed them to interact with real members of their group live, leaped at the opportunity. They leaped at the opportunity of meeting and actually hanging out with real people until three o'clock in the morning and arguing over whatever it is–– whether or not it's football or Kant. I think particularly for the young, living life live just beats the alternative.Dwarkesh Patel 0:37:05That sounds like a very Harvard scenario, having to argue over football or Kant, those two topics. [laughs] Are you predicting lower taxes over the coming decades in places like California and New York, specifically because of how remote work sets a sort of maximum bar of how much you can tax highly productive people before they will just leave? Edward Glaeser 0:37:29This is a great question. It's a central issue of our day. Here's how I think about it. In part, it's why I wrote my recent book, Survival of the City. It's because I was worried about this. Two things happened simultaneously. One, as you correctly say, Zoom has made it easier to connect anywhere. I don't think that Zoom is going to cause our tech startup currently in Silicon Valley to say, oh, you know what? We're just going to go home to our Orange County suburban homes and never meet live again. I think that's a low-probability event.But what seems to be a perfectly high probability event is saying, “Oh, we can Zoom with our VCs, we can Zoom with our lawyers. Why don't we just relocate to Austin, Texas, not pay taxes, or relocate to Boulder, Colorado, so we can have beautiful scenery, or relocate to Honolulu so we can surf?” That seems like we've made the ability for smart people to relocate much easier, even if they're going to keep on seeing each other in the office three or four days a week. That collides with this very fervent desire to deal with festering social inequities at the local level. Be this limited upward mobility for poorer people, be this high housing costs, be this the rise of mass incarceration and police brutality towards particularly minority groups. There's this progressive urge which runs up against the fact that the rich guys can run away.If your model, which says, “Oh, the local governments are going to realize the rich guys can run away, so they will seamlessly lower tax rates in order to make sure that they attract those people,” that's running up against the fact that there's a whole lot of energy on the progressive side, which says, “No! Massachusetts just passed a millionaire's tax. For the first time ever, we have the possibility to have a progressive tax, which feels extraordinarily dangerous given this time period.”I think we may need to see a bunch of errors in this area before we start getting things right. We went through a lot of pain in the 1970s as cities first tried to deal with their progressive goals and rich people and companies ran away, and it wasn't until the 1980s that people started realizing this was the path to local bankruptcy and that we had real city limits on what the locality could do.Dwarkesh Patel 0:39:44You cited research on the survival of the city, which said that firms like Microsoft were much less willing to hire new people once they went online because of the pandemic. What do you make of the theory that this is similar to when industrialization first hit and we hadn't figured out exactly how to make the most use of it to be most productive, but over the long run, somebody will do to remote work what Henry Ford did to the factory floor and in fact, just make it much more effective and efficient than in-person contact just because we'll have better ways of interacting with people through remote work, since we'll have better systems?Dwarkesh Patel 0:40:17It's entirely possible. I never like betting against the ingenuity of humanity. On the other hand, you need a lot of technology to override 5 million years of evolution. We have evolved to be an in-person species, not just because we're productive and learn a lot face-to-face, but also because we just like it. A world of hyper-efficient remote work where you basically are puttering around your apartment doing things very quickly and getting things done, doesn't sound particularly joyful to me.Workplaces are not just places of productivity; they're also places of pleasure, particularly at the high end. Remember in 2019 and earlier, Google, and Yahoo, the companies that should have had the biggest capacity to do remote stuff, weren't sending their workers home; they were building these paradises for high-skilled workers, stuffed with foosball tables and free snacks and whatever else they had in these giant campuses in the Google lex. So they were certainly betting on the power of face-to-face and creativity rather than on the ability of remote work to make everything work. I think the most reasonable view, let's say that of Nick Bloom of Stanford, is that for those types of workers, 20% of your week being hybrid, maybe 40%, seems quite possible.That seems like a thing, particularly for workers who have families who really value that degree of flexibility. But fully remote, I guess that's a pretty niche thing. There's some jobs like call center workers where you could imagine it being the norm, but in part, that's just because it's just hard to learn the same amount remotely that you do face-to-face. This came out both in the earlier Bloom study on remote call center workers in China and on more recent work by Natalia Emmanuel and Emma Harrington. Both studies found the same thing, which is in these call centers, are plenty productive when they're remote, but the probability of being promoted drops by 50%.The entrepreneur may make it very efficient to do things in the short run remotely, but they're going to turn off this tendency that we have to be able to learn things from people around us, which is just much harder to duplicate remotely.Past & Future of Silicon ValleyDwarkesh Patel 0:42:29Now, I'm curious why Silicon Valley became the hub of technology. You wrote a paper in 2018 about where pioneer and non-pioneer firms locate. So, I was hoping you had insight on this. Does it stand for it? Is it where Fairchild Semiconductor is located? What is the explanation?Edward Glaeser 0:42:48So, we take it as being earlier. It is Stanford. I traced through this, I think in Triumph. Yeah, it was a company called Federal Telegraph Company that was founded by a guy called Cyril Frank Elwell, who was a radio pioneer, and he was tapped by his teacher to head this radio company. The story was, as I remember it, there'd been this local genius in San Francisco who had attracted all these investors and was going to do this wireless telegraphy company. Then he died in a freak carriage accident.These investors wanted to find someone else, and they went to Stanford's nearby factory and asked, who should we hire? It was this guy Elwell who founded Federal Telegraph. Federal Telegraph then licensed, I think Danish technology which was originally the Poulsen Telegraph Company. They then hired some fairly bright people like Lee DeForest and they did incredibly well in World War I off of federal Navy contracts, off of Navy contracts. They then did things like providing jobs for people like the young Fred Terman, whose father was a Stanford scientist. Now, Fred Terman then plays an outsized role in this story because he goes to MIT, studies engineering there, and then comes back to become Dean of Stanford's engineering program.He really played an outsized role in setting up the Stanford Industrial Park which attracting Fairchild Semiconductor. Then there's this sort of random thing about how the Fairchild Semiconductor attracts these people and then repels them because you have this brilliant guy Shockley, right? He's both brilliant and sort of personally abhorrent and manages to attract brilliant people and then repel all of them. So they all end up dispersing themselves into different companies, and they create this incredibly creative ecosystem that is the heart of Silicon Valley.In its day, it had this combination of really smart people and really entrepreneurial ethos, which just made it very, very healthy. I think the thing that many of us worry about is that Silicon Valley more recently, feels much more like it's a one-industry town, which is dangerous. It feels more like it's a bunch of industrial behemoths rather than a bunch of smart and scrappy startups. That's a recipe that feels much more like Detroit in the 1950s than it does like Silicon Valley in the 1960s.Dwarkesh Patel 0:45:52Speaking of startups, what does your study of cities imply about where tech startups should locate and what kind of organization in person or otherwise they should have? I think there's a lot to like about in person, certainly. Relying too much on remote feels quite dangerous if you're a scrappy startup. But I like a lot the Sunbelt smart cities.I sort of have a two-factor model of economic growth, which is it's about education, and it's about having governments that are pro-business. If you think about sort of the US, there's a lot of heterogeneity in this. If you think about the US versus other countries, it's heterogeneity. So the US has historically been better at being pro-business than, let's say, the Northern European social democracies, but the Northern European social democracies are great on the education front.So places like Sweden and the Netherlands, and Germany are also very successful places because they have enough education to counter the fact that they may not necessarily be as pro-business as the US is. Within the US, you also have this balance, whereas places like Massachusetts, and California are certainly much less pro-business, but they're pretty well-educated. Other parts of the country may be more pro-business, but they're less so. The real secret sauce is finding those places that are both highly educated and pro-business.So those are places like Charlotte and Austin and even Atlanta, places in the Sun Belt that have attracted lots of skilled people. They've done very, very well during COVID. I mean, Austin, by most dimensions, is the superstar of the COVID era in terms of just attracting people. So I think you had to wait for the real estate prices to come down a bit in Austin, but those are the places that I would be looking at. Dwarkesh Patel 0:47:46I don't know if you know, but I live in Austin, actually.Edward Glaeser 0:47:50I did not know that. [laughs]Dwarkesh Patel 0:47:54Well, actually, I'm surprised about what you said about education because you write in the paper, “general knowledge measured as average years of schooling is not a strong determinant of the survival of a pioneer firm, but relatedness of knowledge between past and present activities is.” So I'm surprised that you think education is a strong determinant for pioneer firms.Edward Glaeser 0:48:15No, I'm a big human capital determinist. So I tend to believe that individuals, cities, and nations rise and fall based on their skill levels. Certainly, if you look over the last 40 or 50 years, skills are very predictive of which cities (particularly colder cities) manage to do well versus poorly. If you ask yourself why Detroit and Seattle look different, more than 50% of Seattle's adults have college degrees, and maybe 14, 15% of Detroit's adults do.That's just a huge, huge gap. Certainly, when we think about your punitive startup, you're going to be looking for talent, right? You're going to be looking to hire talent, and having lots of educated people around you is going to be helpful for that.Housing ReformDwarkesh Patel 0:48:56Let's talk about housing. Houston has basically very little to no zoning. Why is it not more of interesting today? Nobody goes to Houston for tourism.Edward Glaeser 0:49:07I have. [laughs] I have, in fact, gone to Houston for tourism. Although part of it, I admit, was to look at the housing and to go to the woodlands and look at that. Interesting has a lot to do with age in this country. So the more that a city has… Boston is good for tourism just because it's been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed all that much. So it has this sort of historical thing. Houston's a new place, not just in the sense that the chronological age is lower but also in the sense that it's just grown so much, and it's dominated by new stuff, right?That new stuff tends to be more homogenous. It tends to have less history on it. I think those are things that make new cities typically less interesting than older cities. As witnessed by the fact that Rome, Jerusalem, London, are great tourist capitals of the world because they've just accreted all this interesting stuff over the millennium. So I think that's part of it. I'm not sure that if we look at more highly zoned new cities, we're so confident that they're all that more interesting.I don't want to be particularly disparaging any one city. So I'm not going to choose that, but there's actually a bunch that's pretty interesting in Houston, and I'm not sure that I would say that it's any less interesting than any comparably aged city in the country.Dwarkesh Patel 0:50:35Yeah. I'm visiting Houston later this month. I asked my friend there, should I stay here longer? I mean, is there anything interesting to do here? And then he responds, “Well, it's the fourth biggest city in the country, so no.”Dwarkesh Patel 0:50:47Many people, including many economists, have said that we should drastically increase US population through immigration to a figure like 1 billion. Do you think that our cities could accommodate that? We have the infrastructure, and I mean, let's say we reformed housing over a decade or so. Could we accommodate such a large influx of people? Edward Glaeser 0:51:24A billion people in a decade? I love the vision. Basically, in my heart, I'm an open borders person, right? I mean, it's a moral thing. I don't really like the idea that I get to enjoy the privileges of being an American and think that I'm going to deny that opportunity to anyone else. So I love this vision. A billion people over 10 years is an unimaginably large amount of people over a relatively short period of time. I'd love to give it a shot. I mean, it's certainly not as if there's any long-term reason why you couldn't do it.I mean, goodness knows we've got more than enough space in this country. It would be exciting to do that. But it would require a lot of reform in the housing space and require a fair amount of reform in the infrastructure space as well to be able to do this at some kind of large scale affordability.Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:05What does the evidence show about public libraries? Do they matter?Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:09My friend Eric Kleinberg has written a great book about… I think it's called Palaces for the People about all the different functions that libraries have played. I've never seen anything statistically or systematically about this, but you're not going to get a scholar to speak against books. It's not a possible thing.Europe's Stagnation, Mumbai's Safety, & Climate Change Dwarkesh Patel 0:52:32Why do European cities seem so much more similar to what they look like decades or even centuries ago than American cities, even American cities that are old, obviously not as old as European cities, but they seem to change much more over time. Edward Glaeser 0:52:46Lower population growth, much tougher zoning, much tougher historic preservation. All three of these things are going on. So it's very difficult to build in European cities. There's a lot of attention to caring about history. It's often part of the nationalist narrative. You often have huge amounts of national dollars going to preserve local stuff and relatively lower levels of population growth.An extreme example of this is Warsaw, where central Warsaw is completely destroyed during World War II, and they built it up to look exactly like it looked before the bombing. So this is a national choice, which is unlikely that we would necessarily make here in the US. Dwarkesh Patel 0:53:27Yeah. I was in Mumbai earlier this year, and I visited Dharavi, which is the biggest slum in Asia. And it's a pretty safe place for a slum. Why are slums in different countries? Why do they often have different levels of how safe they are? What is the reason?Edward Glaeser 0:53:45I, too, have been in Dharavi and felt perfectly safe. It's like walking around Belgravia and London in terms of it. I think my model of Dharavi is the same model as Jane Jacobs's model of Greenwich Village in 1960, which is this is just a well-functioning community.People have eyes on the street. If you're a stranger in these areas, they're going to be looking at you, and it's a community that just functions. There are lots of low-income communities throughout the world that have this. It requires a certain amount of permanence. So if the community is too much in flux, it becomes hard to enforce these norms and hard to enforce these sort of community rules. It's really helpful if there aren't either a massive number of guns floating around or an unbelievably lucrative narcotics trade, which is in the area. Those are both things that make things incredibly hard. Furthermore, US drug policy has partially been responsible for creating violence in some of the poor parts of Latin American cities.Dwarkesh Patel 0:54:43Maybe you don't play video games enough to know the answer to this question. But I'm curious, is there any video game, any strategic video game like Civilization or Europa that you feel does a good job representing the economics of cities? Edward Glaeser 0:55:07No, I will say that when I was in graduate school, I spent a few hours playing something called Sim City. I did think that was very fun. But I'm not going to claim that I think that it got it right. That was probably my largest engagement with city-building video games.Dwarkesh Patel 0:55:12What would you say we understand least about how cities work? Edward Glaeser 0:55:18I'm going to say the largest unsolved problem in cities is what the heck we're going to do about climate change and the cities of the developing world. This is the thing I do not feel like I have any answer for in terms of how it is that we're going to stop Manila or Mumbai from being leveled by some water-related climate event that we haven't yet foreseen.We think that we're going to spend tens of billions of dollars to protect New York and Miami, and that's going to happen; but the thing I don't understand and something we really need to need to invest in terms of knowledge creation is what are we going to do with the low-lying cities of the developing world to make them safe. Dwarkesh Patel 0:55:54Okay. Your most recent book is Survival of the City. And before that Triumph of the City, both of which I highly recommend to readers. Professor Glaeser, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. This was very interesting.Edward Glaeser 0:56:05I enjoyed this a lot. Thank you so much for having me on. I had a great deal of fun. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.dwarkeshpatel.com
Today we are talking about Being a Creative Director with Randy Oest. For show notes visit: www.talkingDrupal.com/375 Topics What is a Creative Director? How is being a CD at a technical company different? Do Drupal CD's need additional skills? Sometimes things get lost in translation between design and development how do you bridge that gap? How do you mentor? How do you interview for creative positions? Do you hire developers too? Optimal makeup for a team. Guiding the Four Kitchen's team Inpiration Resources NEDCamp Videos Bits and Mortar WTI Yale Sanity PenPot Quant-Ux Four Kitchens Hosts Nic Laflin - www.nLighteneddevelopment.com @nicxvan John Picozzi - www.epam.com @johnpicozzi Randy Oest - randyoest.com @amazingrando MOTW Correspondent Martin Anderson-Clutz - @mandclu ECA ECA is a powerful, versatile, and user-friendly rules engine for Drupal 9+. The core module is a processor that validates and executes event-condition-action plugins. Integrated with graphical user interfaces like BPMN.iO, Camunda, ECA Core Modeller or other possible future modellers, ECA is a robust system for building conditionally triggered action sets.
Real faith ‘passes first through the body/ like an arrow' so writes the American-Iranian poet Kaveh Akbar. In his collection Pilgrim Bell he plays with the physical and divine, the human capacity for cruelty and grace, and the reality of living as a Muslim in an Islamophobic nation. The Anglican priest and biblical scholar John Barton turns his attention to the word of God as it has travelled across the world. The Bible have been translated thousands of times into more than 700 languages. In The Word he traces the challenges of crossing linguistic borders from antiquity to the present, while remaining faithful to the original. Faith, fanaticism and fame combine in Emma Donoghue's novel, The Wonder, now made into a film, starring Florence Pugh. It follows the story of a young girl in 1860s Ireland who stops eating, but miraculously stays alive, and the nurse sent to discover the truth. Producer: Katy Hickman Image: From the film, 'The Wonder'. (L to R) Florence Pugh as Lib Wright, Josie Walker as Sister Michael in The Wonder. Cr. Aidan Monaghan/Netflix © 2022
Episode SummaryHow's life growing up in a neighborhood where no one looks like you? In this episode, I talk to a former student, Wendy Pease, who grew up overseas and learned to adapt to life where she was the one who stood out. Now, many years later, perhaps unsurprisingly, she runs a business focused on managing cultural and language barriers. From melting pots to immigration, on this episode of The Sydcast a deep dive into an entrepreneurial life set in motion long ago. Sydney Finkelstein Syd Finkelstein is the Steven Roth Professor of Management at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College. He holds a Master's degree from the London School of Economics and a Ph.D. from Columbia University. Professor Finkelstein has published 25 books and 90 articles, including the bestsellers Why Smart Executives Fail and Superbosses: How Exceptional Leaders Master the Flow of Talent, which LinkedIn Chairman Reid Hoffman calls the “leadership guide for the Networked Age.” He is also a Fellow of the Academy of Management, a consultant and speaker to leading companies around the world, and a top 25 on the Global Thinkers 50 list of top management gurus. Professor Finkelstein's research and consulting work often relies on in-depth and personal interviews with hundreds of people, an experience that led him to create and host his own podcast, The Sydcast, to uncover and share the stories of all sorts of fascinating people in business, sports, entertainment, politics, academia, and everyday life.Wendy Pease Wendy MacKenzie Pease is the owner and president of Rapport International, a translation and interpretation services company specializing in marketing, legal, and medical/life sciences translation. Throughout her career, she has worked with hundreds of companies to help them communicate across more than 200 languages and cultures. She is the author of the book, "The Language of Global Marketing," and the podcast host of the "Global Marketing Show." Wendy has an MBA from the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth College and a BA in Foreign Service & International Politics from Penn State. She is passionate about connecting people, especially across languages and cultures. She lived in Mexico, Taiwan, and the Philippines, where she fell in love with the richness of international cultures and understood that we are all human, no matter the language we speak. Insights from this episode: Wendy's life growing up Growing up in a culturally different neighborhood Getting into business and buying her companyGetting laid off while on maternity leaveLessons Wendy learned running her own company Details about what her company does Building a formidable workforceDetails on her competitor, Google translateThe beauty of different languagesAdvice for people going to other countriesQuotes from the show:“I am an off-the-scale extrovert: I always made friends wherever I went, and I think that's what's given me the love I have for what I do now” —Wendy Pease [14:24]“After two lay-offs on maternity leaves, I decided I was done with doing the corporate thing and wanted to own my own business again. So that's how I ended up buying the company I run now” —Wendy Pease [22:22]“I think the hardest thing for me was work-life balance. When I owned my company before, I was single and young, and in my twenties with tons of energy and a lot of time went into work” —Wendy Pease [27:07]“What we do: our mission is clear, communication for peaceful and prosperous worlds. So what that boils down to is that we do written translations, and spoken interpretation in over 200 languages” —Wendy Pease [28:12]“People used to come into the U.S and say, ‘I'm gonna get rid of my language and culture, and I'm gonna assimilate, and I'm gonna be American' that's not happening anymore. People are keeping their language” —Wendy Pease [35:17]“My biggest advice is if you are going somewhere to conduct business where English is not the native language (…), my advice is to get an interpreter who fully understands the two languages and two cultures, and then you use your interpreter as your cultural conduit“—Wendy Pease [43:44]“You can go out and hire them (in manufacturing), but if you don't train them in their language, give them opportunities to promote and make them feel included, they are not gonna stay” —Wendy Pease [47:10]Stay connected:Sydney FinkelsteinWebsite: http://thesydcast.comLinkedIn: Sydney FinkelsteinTwitter: @sydfinkelsteinFacebook: The SydcastInstagram: The SydcastWendy Pease Linktree: https://linktr.ee/wendypeaseLinkedIn: Wendy (MacKenzie) Pease Twitter: Wendy Pease (@RapportIntl)Subscribe to our podcast + download each episode on Stitcher, iTunes, and Spotify.This episode was produced and managed by Podcast Laundry.
Have you heard about Nelson Nash, Infinite Banking, and Becoming Your Own Banker ... and want to learn more? Or maybe you're already using Infinite Banking but would like to be able to explain it better to your spouse, parents, children, business partner, or friends. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoKCkrLgSMs Today, we're unpacking the fundamentals of the Infinite Banking Concept and discussing what Infinite Banking ISN'T. Table of contentsInfinite Banking is NOT: MagicInfinite Banking IS: A Long-Term Habit, Skill, and SystemThe Importance of Long-Term ThinkingInfinite Banking is NOT: A Get Rich Quick SchemeHow Should You Split Your Premium?Can You Pay Premiums with Cash Value?Book A Strategy Call Infinite Banking is NOT: Magic Sometimes, what gets lost in translation when talking about IBC is HOW it works. While it is a powerful tool when structured properly, it is definitely not magic. Unfortunately, the way some people talk about IBC can make it seem that way, which is a disservice to how well it works from a logical and contractual standpoint. Life insurance is a contract. Whole life insurance, in particular, tends to be a very beneficial contract. Since it's permanent insurance, it offers a lot of living benefits. The loan provision, for example, is one such benefit. However, the loan provision is valuable because of the financial principles you can apply, NOT because you're getting “free money,” nor even necessarily “tax-free” money. In reality, the loan provision works like any other loan. It just has the added advantage of flexibility, because it's 100% collateralized by your cash value. Every other seemingly “magic” or “too good to be true” feature of life insurance has a similar explanation. It's a product that is highly efficient and works well, but it has checks and balances like any other financial product. [6:50] “This is what Nelson [Nash] knew: that human conditions get in the way… If you don't have good money habits to begin with… you're not going to be a good saver either. And that is what the Infinite Banking system is. It's a place to store or save money. It's not an investment.” Infinite Banking IS: A Long-Term Habit, Skill, and System In reality, Infinite Banking is a long-term strategy to employ by way of whole life insurance. To put that in different terms, whole life insurance is a savings vehicle. Infinite Banking is the strategy for saving and using your money. The reason IBC works so well is that it rewards good habits. The first habit is one of saving: by paying premiums, you increase your equity in your insurance policy. This equity is called cash value. The next good habit is paying down your debt. When you leverage your policy to make a purchase, you benefit by making regular loan payments. You free up capital to use, and you can even apply some of that loan payment as PUAs that increase your cash value. All the while, you continue earning interest and dividends because you're using a system that puts you in control. Your whole life insurance policy is the place you put your cash until you have somewhere to deploy it. It's a system that makes your savings more efficient, but you have to have those good habits already. That way, you can access and use your capital. The Importance of Long-Term Thinking The tether that ties the entire system together is long-term thinking. To truly reap the benefits of an IBC policy, you have to set your sites on the long game. That means considering how your actions today can affect your future self in 30 to 40 years or more. Saving, paying loans, and creating a wealth system can all have positive impacts. Not doing those things can leave major holes in your personal economy. And more importantly, if you don't adopt long-term thinking in your use of an IBC policy, you may struggle to see the results you want. The policy you have can only work as well as you are able to manage it.
While compiling the Oxford English Dictionary, lexicographer James Murray exchanged hundreds of letters a week with authors, advisors, and volunteer researchers. A new collection online lets you eavesdrop on discussions about which words should be in the dictionary and why -- including words that might offend Victorian sensibilities. Also why are some words more pleasurable to say than others? And: the German saying that means "If Grandma had wheels, she'd be a bus." Did something get lost in translation? Plus, an alliterative brain teaser, ovoviviparous, wasper, crack shot, the dessert called buckle, the best term for an adult child, disdainful words for weak coffee, the kind of hairpin I am, proctor vs. proctologist, and the smoky jungle frog otherwise known as Leptodactylus pentadactylus. Read full show notes, hear hundreds of free episodes, send your thoughts and questions, and learn more on the A Way with Words website: https://waywordradio.org/contact. Be a part of the show: call 1 (877) 929-9673 toll-free in the United States and Canada; worldwide, call or text/SMS +1 (619) 800-4443. Email firstname.lastname@example.org. Twitter @wayword. Copyright Wayword, Inc., a 501(c)(3) corporation. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Wouldn't it be loverly to listen to a whole new Worthy episode? Ben and Jon are back discussing the 1964 Best Picture winner, "My Fair Lady". The Audrey Hepburn and Rex Harrison starring film is among one of the most popular musicals of all-time. In this episode, the Worthy boys figure out if that still holds true with the film version of the musical. We discuss film going audience's fascination with high society drama, what the true message of the film is and if the messaging of the film is lost in translation for audiences. The 37th Academy Awards proved to be a questionable affair with several great movies coming out that year, yet there seems to be one person in particular who may have been pulling the strings in their favor. Is My Fair Lady worthy of the Best Picture award of 1964? Tell us how we're wrong at email@example.com
The opening song Wild Sweet by Starling Arrow was submitted by Spring from Portland. Thank you Spring. While watching Lost in Translation ( for maybe the 10th time), I caught one song that I remembered was in my iTunes library but I couldn't place the artist. I thought it was BT, but nope, it is AIR the french band. This is track number three called Alone in Kyoto. Many songs featured past the 30 min mark (where we get into some funky house, jazzy grooves) are from Naked Music Recordings. If you like this older house vibe, check out the Naked Music website, esp Blue Six who ends this playlist with one of my favorites "Music & Wine".
Chaker Bou Abdalla and Wissam Kamal return to Sarde and make us laugh about: The untranslatable words in the Arabic language: the mystery of the “Ballou3a” - Wissam & Chaker's New Years Eve in Bcharre - “Stop Oil” Activists Gluing themselves to art - Arabic Comedy on regional and international scale - Why are there so many Kousa corers (man2ar) at the airport? يعود شاكر بو عبدالله ووسام كمال إلى سردة لإضحاكنا، ومن المواضيع التي سيتطرقان إليها: الكلمات العربية غير القابلة للترجمة: لغز "البلّوعة" ليلة رأس السنة التي قضاها وسام وشاكر في بشرّي "أوقفوا البترول" ناشطون يلصقون أنفسهم على تحف فنية الكوميديا على الساحتين الاقليمية والعالمية لماذا نجد "نقّارات" الكوسا في المطار؟ Want to support our Sarde? check out our Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/sardeafterdinner Sarde (noun), [Sa-r-de]: A colloquial term used in the Middle East to describe the act of letting go & kicking off a stream of consciousness and a rambling narrative. The Sarde After Dinner Podcast is a free space based out of the heart of Beirut, Lebanon, where Médéa Azouri & Mouin Jaber discuss a wide range of topics (usually) held behind closed doors in an open and simple way with guests from all walks of life. سردة (إسم) سَرْدَةْ : مصطلح بالعامية يستخدم في منطقة الشرق الأوسط للدلالة على الاسترخاء وإطلاق سردية. يشكّل بودكاست سردة بعد العشاء مساحة حرّة من قلب بيروت، لبنان، حيث تناقش ميديا عازوري ومعين جابر عدّة مواضيع (لطالما) تمّت مناقشتها خلف أبواب مغلقة وذلك بطريقة بسيطة ومباشرة مع ضيوف من شتّى المجالات. SARDE EVERY SUNDAY with NEW EPISODES released WEEKLY! 9:00 PM
Who couldn't use some solid advice at times? Here's a piece of advice that is super controversial, but in reality, it has an awesome underlying message. The problem with it is the communication from one agent to the other. Somewhere, it gets lost in translation, in turn making it "bad advice". Well screw that, I'm here to tell you that is GREAT advice, and it is up to the agent to really understand what this message means. Even Glenda Baker from TikTok has said this is the worst advice ever, but I disagree. What is hard to understand is that the house stays the same (location, neighborhood, etc...), but what doesn't stay the same is the mortgage or the monthly payment, they are malleable. Marry the house date the rate is not controversial, its factual. You are not stuck with the mortgage, aka date it! The issue is when your telling consumers they CAN refinance when interest rates go down. We need to change that too IF interest rates go down, if they can qualify, then hell yeah, refinance. The problem is when you lead them on to think refinancing is a sure thing when it's not. As long as your communicating the concept correctly, its an IF, not a guarantee.Try Keeping Current Matters w/ BAM discountAutomate your social posts to the other platforms w/ Repurpose.io Proud member of the Broke Agent Media network***********************Sponsored by: Follow Up Boss, the CRM of choice for agents ready to scale quickly. Massive Agent listeners get a FREE 30 Day trial (no CC required!!) CLICK HERE***********************Recommended:Witly: the fully automated Facebook Ad management system for real estate agents and loan officers. Get a 14 day free trial HEREShop my Amazon Store: podcasting equipment, my favorite books, cool stuff for REALTORS®, etcMassive Agent Society: Our Real Estate Lead Gen Coaching Program/online course and online courseBuzzsprout: Starting a podcast? Host your show with the same platform we use. Affordable, user-friendly podcast hosting for real estate agents - New users get a $20 Amazon Gift CardOne of our agents in Iowa got 9 new deals under contract in just 45 days, in a recession… without cold calling, door knocking or paying Zillow. See how over at massiveagentsociety.comOne of our agents in Iowa got 9 new deals under contract in just 45 days, in a recession… without cold calling, door knocking or paying Zillow. See how over at massiveagentsociety.com
Dating can be tricky when English isn't your first language. Laura Fois joins us to talk about some of the lost-in-translation moments she's had while looking (and sometimes not looking) for love.Laura's show, Power, Language and Love, plays in Fringe Brisbane Nov 4 and 5 at 7:30pm and Nov 6 at 7pm.PIP Performance Theatre, 20 Park Road, Milton QLD, QLD 4064You can buy tickets here: https://fringebrisbane.com.au/event/power-language-and-love-a-cabaret/Laura Fois is a versatile singer, producer and writer of Italian heritage.She is particularly passionate about cabaret. Her credits as a performer include Blathnaid/Scathach in the original musical Destiny Doomed, produced by Observatory Theatre, the Lady of the Lake in Spamalot (Brisbane Arts theatre), Magda in Ladies in Black (Brisbane Arts theatre), Lucy in Jekyll and Hyde (BMCG, WA), Marianne Renate in Shout! The legend of the wild one (Beenleigh Theatre Group).In 2020 she performed in the multi awarded short "The Great Salami Breakout" currently successfully presented at international festivals. As a producer, she looks for opportunities to tell women's stories, particularly though performers' individual stories and through independent writers' scripts. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
On this week's episode of Inside Outside Innovation, we sit down with Mauro Porcini, PepsiCo's first ever Chief Design Officer and author of the new book, The Human Side of Innovation. Mauro and I talk about the human aspects of innovation and the importance of love in the innovation process. Let's get started.Inside Outside Innovation is a podcast to help new innovators navigate what's next. Each week we'll give you a front row seat into what it takes to learn, grow, and thrive, in today's world of accelerating change and uncertainty. Join us as we explore, engage, and experiment with the best and the brightest innovators, entrepreneurs, and pioneering businesses. It's time to get started. Interview Transcript with Mauro Porcini, PepsiCo's Chief Design Officer and author of The Human Side of InnovationBrian Ardinger: Welcome to another episode of Inside Outside Innovation. I'm your host, Brian Ardinger. And as always, we have another amazing guest. Today we have Mauro Porcini. He is PepsiCo's first ever Chief Design Officer, and author of the new book, The Human Side of Innovation: The Power of People in Love with People. Welcome to the show. Mauro Porcini: Thanks, Brian. Thanks for having me. It's really a pleasure. Brian Ardinger: I am super excited to have you on the show. I'm big fan of PepsiCo and your work prior at 3M, and you've got this new book out and I wanted to have a conversation about some of the things that you've seen in this world of innovation. How do you define innovation? Mauro Porcini: That's a good question. Every time you touch, you start score, every time you take something, anything, it could be a product, it could be an experience, it could be an institution, anything in your life. You try to change. And now this change could be directed in a positive way. It could go in a negative way. It could be a major change. Destructive but true as we call those kind changes in innovation world. It could be very incremental, very minimum, but anything you do, the change, the status quo is innovation by definition. Brian Ardinger: I like that definition because you know, I think a lot of people get hung up on the fact that innovation, they think it has to be the biggest change in the world. It's I've got to come up with the next flying car. But you talk about in your book, innovation is not just about that. It's about incremental improvements. It's just creating value in change. Mauro Porcini: This point we are both making right now, I think is extremely important because often people out there, media, opinion leaders, are looking at companies investing in innovation, and if they don't produce the next iPhone, they're like, well, they're failing. They're not really extracting the value that they should from that innovation team, that design team, whatever is the form shape of that innovation organization. And instead, in many situations that innovation is more in the genetic code of the company. Is happening so many different ways in the way you serve a customer. In the way you build experiences. In the way you promote your brands, or you build new ones. Or eventually also in some small incremental products that make your portfolio more meaningful, more relevant. Or financially more interesting for you and your shareholders or more strategic for your company. So, it's very, very important to make this point. I read a few articles recently. They were attacking and challenging companies that were not producing the next iPhone after these loud investments in the innovation machine. And the reality, many of those companies are actually different companies today than today than what they were in the past. Thanks to that innovation culture that they built. Brian Ardinger: Absolutely. I heard you talk about design and that great design comes from this earnest desire to make other people happy. Can you expand on that a little bit?Mauro Porcini: That's how everything started. Thousands of years ago when the first act of innovation or design, because for me, are exactly the same thing happened. When the historic man or woman. Who knows if it was a man or if it was a woman, for the first time, took something that was available in nature, a stone, and modified that to give it a different destination of use. To use the stone as a more effective hunting tool. Or a tool to prepare the food. Or later on to decorate your body. Or later on to celebrate your gods.By the way, just mentioned, three different dimensions of the Maslow Pyramid. You know, the bottom of the pyramid that is about survival and is safety and is your physiological needs. The center is about self-expression, the connection with others. And then the top that is about something that transcend yourself is bigger than you.Yeah. And so already those utensils made out of stones were serving specific needs. They were all about reaching your happiness. Because the Maslow Pyramid, at the end of the day, the needs Pyramid is all about reaching what we call today happiness. If you work in all these dimensions. So already back innovation or design was an of love. This is how I start. Also, the book, innovation is an act of love. An act of love towards yourself. If you were creating this for yourself, but obviously already back then, we were organized in little communities. We have people around us. We wouldn't have the concept of family yet, but you were creating these products also for the people around you. It was an act of love for them as well. And then you started to create more and more product by yourself. At a certain point, there were so many products. You needed help. You needed to start delegating the creation of those products to other people.And then over there, hundreds of years and thousands of years, we started to organize ourselves in different communities. We invented the idea of work. We invented companies. Then later on brands. And so, what happened when that started to happen is that essentially you start to put scale. Literally scale between you innovator and the people that you love and that you are serving.The scale plays the distance between the two of you and the love started to get lost in translation in the scale. And instead of love, you started to change love with profit and financial revenue and other things. And so, in the name of profit, eventually you could create products that eventually were not ideal for the people you wanted to serve.But products that eventually you could extract as much financial value as possible out of. And so, this is what has been happening for hundreds of years, more recently. That we are surrounded by so many mediocre products and services and brands and experiences because they were created in the name of profit instead of the name of love.What is changing today is that we live in a world, where if you don't create the ideal extraordinary, excellent solution for people needs and wants, the solution could be once again, a product, service, a brand, or experience. Somebody else will do it on your behalf. Why this was not happening 20 years ago, 30 years ago was simply because if you were a big company, you could protect your product. With big barrier to entry. Made of scale of production, of distribution, and communication. Today. Instead, anybody out there can come up with an idea, get easy access to funding through kickstarter.com or their proliferation investment funds that are hunting for the next startup. The custom manufacturing is going down driven by new technologies and globalization.You can go straight to your end users through the digital platforms to sell them stuff through e-commerce channels and to promote your products through social media. In these areas, these companies, the big ones, were building their barriers to end. It was impossible for the men and woman in the street to go compete with them Today they can, and therefore the big and the small, they're left with just one possible solution. They need to really focus on people and really create something extraordinary for them. You may have the best product, the best brand. Very bad service. Your competitor will create the best product, the best brand, and eventually something with a better service.Or you may have all of them, but your product is not sustainable enough. Or is not healthy enough. That's exactly where competition will come. Thank God we live in a world where the big and small need to do just one thing to create excellence for people. There is no space for mediocrity anymore. You cannot protect the mediocrity with your old barriers to entry anymore.Brian Ardinger: I love that concept and coming back to the idea of innovation is love, if you think about one of the best acts of love is solving a problem for somebody. And at the end of the day, that's what innovation is. It's finding a problem and solving that problem for yourself or whoever's having that problem. Mauro Porcini: And going maybe a little bit further, you know, many years ago, around 18 years ago, I was working at 3M. And 3M named that year, the year of customer satisfaction. The idea was, let's focus on the customer. Let's really celebrate and please the customer. This year more than ever. So was thinking about customer satisfaction and the etymology of the world satisfaction and the meaning of the word. And at a certain point, I realized that as a designer, as an innovator, I didn't care at all about satisfying the customer.I really didn't care at all about satisfying the customers. I wanted to love the customer. What is the big difference between satisfaction and love? Satisfaction is all about identifying a need and fulfilling the specific need. But if you love somebody could be your children, it could be your wife or husband, or your parents and your friends. You try to do more; you try to do the magic. Then expect to go above and beyond. To really surprise them. And this is what innovators, the real innovators do. They want to surprise. They want to do the magic. And you know that to surprise them, do the magic, you need an extra effort. You need to really change things. You need to do things that people do not expect. Not just the people you serve, but unfortunately, and this is the difficulty of doing innovation also, the people surrounding your boss. Your investors. Your colleague. There is a subtle difference between satisfaction and love, and I think love is really the word synthesized for innovation.Brian Ardinger: That's a great. You talk about in the book how you have to go after and find these, what you define as unicorn employees. The employees that possess a lot of these key talents that you're talking about. Can you expand on what a unicorn employee is and why it's so important to have them in your innovation space?Mauro Porcini: Well, the first definition that is also the subtitle of the book is There are People in Love with People. So, until now, we talked about how important it is to refocus everything on people. That's the second people in the sentence. We briefly talk about love that synthesizes essentially everything. The first people I started to focus on, the first people of the sentence that are innovators, entrepreneurs, the leaders of the world, the designers.Many years ago, for a very practical reason, you know, everything is in the book comes from the practical needs that I faced in my professional journey. Who was this need? Well, I was building design teams in 3M, and I was hiring people, and I had a series of technical skills. They needed to be the best possible designers.They also needed to be business savvy. They needed to have also you know, a series of characteristics that were very clear to me. And then I was giving more, less an idea of the soft skills that these people needed to have. And very soon I realized that it was so difficult to find the kind of talents that I wanted.They had all the technical skills there, the business skills, but they were missing when something was important to move projects forward. Something else happened in part. I was there to introduce design thinking and design driven innovation, or as we call that kind of innovation, human center innovation in 3M.And I was studying every other company, what they were doing, how they were applying innovation, big companies, small companies. And one of the trendy words of the time was Design Thinking. And of course, as a designer, I would introduce that idea inside the company. And they started to introduce the tools, the processes, the ways of working of Design Thinking.This is what you were reading in books, listening, hearing, conferences, and what the, the consultant out there were selling to these companies. And so here I am. I started to run dozens and then hundreds of projects with this methodology. And some of them were succeeding and some of them were miserably failing.And then you start to look at them. You start to analyze them. And then at the beginning I was thinking, okay, maybe the process is not the right one. I need to tweak it and evolve it and I need to change the way of working and some of the tools. And you do all of this and still some succeed in some not. And at that point you try to find what is the root cause of this. What are the common themes? And you're right to want conclusions. That is pretty obvious if you say, but the reality in the companies, people don't talk enough about this when they talk about innovation. The difference was made by the people driving the projects. And there were people with certain kind of characteristics and people with others. Mindset, ability to observe reality and take certain kind of decisions, extract certain kind of insights and learnings, courage to drive things forward to face roadblocks, ability to take orders with you.I mean, there are a series of skills that back then when I was hunting for all these people to join my teams at 3M, I listed literally in the list for my HR department. Because I needed these people to have this kind of characteristic. Then the list became a paper for the Design Management Institute Review. It became something that will share in conferences. And it became something very public for a simple reason because I wanted everybody out there that was interested to join my teams, to know what kind of people I was looking for.And so, in the past 17 years. I've been tweaking and evolving the list. And two-thirds of this book is about characteristics and the way these unicorns think and behave. And some of them are more obvious than others, like the ability to dream and think big when you talk about leaders and innovation, obviously you need to think big.It's not that easy though. You know, we think big, and we dream when we are children and then society try to convince us that is not okay. That that's a childish kind of activity. Because society wants to normalize people. They don't want people to dream too much because people need to be a feature and be stable, you know. Within the society that we have today.Instead, we need to find ways to protect those dreams and we need to understand that when we dream, we'll face people that will push back on us. They, they will stop us from dreaming because that's what they believe in. You shouldn't dream or you need to be practical. You need to be pragmatic. The problem is that then even if you succeed in dreaming, that's not enough.There are many people that dream, there are great visionaries, but are unable to make things happen. They stay up there in the dimension of dreaming. That is also very comfortable dimension because to make things happen is tough. So, you know the balance between dreaming and execution is very important.Now, this is something that you hear about when you talk about innovation. You talk about leadership; you talk about design. But there are other characteristics that are less obvious. For instance, kindness, optimism, curiosity. How many times you heard the CEO or a business leader or a hiring manager asking, is this person a kind person or is this person curious or optimistic and, and there are many others. Again, there are 24 traits of these innovators. And in my, again, journey, I found that these characteristics are what made the difference in my teams. At the beginning, even before I started to create this list, they were kind of intuitive. People love to be surrounded by people that are similar to them, so. I grew up in this family of kind people and optimistic people. I mean, it was just the way we were.I wish all Italians were like this. Actually Italy, we have the opposite. Yeah, kind maybe. I don't know. But is the opposite. I think the problem of Italy today is that we're not optimistic at all today. Unfortunately. At the second point, I realized with full awareness, the power of something like this. For instance, curiosity is what drives you to talk with others. To get out of your comfort zone and embrace people that think differently than you. Curious people usually love diversity because they see diversity, diversity of thinking and background, the precious gift of knowledge.They know that people that are different than them have something to offer to them and they can learn from. And it doesn't mean that the other point of view is better than yours. It means that through dialogue and therefore respect to other characteristics of the unicorns, ability to create a dialogue and respect. To dialogue and respect, you can build a bridge with these other perspectives and your perspective. Perspective number one, combine with perspective number two of the other person. Create a third or regional perspective, that is the novel perspective, is what drives innovation. Curiosity makes you read books and travel from one place to the other without just stopping at the meeting room where you're going because of the business commitment that you have. But going out in the city and getting lost in the city and observe people and falling in love with, you know, the way they talk, they behave, they dress, they eat, they drink, they read anything they do. Curiosity make you grow every single day. Brian Ardinger: So, I'm curious to know, so you talk about these particular traits and that. Do you think they can be trained and taught to folks that are already on your team. Or is this something you have to go out and hire for and is it, is it in fact a unicorn from the standpoint of it's a mythical creature that doesn't always exist and is hard to come by. Mauro Porcini: Yeah, exactly. First of all, as you mention it, the unicorn doesn't exist. The person that embodies, to the extreme, the 24 skills of the unicorn doesn't exist. And this is what the unicorn is about. Plato will place the unicorn in the world of ideas up there.The Unicorn is an idea you strive to for the rest of your life. You want to keep seeing your life as a never-ending opportunity that will end with your death eventually, depending on what you believe in. And opportunity to keep learning. And so that's what the unicorn is about. And therefore, is implicit in the very idea of the unicorn that you need to learn, that you can grow. You can improve, you can become a better unicorn than you were when you were born.So, I think there are two dimensions to the idea of the unicorn. On one side, there are talents you are born with, like you play soccer, and you are Maradona or Tennis, Serena Williams or you run and Usain Bolt. Those are people who are born with those talents, but they need to train also, Maradona, Serena Williams or Usain Bolt need to train that talent. We move people with goals. At the beginning, even just building awareness. Realizing that I am Maradona. You know how many amazing potential baseball player or tennis player are out there. And there are maybe employees in a company or doing other things because they never became aware on an amazing talent because they never happened to play baseball for example. They just, you know, they didn't do sport and they ended up, or they were swimming.And so the first role of education is build awareness about specific characteristics. And again, now we're talking about sports. But understanding the power of curiosity. Understanding the power of optimism. The power of humbleness. You know, a series of traits that can make the difference in your innovation journey.The second goal is that once you're aware, you want to practice so that you can take it to the next level. The third one is that you want to, when you right to a certain level, you know, a professional kind of level, you think that you are done, because you are there. You're up there, you've been successful. You did amazing innovation projects.You are Maradona. Somebody stopped learning, somebody stopped growing. And this is a big mistake driven by the opposite of one of the characteristics of the unicorn that is evidence. And the characteristic is that humbleness combined with confidence. So short answer, partially is natural talent, partially training. You may be born with less of a natural talent as a unicorn than somebody else. But you may become a better unicorn than a natural talent if you practice and if you get that kind of education. Brian Ardinger: You brought up the fact that you got to be a natural learner and continually prime that pump. How do you stay fresh and current and connected to new ideas and that?Mauro Porcini: Look, I practice that idea of curiosity I was describing also earlier. But while in the past was kind of random. Like I was just curious by nature. But it was very in efficient. Sometimes I was more curious, sometimes I was less. Today I force myself to be extra learner. And really, you know, for instance, you may already understand from this conversation between the two of us that I love a lot to talk and you put me in a room, we start to talk and I start, and then I learn over the years, when you are in the room and you meet people, people you know, but especially people you don't know, that if I was talking too much, I was wasting the opportunity to learn from others.So, one of the things I learned to do is to stop and list theme. Listen is so, so important. And also, not doing that just in a casual occasion, but also during a business meeting. During a design or innovation meeting. And this is so important because often people, for lack of confidence are there in those rooms feeling the gap of their, of the silence.We justify their presence there, to build their credibility, even if what they're saying is not really meaningful to the conversation. It's not really adding value. There are so many of these people and to them, almost bothered by that because I feel it in my skin, like a waste of time and lack of efficiency in that kind of conversation.I think we should talk when we add value to bring to the conversation, and we shouldn't when we don't. By the way, this value doesn't need to be just intellectual value. Maybe there is a moment that we need a joke or some irony. You know, to create a different vibe in the conversation. So, I'm talking about that.But this is something important I think, and we need to always keep in mind. And then finally, a little trick, again, very spontaneously for me, I am very, very active in social media. Especially in Instagram, in LinkedIn. And I post every day in Instagram especially. And so, posting every day, you always want to have interesting content to post.And so, this force you to walk the streets of life and be curious and see people around you and always hungry for an interesting thing that happens. So that you can snap that picture, that could become content. And it's not just the picture, but it's the story behind that picture. So, you need to observe, you need to understand what's going on, and then you need to give an angle, a perspective that is your unique, that helps so much being alert and looking around and always observe what's going on around you.Brian Ardinger: What it also allows you to do is to make mistakes. Like you can try things and you get better as you try things. I imagine the first time you posted a picture of your shoes, was maybe not the first best conversation piece, but I know that you do it on a regular basis and having the ability to learn and grow and change as you experience and do things, that's probably important trait as well. Mauro Porcini: Yeah. You, you, you say two things that I think are very important here. One is consistency. You may do things at the beginning, look weird, but if you do it consistently because in a consistent way, then it becomes part of your brand. Or you may do things that people perceive as not authentic because they're like, ah, that's not really him, you know, or her in your social media or at work in, you know, in what you do every day, your company. So, at the beginning, there will be this uncomfortable situation. People want to know, you know, why you're doing certain things. But if you keep doing that sooner or later, they will understand that you really believe in what you're doing. So, consistency is very powerful, but it requires a little bit of courage and getting out of your comfort zone at the beginning. When you disrupt, you do things differently. Brian Ardinger: So obviously you work at a company like PepsiCo that's always doing some amazing things out there in the consumers world and headspace. What are some of the trends that you're seeing or that you're excited about? Mauro Porcini: Well, there are three with an overarching platform that could be codified as an additional fourth trend. In our industry, but they're common also, many other industries. Sustainability, health and wellness, personalization, enabled by technology. Technology could attach itself to all of this dimension and really change the game. Sometimes people ask me, well, you've been 10 years at PepsiCo.You were 20 years earlier in 3M, where do you see yourself in the future? The first part of the answer is that you never know, right? I was not planning to leave 3M and then it happened. But I'm not planning to, to leave PepsiCo anytime soon. And one of the reasons why, since 10 years I'm doing exactly the same job. And I could keep doing a job eventually for 20 more years, is that it's exactly these four challenges that I just made.We're working in a industry that is in evolution. Is changing. And companies like PepsiCo give people like me, the platform to reach everyday billions of people. Billions of people. So even the incremental changes that eventually the media don't notice because they're not the next iPhone, who generate a positive impact, for instance, in sustainability, in health wellness.That is exponentially bigger than anything a small company is, can do, and is doing today. The impact what we're doing today, with a variety of different activities that human center design driven is unbelievable. So, it's so exciting to work on these four dimensions today in an industry like this, with a company to give you this kind of access and resources as well.For More InformationBrian Ardinger: It's exciting times we're living in for sure, and I really do appreciate you coming on Inside Outside Innovation, to kind of share your thoughts. I'm really excited about the book coming out. For folks who want to find out more about yourself or about the book, what's the best way to do that?Mauro Porcini: If you follow me, my Instagram, Mauro Porcini and my LinkedIn. Mauro Porcini as well. I'm pretty active there. And then there is the possibility eventually even to communicate directly. So probably are the best two platforms. Brian Ardinger: Well Mauro, thank you again for coming on the program. Very excited to continue the conversation in the years to come and appreciate your time. Mauro Porcini: Thank you. Thank you, Brian. Brian Ardinger: That's it for another episode of Inside Outside Innovation. If you want to learn more about our team, our content, our services, check out InsideOutside.io or follow us on Twitter @theIOpodcast or @Ardinger. Until next time, go out and innovate.FREE INNOVATION NEWSLETTER & TOOLSGet the latest episodes of the Inside Outside Innovation podcast, in addition to thought leadership in the form of blogs, innovation resources, videos, and invitations to exclusive events. SUBSCRIBE HEREYou can also search every Inside Outside Innovation Podcast by Topic and Company. For more innovations resources, check out IO's Innovation Article Database, Innovation Tools Database, Innovation Book Database, and Innovation Video Database.
About ChetanChetan Venkatesh is a technology startup veteran focused on distributed data, edge computing, and software products for enterprises and developers. He has 20 years of experience in building primary data storage, databases, and data replication products. Chetan holds a dozen patents in the area of distributed computing and data storage.Chetan is the CEO and Co-Founder of Macrometa – a Global Data Network featuring a Global Data Mesh, Edge Compute, and In-Region Data Protection. Macrometa helps enterprise developers build real-time apps and APIs in minutes – not months.Links Referenced: Macrometa: https://www.macrometa.com Macrometa Developer Week: https://www.macrometa.com/developer-week TranscriptAnnouncer: Hello, and welcome to Screaming in the Cloud with your host, Chief Cloud Economist at The Duckbill Group, Corey Quinn. This weekly show features conversations with people doing interesting work in the world of cloud, thoughtful commentary on the state of the technical world, and ridiculous titles for which Corey refuses to apologize. This is Screaming in the Cloud.Corey: Forget everything you know about SSH and try Tailscale. Imagine if you didn't need to manage PKI or rotate SSH keys every time someone leaves. That'd be pretty sweet, wouldn't it? With Tailscale SSH, you can do exactly that. Tailscale gives each server and user device a node key to connect to its VPN, and it uses the same node key to authorize and authenticate SSH.Basically you're SSHing the same way you manage access to your app. What's the benefit here? Built in key rotation permissions is code connectivity between any two devices, reduce latency and there's a lot more, but there's a time limit here. You can also ask users to reauthenticate for that extra bit of security. Sounds expensive?Nope, I wish it were. tail scales. Completely free for personal use on up to 20 devices. To learn more, visit snark.cloud/tailscale. Again, that's snark.cloud/tailscaleCorey: Managing shards. Maintenance windows. Overprovisioning. ElastiCache bills. I know, I know. It's a spooky season and you're already shaking. It's time for caching to be simpler. Momento Serverless Cache lets you forget the backend to focus on good code and great user experiences. With true autoscaling and a pay-per-use pricing model, it makes caching easy. No matter your cloud provider, get going for free at gomomento.co/screaming That's GO M-O-M-E-N-T-O dot co slash screamingCorey: Welcome to Screaming in the Cloud. I'm Corey Quinn. Today, this promoted guest episode is brought to us basically so I can ask a question that has been eating at me for a little while. That question is, what is the edge? Because I have a lot of cynical sarcastic answers to it, but that doesn't really help understanding. My guest today is Chetan Venkatesh, CEO and co-founder at Macrometa. Chetan, thank you for joining me.Chetan: It's my pleasure, Corey. You're one of my heroes. I think I've told you this before, so I am absolutely delighted to be here.Corey: Well, thank you. We all need people to sit on the curb and clap as we go by and feel like giant frauds in the process. So let's start with the easy question that sets up the rest of it. Namely, what is Macrometa, and what puts you in a position to be able to speak at all, let alone authoritatively, on what the edge might be?Chetan: I'll answer the second part of your question first, which is, you know, what gives me the authority to even talk about this? Well, for one, I've been trying to solve the same problem for 20 years now, which is build distributed systems that work really fast and can answer questions about data in milliseconds. And my journey's sort of been like the spiral staircase journey, you know, I keep going around in circles, but the view just keeps getting better every time I do one of these things. So I'm on my fourth startup doing distributed data infrastructure, and this time really focused on trying to provide a platform that's the antithesis of the cloud. It's kind of like taking the cloud and flipping it on its head because instead of having a single region application where all your stuff runs in one place, on us-west-1 or us-east-1, what if your apps could run everywhere, like, they could run in hundreds and hundreds of cities around the world, much closer to where your users and devices and most importantly, where interesting things in the real world are happening?And so we started Macrometa about five years back to build a new kind of distributed cloud—let's call the edge—that kind of looks like a CDN, a Content Delivery Network, but really brings very sophisticated platform-level primitives for developers to build applications in a distributed way around primitives for compute, primitives for data, but also some very interesting things that you just can't do in the cloud anymore. So that's Macrometa. And we're doing something with edge computing, which is a big buzzword these days, but I'm sure you'll ask me about that.Corey: It seems to be. Generally speaking, when I look around and companies are talking about edge, it feels almost like it is a redefining of what they already do to use a term that is currently trending and deep in the hype world.Chetan: Yeah. You know, I think humans just being biologically social beings just tend to be herd-like, and so when we see a new trend, we like to slap it on everything we have. We did that 15 years back with cloud, if you remember, you know? Everybody was very busy trying to stick the cloud label on everything that was on-prem. Edge is sort of having that edge-washing moment right now.But I define edge very specifically is very different from the cloud. You know, where the cloud is defined by centralization, i.e., you've got a giant hyperscale data center somewhere far, far away, where typically electricity, real estate, and those things are reasonably cheap, i.e., not in urban centers, where those things tend to be expensive.You know, you have platforms where you run things at scale, it's sort of a your mess for less business in the cloud and somebody else manages that for you. The edge is actually defined by location. And there are three types of edges. The first edge is the CDN edge, which is historically where we've been trying to make things faster with the internet and make the internet scale. So Akamai came about, about 20 years back and created this thing called the CDN that allowed the web to scale. And that was the first killer app for edge, actually. So that's the first location that defines the edge where a lot of the peering happens between different network providers and the on-ramp around the cloud happens.The second edge is the telecom edge. That's actually right next to you in terms of, you know, the logical network topology because every time you do something on your computer, it goes through that telecom layer. And now we have the ability to actually run web services, applications, data, directly from that telecom layer.And then the third edge is—sort of, people have been familiar with this for 30 years. The third edge is your device, just your mobile phone. It's your internet gateway and, you know, things that you carry around in your pocket or sit on your desk, where you have some compute power, but it's very restricted and it only deals with things that are interesting or important to you as a person, not in a broad range. So those are sort of the three things. And it's not the cloud. And these three things are now becoming important as a place for you to build and run enterprise apps.Corey: Something that I think is often overlooked here—and this is sort of a natural consequence of the cloud's own success and the joy that we live in a system that we do where companies are required to always grow and expand and find new markets—historically, for example, when I went to AWS re:Invent, which is a cloud service carnival in the desert that no one in the right mind should ever want to attend but somehow we keep doing, it used to be that, oh, these announcements are generally all aligned with people like me, where I have specific problems and they look a lot like what they're talking about on stage. And now they're talking about things that, from that perspective, seem like Looney Tunes. Like, I'm trying to build Twitter for Pets or something close to it, and I don't understand why there's so much talk about things like industrial IoT and, “Machine learning,” quote-unquote, and other things that just do not seem to align with. I'm trying to build a web service, like it says on the name of a company; what gives?And part of that, I think, is that it's difficult to remember, for most of us—especially me—that what they're coming out with is not your shopping list. Every service is for someone, not every service is for everyone, so figuring out what it is that they're talking about and what those workloads look like, is something that I think is getting lost in translation. And in our defense—collective defense—Amazon is not the best at telling stories to realize that, oh, this is not me they're talking to; I'm going to opt out of this particular thing. You figure it out by getting it wrong first. Does that align with how you see the market going?Chetan: I think so. You know, I think of Amazon Web Services, or even Google, or Azure as sort of Costco and, you know, Sam's Wholesale Club or whatever, right? They cater to a very broad audience and they sell a lot of stuff in bulk and cheap. And you know, so it's sort of a lowest common denominator type of a model. And so emerging applications, and especially emerging needs that enterprises have, don't necessarily get solved in the cloud. You've got to go and build up yourself on sort of the crude primitives that they provide.So okay, go use your bare basic EC2, your S3, and build your own edgy, or whatever, you know, cutting edge thing you want to build over there. And if enough people are doing it, I'm sure Amazon and Google start to pay interest and you know, develop something that makes it easier. So you know, I agree with you, they're not the best at this sort of a thing. The edge is phenomenon also that's orthogonally, and diametrically opposite to the architecture of the cloud and the economics of the cloud.And we do centralization in the cloud in a big way. Everything is in one place; we make giant piles of data in one database or data warehouse slice and dice it, and almost all our computer science is great at doing things in a centralized way. But when you take data and chop it into 50 copies and keep it in 50 different places on Earth, and you have this thing called the internet or the wide area network in the middle, trying to keep all those copies in sync is a nightmare. So you start to deal with some very basic computer science problems like distributed state and how do you build applications that have a consistent view of that distributed state? So you know, there have been attempts to solve these problems for 15, 18 years, but none of those attempts have really cracked the intersection of three things: a way for programmers to do this in a way that doesn't blow their heads with complexity, a way to do this cheaply and effectively enough where you can build real-world applications that serve billions of users concurrently at a cost point that actually is economical and make sense, and third, a way to do this with adequate levels of performance where you don't die waiting for the spinning wheel on your screen to go away.So these are the three problems with edge. And as I said, you know, me and my team, we've been focused on this for a very long while. And me and my co-founder have come from this world and we created a platform very uniquely designed to solve these three problems, the problems of complexity for programmers to build in a distributed environment like this where data sits in hundreds of places around the world and you need a consistent view of that data, being able to operate and modify and replicate that data with consistency guarantees, and then a third one, being able to do that, at high levels of performance, which translates to what we call ultra-low latency, which is human perception. The threshold of human perception, visually, is about 70 milliseconds. Our finest athletes, the best Esports players are about 70 to 80 milliseconds in their twitch, in their ability to twitch when something happens on the screen. The average human is about 100 to 110 milliseconds.So in a second, we can maybe do seven things at rapid rates. You know, that's how fast our brain can process it. Anything that falls below 100 milliseconds—especially if it falls into 50 to 70 milliseconds—appears instantaneous to the human mind and we experience it as magic. And so where edge computing and where my platform comes in is that it literally puts data and applications within 50 milliseconds of 90% of humans and devices on Earth and allows now a whole new set of applications where latency and location and the ability to control those things with really fine-grained capability matters. And we can talk a little more about what those apps are in a bit.Corey: And I think that's probably an interesting place to dive into at the moment because whenever we talk about the idea of new ways of building things that are aimed at decentralization, first, people at this point automatically have a bit of an aversion to, “Wait, are you talking about some of the Web3 nonsense?” It's one of those look around the poker table and see if you can spot the sucker, and if you can't, it's you. Because there are interesting aspects to that entire market, let's be clear, but it also seems to be occluded by so much of the grift and nonsense and spam and the rest that, again, sort of characterize the early internet as well. The idea though, of decentralizing out of the cloud is deeply compelling just to anyone who's really ever had to deal with the egress charges, or even the data transfer charges inside of one of the cloud providers. The counterpoint is it feels that historically, you either get to pay the tax and go all-in on a cloud provider and get all the higher-level niceties, or otherwise, you wind up deciding you're going to have to more or less go back to physical data centers, give or take, and other than the very baseline primitives that you get to work with of VMs and block storage and maybe a load balancer, you're building it all yourself from scratch. It seems like you're positioning this as setting up for a third option. I'd be very interested to hear it.Chetan: Yeah. And a quick comment on decentralization: good; not so sure about the Web3 pieces around it. We tend to talk about computer science and not the ideology of distributing data. There are political reasons, there are ideological reasons around data and sovereignty and individual human rights, and things like that. There are people far smarter than me who should explain that.I fall personally into the Nicholas Weaver school of skepticism about Web3 and blockchain and those types of things. And for readers who are not familiar with Nicholas Weaver, please go online. He teaches at UC Berkeley is just one of the finest minds of our time. And I think he's broken down some very good reasons why we should be skeptical about, sort of, Web3 and, you know, things like that. Anyway, that's a digression.Coming back to what we're talking about, yes, it is a new paradigm, but that's the challenge, which is I don't want to introduce a new paradigm. I want to provide a continuum. So what we've built is a platform that looks and feels very much like Lambdas, and a poly-model database. I hate the word multi. It's a pretty dumb word, so I've started to substitute ‘multi' with ‘poly' everywhere, wherever I can find it.So it's not multi-cloud; it's poly-cloud. And it's not multi-model; it's poly-model. Because what we want is a world where developers have the ability to use the best paradigm for solving problems. And it turns out when we build applications that deal with data, data doesn't just come in one form, it comes in many different forms, it's polymorphic, and so you need a data platform, that's also, you know, polyglot and poly-model to be able to handle that. So that's one part of the problem, which is, you know, we're trying to provide a platform that provides continuity by looking like a key-value store like Redis. It looks like a document database—Corey: Or the best database in the world Route 53 TXT records. But please, keep going.Chetan: Well, we've got that too, so [laugh] you know? And then we've got a streaming graph engine built into it that kind of looks and behaves like a graph database, like Neo4j, for example. And, you know, it's got columnar capabilities as well. So it's sort of a really interesting data platform that is not open-source; it's proprietary because it's designed to solve these problems of being able to distribute data, put it in hundreds of locations, keep it all in sync, but it looks like a conventional NoSQL database. And it speaks PostgreSQL, so if you know PostgreSQL, you can program it, you know, pretty easily.What it's also doing is taking away the responsibility for engineers and developers to understand how to deal with very arcane problems like conflict resolution in data. I made a change in Mumbai; you made a change in Tokyo; who wins? Our systems in the cloud—you know, DynamoDB, and things like that—they have very crude answers for this something called last writer wins. We've done a lot of work to build a protocol that brings you ACID-like consistency in these types of problems and makes it easy to reason with state change when you've got an application that's potentially running in 100 locations and each of those places is modifying the same record, for example.And then the second part of it is it's a converged platform. So it doesn't just provide data; it provides a compute layer that's deeply integrated directly with the data layer itself. So think of it as Lambdas running, like, stored procedures inside the database. That's really what it is. We've built a very, very specialized compute engine that exposes containers in functions as stored procedures directly on the database.And so they run inside the context of the database and so you can build apps in Python, Go, your favorite language; it compiles down into a [unintelligible 00:15:02] kernel that actually runs inside the database among all these different polyglot interfaces that we have. And the third thing that we do is we provide an ability for you to have very fine-grained control on your data. Because today, data's become a political tool; it's become something that nation-states care a lot about.Corey: Oh, do they ever.Chetan: Exactly. And [unintelligible 00:15:24] regulated. So here's the problem. You're an enterprise architect and your application is going to be consumed in 15 countries, there are 13 different frameworks to deal with. What do you do? Well, you spin up 13 different versions, one for each country, and you know, build 13 different teams, and have 13 zero-day attacks and all that kind of craziness, right?Well, data protection is actually one of the most important parts of the edge because, with something like Macrometa, you can build an app once, and we'll provide all the necessary localization for any region processing, data protection with things like tokenization of data so you can exfiltrate data securely without violating potentially PII sensitive data exfiltration laws within countries, things like that, i.e. It's solving some really hard problems by providing an opinionated platform that does these three things. And I'll summarize it as thus, Corey, we can kind of dig into each piece. Our platform is called the Global Data Network. It's not a global database; it's a global data network. It looks like a frickin database, but it's actually a global network available in 175 cities around the world.Corey: The challenge, of course, is where does the data actually live at rest, and—this is why people care about—well, they're two reasons people care about that; one is the data residency locality stuff, which has always, honestly for me, felt a little bit like a bit of a cloud provider shakedown. Yeah, build a data center here or you don't get any of the business of anything that falls under our regulation. The other is, what is the egress cost of that look like? Because yeah, I can build a whole multicenter data store on top of AWS, for example, but minimum, we're talking two cents, a gigabyte of transfer, even with inside of a region in some cases, and many times that externally.Chetan: Yeah, that's the real shakedown: the egress costs [laugh] more than the other example that you talked about over there. But it's a reality of how cloud pricing works and things like that. What we have built is a network that is completely independent of the cloud providers. We're built on top of five different service providers. Some of them are cloud providers, some of them are telecom providers, some of them are CDNs.And so we're building our global data network on top of routes and capacity provided by transfer providers who have different economics than the cloud providers do. So our cost for egress falls somewhere between two and five cents, for example, depending on which edge locations, which countries, and things that you're going to use over there. We've got a pretty generous egress fee where, you know, for certain thresholds, there's no egress charge at all, but over certain thresholds, we start to charge between two to five cents. But even if you were to take it at the higher end of that spectrum, five cents per gigabyte for transfer, the amount of value our platform brings in architecture and reduction in complexity and the ability to build apps that are frankly, mind-boggling—one of my customers is a SaaS company in marketing that uses us to inject offers while people are on their website, you know, browsing. Literally, you hit their website, you do a few things, and then boom, there's a customized offer for them.In banking that's used, for example, you know, you're making your minimum payments on your credit card, but you have a good payment history and you've got a decent credit score, well, let's give you an offer to give you a short-term loan, for example. So those types of new applications, you know, are really at this intersection where you need low latency, you need in-region processing, and you also need to comply with data regulation. So when you building a high-value revenue-generating app like that egress cost, even at five cents, right, tends to be very, very cheap, and the smallest part of you know, the complexity of building them.Corey: One of the things that I think we see a lot of is that the tone of this industry is set by the big players, and they have done a reasonable job, by and large, of making anything that isn't running in their blessed environments, let me be direct, sound kind of shitty, where it's like, “Oh, do you want to be smart and run things in AWS?”—or GCP? Or Azure, I guess—“Or do you want to be foolish and try and build it yourself out of popsicle sticks and twine?” And, yeah, on some level, if I'm trying to treat everything like it's AWS and run a crappy analog version of DynamoDB, for example, I'm not going to have a great experience, but if I also start from a perspective of not using things that are higher up the stack offerings, that experience starts to look a lot more reasonable as we start expanding out. But it still does present to a lot of us as well, we're just going to run things in VM somewhere and treat them just like we did back in 2005. What's changed in that perspective?Chetan: Yeah, you know, I can't talk for others but for us, we provide a high-level Platform-as-a-Service, and that platform, the global data network, has three pieces to it. First piece is—and none of this will translate into anything that AWS or GCP has because this is the edge, Corey, is completely different, right? So the global data network that we have is composed of three technology components. The first one is something that we call the global data mesh. And this is Pub/Sub and event processing on steroids. We have the ability to connect data sources across all kinds of boundaries; you've got some data in Germany and you've got some data in New York. How do you put these things together and get them streaming so that you can start to do interesting things with correlating this data, for example?And you might have to get across not just physical boundaries, like, they're sitting in different systems in different data centers; they might be logical boundaries, like, hey, I need to collaborate with data from my supply chain partner and we need to be able to do something that's dynamic in real-time, you know, to solve a business problem. So the global data mesh is a way to very quickly connect data wherever it might be in legacy systems, in flat files, in streaming databases, in data warehouses, what have you—you know, we have 500-plus types of connectors—but most importantly, it's not just getting the data streaming, it's then turning it into an API and making that data fungible. Because the minute you put an API on it and it's become fungible now that data is actually got a lot of value. And so the data mesh is a way to very quickly connect things up and put an API on it. And that API can now be consumed by front-ends, it can be consumed by other microservices, things like that.Which brings me to the second piece, which is edge compute. So we've built a compute runtime that is Docker compatible, so it runs containers, it's also Lambda compatible, so it runs functions. Let me rephrase that; it's not Lambda-compatible, it's Lambda-like. So no, you can't take your Lambda and dump it on us and it won't just work. You have to do some things to make it work on us.Corey: But so many of those things are so deeply integrated to the ecosystem that they're operating within, and—Chetan: Yeah.Corey: That, on the one hand, is presented by cloud providers as, “Oh, yes. This shows how wonderful these things are.” In practice, talk to customers. “Yeah, we're using it as spackle between the different cloud services that don't talk to one another despite being made by the same company.”Chetan: [laugh] right.Corey: It's fun.Chetan: Yeah. So the second edge compute piece, which allows you now to build microservices that are stateful, i.e., they have data that they interact with locally, and schedule them along with the data on our network of 175 regions around the world. So you can build distributed applications now.Now, your microservice back-end for your banking application or for your HR SaaS application or e-commerce application is not running in us-east-1 and Virginia; it's running literally in 15, 18, 25 cities where your end-users are, potentially. And to take an industrial IoT case, for example, you might be ingesting data from the electricity grid in 15, 18 different cities around the world; you can do all of that locally now. So that's what the edge functions does, it flips the cloud model around because instead of sending data to where the compute is in the cloud, you're actually bringing compute to where the data is originating, or the data is being consumed, such as through a mobile app. So that's the second piece.And the third piece is global data protection, which is hey, now I've got a distributed infrastructure; how do I comply with all the different privacy and regulatory frameworks that are out there? How do I keep data secure in each region? How do I potentially share data between regions in such a way that, you know, I don't break the model of compliance globally and create a billion-dollar headache for my CIO and CEO and CFO, you know? So that's the third piece of capabilities that this provides.All of this is presented as a set of serverless APIs. So you simply plug these APIs into your existing applications. Some of your applications work great in the cloud. Maybe there are just parts of that app that should be on our edge. And that's usually where most customers start; they take a single web service or two that's not doing so great in the cloud because it's too far away; it has data sensitivity, location sensitivity, time sensitivity, and so they use us as a way to just deal with that on the edge.And there are other applications where it's completely what I call edge native, i.e., no dependancy on the cloud comes and runs completely distributed across our network and consumes primarily the edges infrastructure, and just maybe send some data back on the cloud for long-term storage or long-term analytics.Corey: And ingest does remain free. The long-term analytics, of course, means that once that data is there, good luck convincing a customer to move it because that gets really expensive.Chetan: Exactly, exactly. It's a speciation—as I like to say—of the cloud, into a fast tier where interactions happen, i.e., the edge. So systems of record are still in the cloud; we still have our transactional systems over there, our databases, data warehouses.And those are great for historical types of data, as you just mentioned, but for things that are operational in nature, that are interactive in nature, where you really need to deal with them because they're time-sensitive, they're depleting value in seconds or milliseconds, they're location sensitive, there's a lot of noise in the data and you need to get to just those bits of data that actually matter, throw the rest away, for example—which is what you do with a lot of telemetry in cybersecurity, for example, right—those are all the things that require a new kind of a platform, not a system of record, a system of interaction, and that's what the global data network is, the GDN. And these three primitives, the data mesh, Edge compute, and data protection, are the way that our APIs are shaped to help our enterprise customers solve these problems. So put it another way, imagine ten years from now what DynamoDB and global tables with a really fast Lambda and Kinesis with actually Event Processing built directly into Kinesis might be like. That's Macrometa today, available in 175 cities.Corey: This episode is brought to us in part by our friends at Datadog. Datadog is a SaaS monitoring and security platform that enables full-stack observability for modern infrastructure and applications at every scale. Datadog enables teams to see everything: dashboarding, alerting, application performance monitoring, infrastructure monitoring, UX monitoring, security monitoring, dog logos, and log management, in one tightly integrated platform. With 600-plus out-of-the-box integrations with technologies including all major cloud providers, databases, and web servers, Datadog allows you to aggregate all your data into one platform for seamless correlation, allowing teams to troubleshoot and collaborate together in one place, preventing downtime and enhancing performance and reliability. Get started with a free 14-day trial by visiting datadoghq.com/screaminginthecloud, and get a free t-shirt after installing the agent.Corey: I think it's also worth pointing out that it's easy for me to fall into a trap that I wonder if some of our listeners do as well, which is, I live in, basically, downtown San Francisco. I have gigabit internet connectivity here, to the point where when it goes out, it is suspicious and more a little bit frightening because my ISP—Sonic.net—is amazing and deserves every bit of praise that you never hear any ISP ever get. But when I travel, it's a very different experience. When I go to oh, I don't know, the conference center at re:Invent last year and find that the internet is patchy at best, or downtown San Francisco on Verizon today, I discover that the internet is almost non-existent, and suddenly applications that I had grown accustomed to just working suddenly didn't.And there's a lot more people who live far away from these data center regions and tier one backbones directly to same than don't. So I think that there's a lot of mistaken ideas around exactly what the lower bandwidth experience of the internet is today. And that is something that feels inadvertently classist if that make sense. Are these geographically bigoted?Chetan: Yeah. No, I think those two points are very well articulated. I wish I could articulate it that well. But yes, if you can afford 5G, some of those things get better. But again, 5G is not everywhere yet. It will be, but 5G can in many ways democratize at least one part of it, which is provide an overlap network at the edge, where if you left home and you switched networks, on to a wireless, you can still get the same quality of service that you used to getting from Sonic, for example. So I think it can solve some of those things in the future. But the second part of it—what did you call it? What bigoted?Corey: Geographically bigoted. And again, that's maybe a bit of a strong term, but it's easy to forget that you can't get around the speed of light. I would say that the most poignant example of that I had was when I was—in the before times—giving a keynote in Australia. So ah, I know what I'll do, I'll spin up an EC2 instance for development purposes—because that's how I do my development—in Australia. And then I would just pay my provider for cellular access for my iPad and that was great.And I found the internet was slow as molasses for everything I did. Like, how do people even live here? Well, turns out that my provider would backhaul traffic to the United States. So to log into my session, I would wind up having to connect with a local provider, backhaul to the US, then connect back out from there to Australia across the entire Pacific Ocean, talk to the server, get the response, would follow that return path. It's yeah, turns out that doing laps around the world is not the most efficient way of transferring any data whatsoever, let alone in sizable amounts.Chetan: And that's why we decided to call our platform the global data network, Corey. In fact, it's really built inside of sort of a very simple reason is that we have our own network underneath all of this and we stop this whole ping-pong effect of data going around and help create deterministic guarantees around latency, around location, around performance. We're trying to democratize latency and these types of problems in a way that programmers shouldn't have to worry about all this stuff. You write your code, you push publish, it runs on a network, and it all gets there with a guarantee that 95% of all your requests will happen within 50 milliseconds round-trip time, from any device, you know, in these population centers around the world.So yeah, it's a big deal. It's sort of one of our je ne sais quoi pieces in our mission and charter, which is to just democratize latency and access, and sort of get away from this geographical nonsense of, you know, how networks work and it will dynamically switch topology and just make everything slow, you know, very non-deterministic way.Corey: One last topic that I want to ask you about—because I near certain given your position, you will have an opinion on this—what's your take on, I guess, the carbon footprint of clouds these days? Because a lot of people been talking about it; there has been a lot of noise made about, justifiably so. I'm curious to get your take.Chetan: Yeah, you know, it feels like we're in the '30s and the '40s of the carbon movement when it comes to clouds today, right? Maybe there's some early awareness of the problem, but you know, frankly, there's very little we can do than just sort of put a wet finger in the air, compute some carbon offset and plant some trees. I think these are good building blocks; they're not necessarily the best ways to solve this problem, ultimately. But one of the things I care deeply about and you know, my company cares a lot about is helping make developers more aware off what kind of carbon footprint their code tangibly has on the environment. And so we've started two things inside the company. We've started a foundation that we call the Carbon Conscious Computing Consortium—the four C's. We're going to announce that publicly next year, we're going to invite folks to come and join us and be a part of it.The second thing that we're doing is we're building a completely open-source, carbon-conscious computing platform that is built on real data that we're collecting about, to start with, how Macrometa's platform emits carbon in response to different types of things you build on it. So for example, you wrote a query that hits our database and queries, you know, I don't know, 20 billion objects inside of our database. It'll tell you exactly how many micrograms or how many milligrams of carbon—it's an estimate; not exactly. I got to learn to throttle myself down. It's an estimate, you know, you can't really measure these things exactly because the cost of carbon is different in different places, you know, there are different technologies, et cetera.Gives you a good decent estimate, something that reliably tells you, “Hey, you know that query that you have over there, that piece of SQL? That's probably going to do this much of micrograms of carbon at this scale.” You know, if this query was called a million times every hour, this is how much it costs. A million times a day, this is how much it costs and things like that. But the most important thing that I feel passionate about is that when we give developers visibility, they do good things.I mean, when we give them good debugging tools, the code gets better, the code gets faster, the code gets more efficient. And Corey, you're in the business of helping people save money, when we give them good visibility into how much their code costs to run, they make the code more efficient. So we're doing the same thing with carbon, we know there's a cost to run your code, whether it's a function, a container, a query, what have you, every operation has a carbon cost. And we're on a mission to measure that and provide accurate tooling directly in our platform so that along with your debug lines, right, where you've got all these print statements that are spitting up stuff about what's happening there, we can also print out, you know, what did it cost in carbon.And you can set budgets. You can basically say, “Hey, I want my application to consume this much of carbon.” And down the road, we'll have AI and ML models that will help us optimize your code to be able to fit within those carbon budgets. For example. I'm not a big fan of planting—you know, I love planting trees, but don't get me wrong, we live in California and those trees get burned down.And I was reading this heartbreaking story about how we returned back into the atmosphere a giant amount of carbon because the forest reserve that had been planted, you know, that was capturing carbon, you know, essentially got burned down in a forest fire. So, you know, we're trying to just basically say, let's try and reduce the amount of carbon, you know, that we can potentially create by having better tooling.Corey: That would be amazing, and I think it also requires something that I guess acts almost as an exchange where there's a centralized voice that can make sure that, well, one, the provider is being honest, and two, being able to ensure you're doing an apples-to-apples comparison and not just discounting a whole lot of negative externalities. Because, yes, we're talking about carbon released into the environment. Okay, great. What about water effects from what's happening with your data centers are located? That can have significant climate impact as well. It's about trying to avoid the picking and choosing. It's hard, hard problem, but I'm unconvinced that there's anything more critical in the entire ecosystem right now to worry about.Chetan: So as a startup, we care very deeply about starting with the carbon part. And I agree, Corey, it's a multi-dimensional problem; there's lots of tentacles. The hydrocarbon industry goes very deeply into all parts of our lives. I'm a startup, what do I know? I can't solve all of those things, but I wanted to start with the philosophy that if we provide developers with the right tooling, they'll have the right incentives then to write better code. And as we open-source more of what we learn and, you know, our tooling, others will do the same. And I think in ten years, we might have better answers. But someone's got to start somewhere, and this is where we'd like to start.Corey: I really want to thank you for taking as much time as you have for going through what you're up to and how you view the world. If people want to learn more, where's the best place to find you?Chetan: Yes, so two things on that front. Go to www.macrometa.com—M-A-C-R-O-M-E-T-A dot com—and that's our website. And you can come and experience the full power of the platform. We've got a playground where you can come, open an account and build anything you want for free, and you can try and learn. You just can't run it in production because we've got a giant network, as I said, of 175 cities around the world. But there are tiers available for you to purchase and build and run apps. Like I think about 80 different customers, some of the biggest ones in the world, some of the biggest telecom customers, retail, E-Tail customers, [unintelligible 00:34:28] tiny startups are building some interesting things on.And the second thing I want to talk about is November 7th through 11th of 2022, just a couple of weeks—or maybe by the time this recording comes out, a week from now—is developer week at Macrometa. And we're going to be announcing some really interesting new capabilities, some new features like real-time complex event processing with low, ultra-low latency, data connectors, a search feature that allows you to build search directly on top of your applications without needing to spin up a giant Elastic Cloud Search cluster, or providing search locally and regionally so that, you know, you can have search running in 25 cities that are instant to search rather than sending all your search requests back in one location. There's all kinds of very cool things happening over there.And we're also announcing a partnership with the original, the OG of the edge, one of the largest, most impressive, interesting CDN players that has become a partner for us as well. And then we're also announcing some very interesting experimental work where you as a developer can build apps directly on the 5G telecom cloud as well. And then you'll hear from some interesting companies that are building apps that are edge-native, that are impossible to build in the cloud because they take advantage of these three things that we talked about: geography, latency, and data protection in some very, very powerful ways. So you'll hear actual customer case studies from real customers in the flesh, not anonymous BS, no marchitecture. It's a week-long of technical talk by developers, for developers. And so, you know, come and join the fun and let's learn all about the edge together, and let's go build something together that's impossible to do today.Corey: And we will, of course, put links to that in the [show notes 00:36:06]. Thank you so much for being so generous with your time. I appreciate it.Chetan: My pleasure, Corey. Like I said, you're one of my heroes. I've always loved your work. The Snark-as-a-Service is a trillion-dollar market cap company. If you're ever interested in taking that public, I know some investors that I'd happily put you in touch with. But—Corey: Sadly, so many of those investors lack senses of humor.Chetan: [laugh]. That is true. That is true [laugh].Corey: [laugh]. [sigh].Chetan: Well, thank you. Thanks again for having me.Corey: Thank you. Chetan Venkatesh, CEO and co-founder at Macrometa. I'm Cloud Economist Corey Quinn and this is Screaming in the Cloud. If you've enjoyed this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, whereas if you've hated this podcast, please leave a five-star review on your podcast platform of choice, along with an angry and insulting comment about why we should build everything on the cloud provider that you work for and then the attempt to challenge Chetan for the title of Edgelord.Corey: If your AWS bill keeps rising and your blood pressure is doing the same, then you need The Duckbill Group. We help companies fix their AWS bill by making it smaller and less horrifying. The Duckbill Group works for you, not AWS. We tailor recommendations to your business and we get to the point. Visit duckbillgroup.com to get started.Announcer: This has been a HumblePod production. Stay humble.
[iframe style="border:none" src="//html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/24802530/height/100/width//thumbnail/yes/render-playlist/no/theme/custom/tdest_id/2148560/custom-color/61ce70" height="100" width="100%" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen oallowfullscreen msallowfullscreen] A Due Process Hearing is just one of the dispute resolution options available to parents of children with special education needs. But what is a Due Process Hearing? In special education, Due Process Hearings are not often fully adjudicated, because the issues are resolved through some form of settlement. In fact, I'm pretty sure special education is the only civil right we negotiate away. For those fully adjudicated, parents rarely win. The school has significantly more resources (from their administrative staff to their on call attorney). Parents simply don't have the same legal, financial, and emotional ability to pursue and complete a full due process hearing. And that is why it is so exciting when a parent wins!! Today, we look at due process hearings through the lens of one specific case in Connecticut in which the Parents prevailed. Meredith Braxton is a special education attorney in private practice in Greenwich, CT (bio below), who recently prevailed in an interesting due process hearing right here in Connecticut. We discuss the process, the facts, and the final decision as we break down this special education due process hearing. Meredith C. Braxton, Esq., has been practicing law for 32 years, with a primary focus on special education for 20 years. After spending time in general and business litigation in "big law" in New York City and two smaller Connecticut firms, Meredith started a solo practice and began representing students and parents in their efforts to enforce their civil rights by having their children identified, securing appropriate services, and enforcing their rights to appropriate placements, whether via PPT, negotiation, an administrative due process hearing, or appeal to the federal courts. Her office is in Greenwich. Meredith is also a partner in a companion practice with her colleague Liz Hook (Braxton Hook) to represent families in New York in special education matters and individuals in both Connecticut and New York in education-related civil rights and tort cases as well as employment matters. The full decision can be found here. You can find Meredith's contact info here. FLASHBACK: If you are curious about other dispute resolution options, you can check out the episodes What's the Deal with Mediation, State Complaints, and Special Ed 101! Check out this episode! TRANSCRIPT (not proofread) SUMMARY KEYWORDSwitnesses, hearing, decision, officer, felt, parents, child, school district, case, board, argument, student, attorney, people, meredith, thought, footnotes, understand, works, remedy SPEAKERS Meredith Braxton, Esq., Dana Jonson Dana Jonson 00:08 All right. Welcome back to Special Ed on special ed. Thank you for coming back and joining me today. Today I am meeting with Meredith Braxton one of my favorite Special Ed attorneys from Connecticut. Hello, Meredith. Thank you for joining me. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 00:21 Good morning. Dana Jonson 00:22 Good morning, we're going to discuss a case in which Meredith prevailed and discuss the components of a due process hearing, or decision, or pleading or all of that, through this one case, in which Meredith prevailed. But before we say one word, I'm gonna play my disclaimer for you all. The information in this podcast is provided for general informational and entertainment purposes only, and may not reflect the current law in your jurisdiction at the time you're listening. Nothing in this episode, create an attorney client relationship, nor is it legal advice, do not act or refrain from acting on the basis of any information included and accessible through this episode without seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice on particular facts and circumstances at issue from a lawyer or service provider licensed in your state country or other appropriate licensing jurisdiction. All right, Meredith. First of all, congratulations. This is awesome. You're welcome. This is a 54 page decision. There are four issues at the beginning that you raised 176 findings of fact, about 36 conclusions of law. And at the very end, there are nine orders. So that's a little overwhelming. And this is a final decision and order. And I'm a lawyer, and I was so excited when I got this when we all heard that you had prevailed, and we got to read it. And even I'm overwhelmed with 54 pages. So I want to start by, I want to read the actual issues that are listed in the decision. And then I want you to sort of tell us how we got here, if that works. Okay, so the first of the four issues in the final decision in order are, has the board denied the student a free appropriate education or a faith for the previous two years by habitually failing to record the PPT decision in prior written notice? We're going to come back to that one, too. Does the current IEP and placement deny the student faith? Three, should the hearing officer place the student in a residential therapeutic school for students with CP or cerebral palsy? And if necessary, order the board to hire an educational consultant to identify a placement for the student? And for is the student entitled to compensatory education, which would be education to make up for education missed? So those are some pretty loaded issues. Why don't you take us back to the beginning and tell us what happened. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 02:54 First of all, this client is an amazing kid. And I actually spoke to her recently, she's really happy at man's two right now. So great, really thrilled. So I'm really glad we got there, I was actually brought in after the kiss was pretty well set up. There was a lay advocate involved who did a really good job, got some amazing ies, you know, independent educational evaluations from I mean, some of the most qualified people I have ever run across, they were really, super, she also has a super medical team, you know, all of whom, even though some of them were out of state, they weren't totally willing to testify, you know, and give me not very much time, but some time to educate the hearing officer about the student's conditions. Dana Jonson 03:46 And that's an important component is that there's a difference between what is a medical responsibility and an educational responsibility. And as you and I know, a lot of times those responsibilities overlap, correct, making it incredibly difficult to get anyone to provide. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 04:03 Yes, yes, but these medical providers were very well able to connect what was going on with her medically to what was going on with her educationally. So that's amazing. They were really, really helpful. But when this case first came to me, I wanted to file for due process, but I was always until the very end, I was always really concerned about the remedy, right? Because you don't know which hearing officer you're going to get. And if you're not able to put specific remedy out there you just don't know where that hearing officer is going to go with it. So we have not found a placement for this student yet. She's very difficult to place because she has you know, high cognition, but her physical disabilities are profound and urgent Communication Difficulties are profound. So there's just not a lot of places, you know, for that profile. Dana Jonson 05:06 And that's an important piece to understanding what you want. Because we run into that problem a lot with families where they know something's wrong, they know it's not working, but they don't know what will work or what they do want. And that makes it really, really hard for us. Because and I explained this to clients a lot. You could go through a due process, hearing, and win on every single issue, and not get the remedy you wanted, right. And I think the example I use is, you could go into a hearing, asking for an out of district placement, go through the entire hearing, and have the hearing officer say, you are right, the school didn't do anything they should have done. But I think that school can create a program. So I'm going to order them to do that instead of residential, and now you've gone through the entire expense of winning a hearing. Right, and you're not getting any remedy. So that is a very concerning component that I don't think people Meredith Braxton, Esq. 06:05 realize, and I really wasn't willing, you know, I advised my client that I just didn't feel comfortable filing until we had better direction there. So but as time went on, first of all, she was able to eke out a little money to find an ad consultant. And this ad consultant was really great. He was wonderful to work with. And I couldn't stand it anymore. I felt like Greenwich was torturing this, like literally torturing this kid, because, you know, I was on the back end of every email, and phone call, and what they were doing to I couldn't take it anymore. I really just I couldn't take it anymore. So I was like, Okay, we just have to file we have to get this hearing going. And hopefully, by the time we get to the end of the hearing, we will have a remedy in mind and we won't have a placement. We almost got there. Not quite but you know, it turned out okay. But that was a little bit of a, you know, risk that we took, but what was going on was so unacceptable, that that you know, as a moral proposition. Dana Jonson 07:17 Right. Right. And I think that's where school districts don't realize they really messed up is when they one of us off? Yeah, is you know, when one of us is even in the grand scheme of everything we've seen and experienced if we get off, we're like a dog with a bone. Yeah. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 07:34 Yeah. Dana Jonson 07:36 Don't do this. Don't get out of my way. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 07:37 Yeah, yeah. That's how we sort of got to filing the various issues that wound up being presented. Actually, we didn't even really address the faith based on not recording PVT decisions appropriately, even though they did not I was gonna ask Dana Jonson 07:55 you about that. Because now in the in the new IEP, which I've yet to see, in case you're wondering, every school district I'm dealing with is like, yeah, we'll deal with that later. I gotta get back to school right now. So talk to me after Christmas. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 08:11 What I'm what I'm hearing from them is it's taking them six hours to fill out the new form exactly this new Dana Jonson 08:17 convenient form that was going to take less time. But there's no prior written notice in it now. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 08:23 But I thought the prior written notice was supposed to be a separate document, but I have a separate one here. Dana Jonson 08:27 But we haven't seen any documents yet. So I think that this is a really interesting point about the prior written notice. Because what that means in that issue, for those who don't understand is that decisions were made in the IEP meeting that need to be documented in the IEP, because they were either accepted or refused. And when a school does, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 08:51 the more the even more important piece of that is they're supposed to record why they did right. Or important part and the data they relied on to get there, right, which is usually how you can point out how freakin absurd their decision was. Right? Exactly. Because Dana Jonson 09:09 this is my favorite is on I had one where they made the decision based on grades and performance. And the child had modified work and modified grades. So it was like, Well, wait a second. understand all of this. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 09:26 My favorite is where they deny, like a residential placement. And they say it's based on the independent evaluation, you gave them that recommended residential place. Dana Jonson 09:36 Fabulous. Yeah. So it's based on that because we read it. And that's how we read it. And we rejected all of it. Yeah. So actually, that leads me to my next question, which is, you know, after you read the issues, and the piece on why the hearing officer has jurisdiction, we get to your 176 findings of fact. And so the findings of fact, are sort of the meat and potatoes, is that right of the Meredith Braxton, Esq. 10:03 of the you don't you don't get to conclusions of law without those findings of fact, they're the Dana Jonson 10:08 evaluation of your due process demand, right? findings of fact are what you base everything else on. So how does the hearing officer determine what the findings of fact, are? Like? Do you provide those in your brief or your due process demand? Or how does the hearing officer come to determine which facts are actual facts? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 10:29 So the post hearing brief is, is always proposed findings and facts and conclusions of law. And, you know, I can track through this decision the places where he definitely adopted, you know, what I wrote in my brief, but there's a lot of it where he had his own thing going and this particular hearing officer, who unfortunately has been picked off by virtue Moses, since then, he listened so carefully works for birch and Moses now, yeah, they hired him right after his case. Dana Jonson 11:00 Sorry, I can't help but laugh. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 11:01 I know. It's so upsetting. Speaking of absurd, yeah. Anyway, so he listened really carefully to all the witnesses and clearly was focusing on their credibility. And I could tell I was landing the punches, you know, as I was going on, and he was getting them. And the one that was really telling was, you know, there's a principle in examining witnesses for trial lawyers where, you know, if you've got a hospital, first of all, he did go with the school district employees who I called, on my case, were hostile witnesses who I was allowed to ask leading questions. Great. So a lot of our hearing officers won't go there. And it makes it harder, because you have to do direct examination with non leading questions, right, anyway. Dana Jonson 11:52 Right, I mean, that's getting a little in the weeds. But for parents who don't understand that, as attorneys, when we examine a witness, we are bound by certain restrictions, we can't just ask them anything, we can't just suddenly blurt out stuff, right. Like, we have to have a foundation, we have to lead them to a certain place, we have to have demonstrated certain things and have specific items and evidence. And there's a process and if you don't go through the process, you don't get your information across. So one of the ways in which we ask questions is, we ask leading questions all the time in our day, across the day, and you're not allowed to do that, unless they're, especially with your children, especially with your children, right, we're trained to write to ask leading witness. And that's why children shouldn't be witnesses, because you can lead them. So we really have to be cautious about that. And so then it depends on the hearing officer as to what they will allow, and they have a significant amount of leeway in what they will allow or not allow. So it sounds like this hearing officer was really focused on understanding the issues Meredith Braxton, Esq. 12:58 he really was. So one of the principles for examining witnesses from the other side, is, if you land your point, you don't go on to ask like the ultimate question, because then that clues them in that they just messed up, and they will go back and they'll fix it. You instead use that nugget in your argument later on. So that's how we roll I got one of the school district witnesses to say that she made all the decisions in the PPTs. And so I'm sliding away from that, because I'm like, hopefully, like guaranteed, and, of course, returning picked up on Dana Jonson 13:35 that. But whatever. That's kind of a mess. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 13:38 I'm going on, going on to the next thing. And the hearing officer goes, whoa, whoa, whoa. And then he starts questioning her and she doesn't fix it. She doubles down on it. And then I'm cross her attorney tried to save her and she didn't go for it. So she basically got predetermination. That's amazing lack of parental participation. So the hearing officer in this case, he really listened. And he was sort of going through issues in his own head clearly the whole thing about you know, in his findings of fact, in his conclusions of law, he talked a lot about how the school district had the wrong primary disability for this child and that how it drove an inappropriate IEP. Now you and I know that's actually true. Most of the time, if you have the wrong primary disability, it does, to some extent derive. You know, services. Absolutely. Schools always say is no, we give whatever services are needed, no matter what the primary handicap is, blah, blah, blah. I felt like that was just a loser of an argument for me like when I didn't want to spend a lot of time on. I had so many other issues that I thought were really compelling and really important, and that would win the case. It was funny because he kept bringing it up. During the hearing, and I was like, Yeah, you know, and I didn't really press it with witnesses, but he did. You know, he would ask witnesses his own questions, Dana Jonson 15:09 and I find that fascinating about hearings is that the hearing officer can and will just stop everything and be like, I have some follow ups. I need you to clarify that. Yeah. I love it when we hear a hearing officer ask questions, because all that says is, oh, they're listening. Yeah, do get it because not all hearing officers really do get it. Not all of them have been doing what we do our whole lives. And we have to not only explain to them the process, the law but the disability. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 15:35 Right, right. And this one is very low incidence. So it's particularly difficult to convey what it's like, like I said, we had a, especially her physiatrist was really great at describing what it was like to be, I'm allowed to use her name, she doesn't care. Okay. So you know what it was like to be Sydney. And that really got to the hearing officer. So did the videotapes of what was going on on the bus ride. Wow, I thought, did you get those? Well, they're an educational record. They're a four year record. And I was like a dog with a bone. And I did when I filed, I also served an Administrative Code document request. And so at the very beginning of the hearing, when you're sort of like, what housekeeping items do you have, I'm like, I'm asking for these documents. And these videos, they haven't given them to me, I can't do this hearing without it, and I got him to order them to be given to me. So I find Dana Jonson 16:36 that I don't always get everything in a FERPA request. There's never I get everything. Shocking, really. It's shocking, really, but and in my FERPA request, I have a laundry list of things I would like included, and then I just hope I get most of it. You know, videos, and particularly bus videos, I think have to be the hardest things to obtain. That's just my experience. It's just a lot of red tape to get your hands on those videos. So that is huge. Yeah. So you provide your findings of fact, the board attorney is going to provide there's right. So what the hearing officer chooses is going to be based on the testimony. Right. Right. And so that's your point in your testimony is to demonstrate what actually happened, right, I presume you had good witnesses and parents for this? Because I know for me, anytime I contemplate whether this is something that would go to due process or not. The first thing I think of is Who are my witnesses? Yeah. And my first thought is can either parent be witness, and that sometimes makes the decision? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 17:49 You know? Yes, I had one due process where, I mean, the hearing officer literally hated my client. And he was difficult. He was a difficult person. He was a difficult person, like, I liked him. But you know, I'm weird. But she ruled for us anyway. And I was a little I mean, she even dropped a footnote about how she didn't believe that I love that. Yeah, yeah. So it's very important. The parent is very important. Sometimes, like, in this case, I had the parent, but as a backup, I also had her sister who had quit her job to help Sydney, you know, during COVID, and was, I mean, had basically been in her life the whole time. So it was very, sort of a corroborating witnesses if I needed it. Or it could be the primary witness about what was happening during remote instruction, and stuff like that. So yeah, Dana Jonson 18:45 and I see you guys had 11 witnesses, and the board only called to it looks like, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 18:50 Yeah, cuz I called all her witnesses on my case. Dana Jonson 18:54 You called them all first, so that you could get that done with Meredith Braxton, Esq. 18:56 in this, you know, in this particular school district, I find that the attorney, if you do this, if you if you call her witnesses on your case, and she often hasn't glommed on to what your their themes are, and doesn't really prepare her witnesses. Well got it. Well, I can tell my stories through them. And they're the people I had first, and the hearing officer had a little issue with it. He was like, aren't you gonna call them? And I'm like, Oh, get there? Dana Jonson 19:27 Yeah, well, because mom's usually number one, right? Yeah, I don't like doing like that. Well, good. That's, that's great. You should talk to my lawyer about that, because she was working really, really hard to figure out how to not put me because for all of those parents out there who've heard you wouldn't be a good witness and make and took it personally and felt bad. I was informed I would be a horrible witness. So I'm an attorney who does this every day. So you know, don't feel bad about it. So you called everyone that you needed for your case and the hearing officer allowed you to treat the school personnel as if they were hostile. So that is huge. You know, it sounds like we got a really great hearing officer and then a board firm just snatched them up immediately. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 20:12 It did save money, how that works about that Dana Jonson 20:16 money how that works. I wanted to touch on the timeframe to because you filed on October 12, in 2021. And your briefs were due in March 28 2022. And that is actually only five months, I was actually thinking for a hearing that went through so many witnesses that you would conclude this and only five months, I was kind of impressed. And to tell Meredith Braxton, Esq. 20:43 you the truth, this included a month or two of me foot drag. Oh, wow. Because I was I was foot dragging. Because we didn't have that placement. Right. I was like, you know, Brenton, come on. So I delayed things a little bit. And then I decided I gotta go, Yeah, this has got to get going. Right, the hearing officer made it really clear that he was feeling pressure from the State Bureau of Special Education, to move these hearings along faster. You know, they're getting very concerned about their timeline issues as they should, as they can. Absolutely. He assured me and I felt with, you know, after we'd been going at this a little bit, I felt like I could believe him about this, that I could always just refer to an exhibit, and he would read it. And I felt like he would read. Okay, so some hearing officers, you really have to have every single bit like presented orally to them, or they focus on it. But in this case, I felt like I could rely on him to read the exhibits that were admitted. I sped through some of this stuff. Yeah, I mean, the medical people, I probably had a an average 30 to 45 minutes with them, half of which I seated to the other side. Right, wow. Yeah. And so I was like, bang, bang, but I had one day when I had like six witnesses, I blew through six witnesses, that's insane. I then laid down on the floor of my office and made it like an IV of vodka, but it was intense. But it made the hearing officer very happy, they do appreciate it. And I kind of liked it, because I was able to get all the really important stuff in and then the other side was kind of limited and what they could do with it. You know, they were also limited. The you know, in the end, I kind of liked it, even though I ordinarily would, Dana Jonson 22:43 yes. Where are you for this matter? It worked for this matter for this hearing Meredith Braxton, Esq. 22:47 officer, you know, so much depends on the hearing officer get and what their style Dana Jonson 22:53 is. Yeah. And I hear that a lot from parents, do you have experience with this district? Do you have experience with this lawyer? And all of those things do matter. But I feel like the experience matters more in knowing how to shift because all those players change all the time. And I've had evaluators where I felt like I could just leave the room and they'd be fine. And then the next tvip meeting, I go to them, I'm like, Who is this pot person? Like what did they do to my evaluators? So you just never know, there's a lot up in the air, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 23:26 you don't know. And that's what I try to convey to my clients about due process. It's a high risk situation, because you don't know which hearing officer you're gonna get. You don't know what pressures they have on them, because they are getting pressure from above, you don't really know how the evidence is going to come in. You don't know whether some of the board people who you think are charlatans are going to come across as believable. You don't know if you're going to be able to get in every document that you think you need to get in. I got a lot out of those board witnesses that have they been better prepared and probably would not have. Yeah, and that Dana Jonson 24:03 preparation is big. I mean, the prep is big for your clients, too. I remember a colleague telling me I mean, when you're talking about how is someone going to present colleague was telling me they had a client and the school had really messed up. But this was an exceptionally wealthy client who came across as exceptionally wealthy when she walked in a room. And so she was asked to dial it down. So she walked in to the hearing and her kids dinner, blue jeans and a T shirt and no jewelry. And the board almost dropped dead. Really, because they were relying on this person to walk in and look like an extremely wealthy person and present the way she normally does and hoping that that in and of itself would sway the hearing officer. But then she walked in and they're their philosophy has gotten now a good attorney doesn't rely on just that. Right. But to your point, people can present as anything when they walk in that door. Yeah, and they can Say anything. So, like if you if you have someone on the line on the stand and they are flat out lying. What do you do? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 25:08 Well, I mean, it depends on whether I have documentary evidence that I can confront them with that shows they're flat out lying. If this is where a lot of times you do want to have at least partial transcripts of various meetings and recordings. So they can't claim they said something other than what they did. And it's a problem, because in my experience, almost I would say 95% of board, witnesses lie under oath. Yep. And have no problem with it. Yeah. Dana Jonson 25:38 And it's shocking, sometimes to parents. Right. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 25:41 And absolutely, I mean, honestly, when I first started practicing law, many, many, many moons ago, I was shocked, I assumed that everyone who was put under oath would tell the truth. And then I learned that actually a minority and people put under oath will tell the truth. It's not just in special education. Yeah, just board witnesses. It's pretty rampant, Dana Jonson 26:04 pretty rampant. And it's I do think that people take it have a different level of respect, being under oath. I do believe that, as a rule, and I do think that that anxiety is heightened in the person when they are lying under oath versus just in a school meeting, I, I absolutely can see that I can see the change in their body language from lying in the IEP meeting to lying on the stand. They're way more uncomfortable. But that's another reason why I like going to the IEP meetings, because they may be more comfortable there. But you do get a sense of who you can trip up and who you can't. And if the school has bad witness, you make sure they know that. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 26:43 Also, I prefer due process hearings to be in person, because if you've got that body language going on the other side, you can start drilling into it. And sort of push them. Yes. completely out of their comfort zone. Dana Jonson 26:58 Yes. And that's more difficult on the screen. Oh, it's Meredith Braxton, Esq. 27:01 impossible. Dana Jonson 27:02 Have you done any hearings on the screen? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 27:04 Well, this one was completely virtual, Dana Jonson 27:06 Oh, this one was virtual? I don't think I realized that maybe I must have I mean, maybe just because it's so normal now that I didn't think of it. So that must have been really hard, then I didn't even realize this was virtual. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 27:18 Yeah. It was very hard. That's really hard. Dana Jonson 27:21 Amazing. Your experiences you would still prefer in person, right? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 27:26 Yeah, for that very reason. Just looking through the screen at someone, you can't hold their eyes, you can't sort of judge their expression. You can't figure out how to destroy them. You can't pick Dana Jonson 27:42 them apart to the degree that you would like to. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 27:47 So bad, you know, so you're when you're a litigator, you just have to admit that you have a dysfunctional personality. Right? Yes. So that's why we do this, right? Yes, exactly. We got paid for being like completely not the social norm. So Dana Jonson 28:01 I always say that I do that I'm a lawyer, because I think this way, I don't think this way, because I'm a lawyer isn't the only place that that I fit in. So let's talk a little bit about the remedies. Because from the remedy in the decision, it doesn't look like you ever found that one place, did you? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 28:20 Well, no, we found it afterwards. So may Institute was one of the ones that our ED consultant found that he thought was the leading candidate. Ironically, also, the neuropsychologist who did an independent evaluation had put that out as a recommendation as well. So I was able to direct the hearing officer to an email from him saying, you know, this would be a good place. And also ironically, that particular neuro psychologist, I just, you know, I wasn't in love with his evaluation. And I was very concerned about him as a witness, because I've actually seen him under oath before. And so I elected not to call him interesting. Yeah, Dana Jonson 29:03 that's a risk. Huge risk, right? Like, because, I mean, at first thing you're gonna hear from any attorney is you want to go to a hearing, you need an expert. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 29:12 Yeah. Well, so but we had all these other experts. And but that's usually the one that we want, right? It's the neuro Psych. Fortunately, he had spoken to that entire medical team, and incorporated what they said in evaluation itself. And then all of those medical experts wrote follow up letters saying we agree with that neuro psychologist, this is what she means. So I called every one of those medical experts got it. And that's how I got it. I mean, and this is what happens in a due process hearing like, I had him on my witness list, in case I had to I had to put them on. As things develop, you have to make decisions about what you're going to do and what's the whole in your case, you know, then I was like one of the holes My case is, what's the remedy? And I don't usually call Educational Consultants, but I did with this one. Also, because he's got lots of bonus CDs, right? He's, he's run a therapeutic school. He's been, you know, he's Dana Jonson 30:15 got credentials that you can defend. Yeah, I love that. When I get stuff from parents who say, you know, this is the expert. And I'm like, well, they don't have any credentials. No one's ever heard of them. They're in a different country. I don't know that I'm going to get anyone on board. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 30:32 He worked really hard for this placement. I mean, yeah. Beyond what he ever has to do with anyone. I was on a low fee. On this case, he did a low fee on this case. So we've sort of felt like, Okay, Dana Jonson 30:45 we're gonna do we're in it together. Yeah. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 30:47 And, and one of the things we got as a remedy was that he got paid his full fee. Dana Jonson 30:54 Oh, good. Yeah. So that's what I was going to ask you about was the remedies, because one of the remedies is when you win a hearing is that you're entitled to your legal fees? Right. So what I'm curious about is when you submit that legal fees Bill, what is that going to look like after 11 witnesses and five months? It was Meredith Braxton, Esq. 31:15 close to 100,000. It was like 98,000. Dana Jonson 31:19 There were a few things in terms of parents listening to this just passed out. Yeah. But Meredith Braxton, Esq. 31:26 that's what I tell my my clients, it's between 50 and 100,000, for average due process. Yeah. And on top of that, you may have to be paying experts. And that's not reimbursable. Dana Jonson 31:37 Right. So you're not going to get back and that I can't risk, you know, but right, we can always risk our fees, right? Because we can try and get them back. So that does put give you more skin in the game, I guess. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 31:49 I mean, they pushed back on a couple of things. One of them is definitely legitimate. I put it in there and hope it would just slip by but it didn't, you know? And then there were a couple that were like, arguable. Right? Right. So I just rolled over on that, because I'd rather get it paid. Right. So I want to be reimbursed 92,000? Dana Jonson 32:11 Well, and I mean, you know, say it's the only civil rights that we negotiate. So parents are always negotiating way their rights. And we as attorneys are always negotiating away our fees. Yeah, we do nothing on the parents side, but negotiate against ourselves from from the beginning. I don't know of very many of any attorneys who have gone through a full hearing and actually received their full BS, they just don't I also find it when when sometimes I hear people say, Oh, well, litigation fees are so much more than, like, we're never seen. No calm down. Take it down a notch. Uh, yeah, I found the remedies really interesting because one remedy said to find the placement and a consultant is ordered. If you can't find a placement, so the the hearing officer did order that consultant as well, correct? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 33:02 Absolutely. But and the thing with may Institute is they are not going to accept anyone unless they're fully funded, right? Because it's a very expensive place. Yes. So the day this decision came out, the ad consultant got on the phone with them with two words fully funded. And within a week, we had an acceptance, but they had to do a little bit of hiring to bring her on, started right after labor. Dana Jonson 33:27 Right. And I think that's important too, for parents to understand that not a replacement is ready to take your child that day. There usually an acceptance usually means that they can prepare to do that. So if you come, they will then start preparing. They're not going to staff for a student who's not there yet. That's very typical, then that's great. So now is this child going to be there for too long this is placed there Meredith Braxton, Esq. 33:53 now. Yeah. So as their stereo slave foot and everything else? I don't see them after that horrendous decision. Yes, coming back and saying no, you're ready to come back to Greenwich, right. Dana Jonson 34:04 And school districts have done that they have a year after a hearing decision said, Well, we gave it a year, and now they're all ready and everything's back together. But you have that hearing decision under your belt. And that is something you can pull out and use. And it would be foolish to do that, at this stage. And particularly given given how many fights are going on between parents and school districts at you know, there was a time where fighting every hearing decision was worth their time and energy. I don't think it is anymore. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 34:34 But then so there was a significant amount of time between when the decision came out and when she was able to go, you know, in the meantime, he ordered remedies for while she was still in the British school system. And I actually had to get down this state's throat to get them to enforce this decision. Really, I did what happened. They were ordered to have an aide in the home for 30 minutes before the ride to school to help the mom get her ready, and they just didn't do it. And I had to go to the state. And they eventually got to st Greenwich Get your act together, you know, and do it and they finally did. And it made a huge difference. Then she was supposed to have a medical taxi instead of the bus that was so torturous for her never got that I was on the state's case, like every two days. And Greenwich kept giving them a spreadsheet showing all the contacts they made to try to arrange a medical taxi. And I was like, this is just baloney. I mean, I'm literally there was one point where they were like, Okay, well, the legal director Mike McCann and Mary Jean Shugborough, who, unfortunately, was the person assigned to the enforcement part of this. The retired. She's retired, isn't she? Yeah, except she's still a part time consultant for some things. I'm like, Why did you assign us to a part time retired consultant? You know, it's Dana Jonson 36:04 pretty significant. Yeah. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 36:05 So at one point, they were like, well, we're gonna be on the phone with graduates about this on Monday. And we'll let you know. And I'm like, I want to be on that phone call. But I'm on vacation. And they're like, I'm like, do it on Friday, when I'm not on vacation. Oh, well, we can talk to Friday, and then we'll talk to them on Monday. I'm like, No, I will just be on this call during my vacation. So I'm hiking in Maine and losing a signal every three seconds, and I am yelling my butt off. And my husband's like, Oh, my God. And I like I keep losing the signal dialing back in angrily, and on top. So because anyway, never got the medical text, even though I'm, I'm busting a gut. Then on top of that in between, yeah, when I started getting down on their case, and this phone call, they had finally posted this decision, you know, I got it by email. But then they post all of their decisions, right? And the decisions are written. So there's no identifying information the student has called student parents called parents, etc. But it identifies the witnesses, aside from the parent, and the school district and all that, while they put this one on, and they've blacked out everything that would identify the school district or the school district witnesses. And I was like, Okay, so while I'm on the phone screaming, I'm like, who did this? Which one of you did this? You know, what are you doing? They're like, Oh, we thought it might be too specific. And you know, have identifying information. I'm like, you know, if that was your concern, you would have called me or the parent to ask if we had a problem with it, but you didn't. So it seems to me that you were just trying to not embarrass Greenwich, which should be completely embarrassed about how they treat Dana Jonson 37:54 my dogs going nuts. No, that's exactly what I was gonna say. Which is that, you know, that seems like protecting the district. Were? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 38:03 Absolutely, yeah. In the meantime, I had gotten a written consent from my clients saying you can put it up on redacted and I was like, I have that. And they put it up on redacted after that. But, you know, Dana Jonson 38:14 I've seen that before, though, that the school district personnel and school are redacted. Is that a thing? No. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 38:20 If you look on every single other decision, there's not a single redaction. Not one. So who decided to do that? Mary Jean Chabot, she admitted? Did she say why? Because she was afraid it would identify the child's that's a lie. I think so. Dana Jonson 38:43 I feel like that's a lie. But that sounds interesting. Well, you know, and it really is frustrating, because I always feel like when people say, Oh, but these poor teachers, and you know, it's not really there. I feel like I'm with you on that. And I feel as a former teacher and a former administrator, admittedly, I spent about 10 minutes in each role, but I didn't have a problem being honest in the meeting. Now, that was me. Perhaps I didn't have as much at risk as some people by doing that. And I respect and understand that. But I go nuts. When parents say, well, the teacher told me this, but they won't say it in the meeting. And I always say, well, then I don't trust that teacher. No, I just don't, it's great. You're getting inside Intel. But how do you know? They aren't turning around and saying the same thing to the district about you? Exactly. You know, and they're protecting their butts. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 39:39 Yeah. If they're not willing to say it in the meeting, it's useless. It's absolutely Dana Jonson 39:42 useless. You can see it when people are scripted. In the meetings, you can tell. And I you know, look, it's not my intention to embarrass anyone. But if you have made a conscious decision to toe the party line, then you are making a conscious decision to take the consequences of that action, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 40:06 this child's speech and language pathologist basically said that she agreed to include oral motor goals to help Sydney learn how to talk, which she could do, right. Basically, as a favor. Dana Jonson 40:22 Oh, it's an accommodation to the parent. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 40:24 Yeah, cuz she wanted to talk. But you know, she didn't really need it for accessing the general education. Oh, Dana Jonson 40:29 why do you need language for that narrative? I know, I'm sorry, I just get flip. I can't stop myself. I love that when it's an act as an accommodation. I'm Meredith Braxton, Esq. 40:38 gonna call out that I'm gonna call it call that speech pathologist out on that? Yep. You know, Dana Jonson 40:44 accommodation is what the child needs. And you know if that I found that frustrating during the pandemic, too, when people were like, well, I don't want to be on tape or on screen or what have you. And I do understand that there is something to being under a micro microscope and people taking things out of context. We've all had that happen to us at some point on the internet, right? Or in a text, something has been taken in the wrong tone. And I just feel like, Haven't we all been using the internet long enough that we should know that. And you know, that tone gets lost and things get lost in translation. But knowing what happens, and being able to reflect on that and make changes that that's important if we're not willing to do that. And that's where I feel like we are right now in schools. I feel like no one's willing to reflect. Yeah, because everyone's so afraid, even more so than before, to look back and say, Yeah, we messed up. And I understand because there are legal ramifications to saying that, so I get why they're not announcing it to the world. Yeah. But maybe their inside voice like in the back of their head, maybe could say, We screwed up, and we gotta fix this. You know, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 41:58 honestly, I find that the better board attorneys manage that, right? Yes, by having a good relationship with you giving you a call saying, can we talk about some solutions? Right? It doesn't have to be an explicit, we messed up, it can be willing to make it better. Right? Right. Good board attorneys. manage that. Dana Jonson 42:19 Right. And some board attorneys, you know, when when the parent calls you, I'll say, you know, what, I know, we can get X, Y and Z, which will help bring everyone back to the table and and start the conversation over. And then there are some board attorneys where I have to say, look, I hate to tell you this, but we're going to start off fighting, because that's where you are. And that's unfair to it depends on who represents your district as to what kind of what access you will have to that due process, and whether you will be able to fight them or not. And not every parent has access to us. No, you know, and I was just talking to Christine Lai on my last episode about self in the special legal fund and how they've allowed for so much access for parents afforded us I've you know, regardless, look at this, this is a like I said, it's, you had 11 witnesses, it took five months, this took up a significant amount of your time, most of which you were not paid for at the time. Like that's something else people have to realize we get paid when we work, right. Like I'm not on a salary over here with fabulous benefits. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 43:26 What we eat what we kill, as they say, exactly, we Dana Jonson 43:29 eat what we kill. Yes. I Meredith Braxton, Esq. 43:30 mean, I had restricted cash flow for a few months there because it took time, Dana Jonson 43:35 it takes a tremendous amount of time for us to have even one full blown. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 43:40 If I win, I'll be fine. If I know, I'm gonna be second run for a little bit, you know? Dana Jonson 43:45 Exactly. So I mean, yeah, I mean, it's tough all the way around, and you have to have the bandwidth to do it. And you have to not be afraid of creating bad law because you have to look at if I lose this. Yeah, the way that I have asked this question, if I lose it, what will that do to other families? Exactly. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 44:04 And this decision, I felt like I got more good law out of this, than expected. So tell Dana Jonson 44:10 us what you think the main takeaways are that you got from this this decision that you think are solidified that are helpful for parents? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 44:18 Well, the blasting of how the school district treated COVID and learning during COVID? Yes, and the failure to implement the IEP at all, really during COVID. And he runs through that was he on the legal side, the support for you were supposed to do what you needed to do and you didn't do it that leads to combat. So I thought that was good. I thought the way he treated the requirement for residential placement when there were mixed issues of because here we had mental health issues, but also medical issues. But those medical issues were very much intertwined with ability to be educated. Yeah, right. So the way he merged those things In talking about the requirement for a residential placement and the board's duty for that residential placement, I thought that was very helpful. Yeah. So those, those were the two takeaways that I really enjoy. Dana Jonson 45:15 Now, those are great. And those were great for the rest of us. Thank you. Here. I say, the combat peace to the combat peace is great. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 45:24 Yeah. So that was good, because he talked about how you don't need to have gross violation to get combat if you're not in a aged out situation. Right. And he kind of blasted the whole equities argument, which I was like, I didn't even understand the board's argument. I'm like, this isn't the unilateral placement case. Right. That's third prong about the equities. Right. Yes. So but he turned that around to Well, maybe it's, you know, relevant to combat? Well, and Dana Jonson 45:56 that's I mean, to explain to parents who don't understand really what we're talking about. No, no, it's good. It's good. Because what what that means is there are specific arguments we have to meet. So the first question I have to ask is, did the school district provide an appropriate program? And if the answer to that is yes, then nothing else matters, right? So there are different prongs of these different arguments. And some of them get to the point of equity. And this one doesn't. So it was unclear where he was going when he went down that road. But what he was doing was taking that equity argument and, and putting it towards compensatory education and saying that, for these reasons, this child does require compensatory education, which is meant to bring the child back up to where they would have been had they had that service. So that's an that's a big win, especially post COVID. Where that's a lot of the arguments is whether it's compensatory or not. So that's, that's a tough argument. And so that was a great win for parents. Yeah. And the last thing I want to ask you about, though, is the quotes throughout the decision, because I started reading and I thought was this a quote from the transcript? So at the beginning of every section, the hearing officer wrote a little quote, and the chapter and pages that it was from so I put that into my trusty Google search, and discovered that he was quoting Helen Keller throughout the whole thing. Can you talk a little about Meredith Braxton, Esq. 47:24 could have looked at the footnotes, or I could Dana Jonson 47:27 have looked at the footnotes that would have required this dense dyslexic woman to look at every footnote in this 54 Page decision. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 47:37 Okay. We won't do that to you. He basically took the I guess it was the autobiography of Helen Keller, and took various clubs, this kid touched his heart. And she's touched mine as well. She wants to start a school for kids with disabilities. She's she's just, she's an amazing kid, right? Before she went to me. I went and had dinner with her. And she finally had the new communication device that had actually been recommended and like managed never did. Wow. And we sat and had a really long, pretty fluent conversation about how do we get to the point where she gets to go to May? What was the hearing? Like? Who did I call? What did they say? You know, do I have to go back to Greenwich public schools for like three days to the school they have before I go to make? No you don't, I can see her really doing something in the world. Her physiatrist testified very clearly that he expects big things from her. And the hearing officer clearly felt that this child had a lot of potential and could make some change in the world. I think putting in those quotes helped bring it to like, we need to liberate this kid from her, the confines of her body, right? And let her be the person she can be. So I just about cried when I was reading through the decision with those quotes sprinkled throughout. I talked to a board lawyer afterwards. And she was like, Oh, that was quite a decision, like, I guess was just like, you know, the quotes from having Helen Keller were a little bit of overkill on like, this is run through your veins, Dana Jonson 49:22 right? And by the way, not if you were there, if you were there. These fit in perfectly. And I did I mean I did read a couple of footnotes narrative, but I liked how he he did talk about while this student is not deaf and blind, they are bound by these disabilities in a way that we can't comprehend. And that it wasn't until, you know Helen Keller, somebody taught her how to communicate that she was able to share herself with the world and that those comparisons he felt applied to this student as well. And I think that just added to the impact of those quotes. And you're right, you could tell that this was a very emotional matter. And this is one of those matters where you read through it and you think, well, it's a slam dunk, right? You read this and you're like, of course, you're gonna win. But that just simply isn't how special education works, you know, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 50:31 and back to what we were talking about at the beginning, you can win, and the remedy can wind up being useless. Dana Jonson 50:39 Exactly. So there's a lot of risks, but it's decisions like this, that are the reason why we continue to do it, and move forward. And also, make sure that your attorney moving forward and a hearing has the experience and background necessary to and resources. You know, if you don't have experience, you can get experience, right, you can learn, you can get experience, you can get mentored, you can do all those things. But you can't pretend you know what you don't know. Right. And it's important to make sure that your attorney does practice special education law, that is their primary, that they are not doing something else, and are not distracted by other laws that may conflict with the ID EA, which people don't realize there are a lot of educational rules and laws that actually conflict with the ID EA. So if you're more familiar with those than the IDA, then you may not be giving the right advice. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 51:44 It's ironic that a lot of that was passed in order to be parent friendly, and increase parental participation in the education of disabled kids is so non parent friendly. Dana Jonson 51:56 It's not parent friendly. It's not free to access. No. Because if you want to access it, you need an attorney or an advocate. And those are not free. Just think about the professional development that parents do just to understand how to talk to their attorneys. I mean, to their sorry, to their school districts, you know, like, just to get the vocabulary to advocate for their child, they spend a tremendous amount of money on professional development and all of those pieces. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 52:24 So back up for a second. The other thing I thought this decision was Brown was LRE least restrictive environment. Dana Jonson 52:31 Oh, yes. Talk about LRE for a second. So Meredith Braxton, Esq. 52:34 least restrictive environment means that your disabled children are supposed to be educated to the maximum extent possible with non disabled kids. My argument here was because they were screwing up so much. And they really did not include her appropriately in general education things. She was isolated from her peers. And it's even as much as like the chair they were using, they were having her in a wheelchair in her classroom, which separated her and put her on a different level than her peers. And the physical therapist, do Dana Jonson 53:07 you mean physically, like height wise? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 53:10 Yeah, so she's not even at the table, right. And they were like, you know, the IES were like, You need to get this kind of chair and play her here. So that she's with her peers. And they never did any of that. It was stuff like that. And then she would have total meltdowns, especially Shan Maxon, or whatever, and be removed from the classroom because of her meltdowns, and then be removed to go to the bathroom and spend all sorts of time on there. The general education setting for her was more restrictive than one that was designed for kids with similar disabilities. And he went for that argument, which I really appreciate it. Dana Jonson 53:51 And that's an amazing argument. And I I make it all the time. It's, like all my philosophical, yeah, argument of what's least restrictive, right. And I had a student once who were arguing over Villa Maria. And in the public school, the student had to be in the sub substantially separate room all day, including lunch, including everything, but at Villa Maria, they could roam the halls, they could have lunch with Meredith Braxton, Esq. 54:16 their peers. And from my perspective, that is absolutely and Hillary argument in favor of Bill Murray. Yeah, Dana Jonson 54:22 exactly. Exactly. You know, and so, you know, fortunately, that didn't have to go to a hearing at that point in time, because I don't know where that would have landed. But I do think we are getting closer to understanding that that may be a more a less restrictive environment for that student. It looks restrictive to us, Meredith Braxton, Esq. 54:41 but if they have no peers to relate to, right, exactly, and they're not being educated with the same materials, you know, if they're sitting in the general education classroom, everyone else is working on, you know, XYZ, but they're working on a different on a different level on a different skill on their own little worksheet. with their pero right here, that's not the least restrictive environment for that child. Now, they're being they're other, they're separated. Dana Jonson 55:08 Right? They're substantially separate from everybody else, even if you physically sit them in the room and kids do not learn independence through osmosis. No, it's not by sitting near typically developing children that you become typically developing. The goal is to become independent. Right? And what does this child need to become independent? And sometimes what a child needs to become independent is more children like them? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 55:36 Right. Right. So I thought that his ruling on that issue was helpful for this argument. Dana Jonson 55:43 Yes, yes. That's very helpful for this argument, because it gives us a little something with some meat on it. Yeah, too. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 55:51 When I when I was bringing it up, you could see him going like, that's an interesting point. Dana Jonson 55:57 Yeah. And now I really hate for to Moses for taking him out of the hearing officer, Bill. I'm hotline. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 56:07 He was he was previously I think he was in a judge advocate corps. Okay. He was a Jag. Um, you could tell you know, he have plenty of litigation experience. Right. Okay. So he was it was sort of easy that way for me, because my litigation arguments like right in a place where he understood them. Dana Jonson 56:28 Right. That was good, good. Friend, now he's gone. And so this is the this is his swan song, which we will have framed up in many offices around Connecticut. This was incredibly helpful narrative. And thank you so much for coming on. And talking to me about it. I really, I don't think parents really understand everything that goes into due process. They just here fight the school district, I will put the link to your decision in my show notes. So anyone who wants to geek out like the one right? Yes, the unredacted one, so you can see everybody's name and all the footnotes. And she could just click on them and they pop up. So I'll put the link to that there. But if someone's listening, and they're like, Wow, I need to hire Meredith clearly, because she's the only attorney who who can understand me and my child. How do they reach you? How do they find you? Meredith Braxton, Esq. 57:25 Well, it would be great if I had a website, but I just haven't over the last 20 years have the time to put Yeah, really Dana Jonson 57:30 had a need. Hmm. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 57:33 Really? I'm gonna do it soon. No, I swear. Dana Jonson 57:36 Okay, I got I have a good name for you. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 57:40 I've had it in process for a long time. You can look me up on the internet, probably. I don't know some I'll put a link to how you can find this. Sometimes when you put in Meredith Braxton. There's some Meredith Braxton some like soap opera or something. Dana Jonson 57:54 Awesome. So you show up in the soap opera star? Yeah, I think that's great. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 57:58 No, it's the name of a character. Dana Jonson 58:03 Even better. All right, I will put a link to Meredith in the in the show notes as well. If you feel you must reach out to Meredith and find her. And thank you so much, Meredith, for coming on and talking to us and talking about your case. And thank you for taking it all the way. Because I think that that is not easy for any of us to do. And Meredith Braxton, Esq. 58:22 you know, I had not had a case go all the way in like two years. So I was also sort of chomping at the bit. Yeah, because I am a litigator at heart. And I like to go to hearing occasionally. And I was like it was sort of killing me. So I was happy to bring it all the way and I got a few more going into the can this week, then. I think at least one will my gold way. Dana Jonson 58:49 That will be amazing. Yeah. Well, thank you. And that, that it makes a huge difference for the rest of us. And it definitely helps. helps all of us. You know, when Meredith Braxton, Esq. 58:58 we talk he's, I was about as pleased as one could be with that decision. It's amazing, even better than I had hoped. Dana Jonson 59:05 And that's amazing. And the family must've just been beside themselves. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 59:10 You know, and Sydney. She's, she's happy as a clam of May. Dana Jonson 59:14 I'm so happy and validation. Yeah, it wasn't her right that. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 59:20 Yeah. Oh, but she always knew that. Dana Jonson 59:22 Yeah, she she's smarter than they are. Meredith Braxton, Esq. 59:24 She is. She really is. Dana Jonson 59:27 That's often the problem. Well, thank you so much. Meredith. Thank you so much for joining me today. Please don't forget to follow this podcast so you don't miss any new episodes and leave a review and you have a chance. If there's anything you want to hear about or comment on. Please go to my Facebook page special ed on special ed and find me there. I'll see you next time here on special ed on special ed. Have a fabulous day. The views expressed in this episode are those of the speaker's at the time of the recording and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other agency, organization, employer or company or even that individual today.
Video animation by: Big Flowers Intro/Outro beat by: BLOODBLIXING The Hook (0:21). The Interview (2:27). When I first heard today's guest on the show on El-P's "Oh Hail No" off of Cancer 4 Cure… I was sold immediately. Even if it was just one feature, without me being aware of who this guy was and what projects he had under his belt, his flows, his bars, and his charisma were off the charts. The talent of Mr. Muthaf*****' eXquire was undeniable. And luckily for me, he also had a catalog to back up this strong first impression by the time I tapped in around the year 2012, since eXquire had already dropped a fun and rugged mixtape in Lost in Translation, and then soon after would drop the terrifically thoughtful Kismet. From then on I was a fan for life. Now a decade later Brooklyn's eXquire has released his most mature and reflective album yet, and is here today to discuss that and much, much more. eXquire illustrates how he presents himself in his music vs. how he is in his regular life (3:58). eXquire speaks on the influence of later 2000s era rappers on his musical style (7:51). eXquire details the influence that artists such as El-P and the Definitive Jux crew had on his artistic development (12:00). eXquire speaks on the differences between making music now (15:31). eXquire speaks on some lessons that he learnt throughout his career (17:23). eXquire illustrates the inspiration behind his latest album I Love Y.O.U Cus Y.O.U Ugly Vol. 1 (22:31). eXquire opens up about how his daughter and uncle has inspired his music (25:48). eXquire dives into the concept of Y.O.U, and why he is so proud of his latest album (28:23). eXquire illustrates the musical direction of I Love Y.O.U (32:59). eXquire speaks on some current active artists that inspire him (40:57). eXquire answers a RMPP Patron question from Dan-O on the most heinous s*** talker in hip-hop (45:29). Stream Mr. Muthaf*****' eXquire's music here: https://open.spotify.com/artist/1Sq6VkcHqHAuFvURbH3sXQ?si=I7672d0jR16qXsmKyRg5Ew Follow Mr. Muthaf*****' eXquire on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/mrmfnexquire Follow Mr. Muthaf*****' eXquire on Instagram here: https://www.instagram.com/mynameishughie/ -- Fiending for some more quality rap content? Visit the RMPP website: https://rmpp.squarespace.com/ Want to support and help us grow? Become a RMPP Patron, and gain access to exclusive content: https://www.patreon.com/therapmusicplugpodcast Looking to connect? DM me @rapmusicplugpod on Twitter and Instagram, or shoot me an email at firstname.lastname@example.org
Discusses adult themes Chris Braley's journey has been a long and winding one. With humble beginnings in rural Maine, Braley's excellence in athletics helped him emerge as an elite Prep School and AAU standout in basketball, landing a Division I college scholarship. When things didn't go according to plans, Braley charted a new course, which saw him transfer to Division II and then have to figure out what to do with the rest of his life. Braley credits the lessons, work ethic, and determination he learned along the way with helping him to find success as a business owner and aspiring fitness competitor.
Actor, writer and producer Kate Hewlett (Stargate Atlantis, Degrassi, Murdoch Mysteries and more), who's just adapted her 2008 stage musical The Swearing Jar into a feature film with director Lindsay Mackay, sinks into the beguiling mysteries of Sofia Coppola's 2003 Oscar-winner Lost in Translation, that delicate little drama where Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson forge an unexpected connection in a Tokyo hotel. Your genial host Norm Wilner has never been to Tokyo, by the way.
This episode focuses on a singular technical foul from a recent AAU game, and the actions that occurred leading up to it, the steps we took to proactively manage the coach, and how we went about administering the technical foul. This podcast will give you some communication and game management tactics for you to immediately apply to your games. One of the themes we discussed is the art of snatching the coach's attention before we deliver our sportsmanship message so our response doesn't get lost in translation. This episode features Justin Wallace, a 4-year official from Mt. Vernon, NY, and loyal Crown Refs supporter. It was an honor to finally work with you!
We are sitting down with Amanda from the Sip List Podcast, and she is doing her very own 104 2000s movie tournament. Check out this episode to see what she think is the best movie from the 2000s is. If you want to do your own tournament, please contact us, and we will set it up. Here are all the movies in the tournament: Watchmen (2009) STEP BROTHERS (2008) Cast Away (2000) BAD SANTA (2003) LOVE & BASKETBALL (2000) THE DARK KNIGHT (2008) PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: THE CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL (2003) THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (2001) BRIDGET JONES'S DIARY (2001) LOST IN TRANSLATION (2003) BARBERSHOP (2002) GLADIATOR (2000) THE HANGOVER (2009) THE PRESTIGE (2006) SIN CITY (2005) ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND (2004) OCEAN'S ELEVEN (2001) CHILDREN OF MEN (2006) TEAM AMERICA: WORLD POLICE (2004) NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (2007) ELF (2003) SHAUN OF THE DEAD (2004) THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA (2006) IRON MAN (2008) WEDDING CRASHERS (2005) UP (2009) BLACK HAWK DOWN (2001) THE WRESTLER (2008) HAPPY FEET (2006) MEAN GIRLS (2004) V FOR VENDETTA (2006) BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN (2005) PARANORMAL ACTIVITY (2007) WALL-E (2008) BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM (2002) THE SISTERHOOD OF THE TRAVELING PANTS (2005) ERIN BROCKOVICH (2000) MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING (2002) WALK THE LINE (2005) HAROLD & KUMAR GO TO WHITE CASTLE (2004) SHREK (2001) THE INCREDIBLES (2004) IN BRUGES (2008) CHICKEN RUN (2000) DONNIE DARKO (2001) SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE (2008) REMEMBER THE TITANS (2000) CASINO ROYALE (2006) CORALINE (2009) HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE (2001) REQUIEM FOR A DREAM (2000) TRAINING DAY (2001) THE 40-YEAR-OLD VIRGIN (2005) CROUCHING TIGER, HIDDEN DRAGON (2000) KILL BILL: VOL. 1 (2003) THE RING (2002) Grindhouse (2007) IDIOCRACY (2006) THE PIANIST (2002) SOMETHING'S GOTTA GIVE (2003) UNBREAKABLE (2000) THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM (2007) X2 (2003)JUNO (2007) COLLATERAL (2004) SPIDER-MAN 2 (2004) LEGALLY BLONDE (2001) THE DEPARTED (2006) AVATAR (2009) AMERICAN PSYCHO (2000) INSIDE MAN (2006) MINORITY REPORT (2002) STAR TREK (2009) THE HURT LOCKER (2008) LOVE ACTUALLY (2003) DISTRICT 9 (2009) SPY KIDS (2001) ZOOLANDER (2001) 28 DAYS LATER (2002) 300 (2006) SUPERBAD (2007) BEST IN SHOW (2000) MR. & MRS. SMITH (2005) BORAT: CULTURAL LEARNINGS OF AMERICA FOR MAKE BENEFIT GLORIOUS NATION OF KAZAKHSTAN (2006) ALMOST FAMOUS (2000) NATIONAL TREASURE (2004) TROPIC THUNDER (2008) INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS (2009) FINDING NEMO (2003) LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE (2006) TRANSFORMERS (2007) NAPOLEON DYNAMITE (2004) TAKEN (2008)ZODIAC (2007) MAMMA MIA! (2008) THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS (2001) THE NOTEBOOK (2004) MOULIN ROUGE (2001) THE SCHOOL OF ROCK (2003) TWILIGHT (2008) SAVE THE LAST DANCE (2001) HOT FUZZ (2007) SAW (2004) MILLION DOLLAR BABY (2004) --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/mass-debaters/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mass-debaters/support
His name is Ben Baller, not Ben Humble & he's here to discuss: Wishing he could stay another week, Lost in Translation, sorry just doesn't move me, Kanye West gaining a new audience of hate, being out here with Kid Cudi, selling out in Korea, wanting to get a place in Japan, depression & salary men, BB Glasses Drop, Murakami meeting & Headquarters then going to dinner, Japanese McDonald's, playing golf where the ZoZo Championship was played & more. This episode is not to be missed! Please Support our Sponsors www.chime.com/baller www.meetfabric.com/baller If you are interested in NBA, NFL, NCAA, MLB, Soccer, UFC & more Picks daily, weekly or monthly subscribe at www.CaptainPicks.com & Follow @TheCaptainPicks on Instagram Produced by: DBPodcasts www.dbpodcasts.com Follow @dbpodcasts on Instagram & Twitter Music by @lakeyinspired Available on all Podcast Platforms, YouTube & BehindTheBallerPod.com Behind The Baller Theme Music Artist: Illegal Kartel (@illegal_kartel_mikal_shakur) Produced by: Gene Crenshaw @yuyuthemaker
Episode Description In this episode of the Miles to Memories podcast we discuss Mark's recent trip to Chicago and his negative experience with Joe's wife (not really), Hyatt Globalists and fake Globalist treatment, more adventures in the air for Shawn, IHG giving out Diamond like candy and a whole lot more. Episode Notes 2:34 - Mark in Chicago 10:07 - The Thompson 24:32 - Prime Day 2 experience 27:48 - IHG Diamond status offer 28:43 - Kimpton in Miami and Little Havana Enjoying the podcast? Please consider leaving us a positive review on your favorite podcast platform! You can also connect with us anytime at email@example.com. You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Sticher, Spotify, TuneIn, Pocket Casts, or via RSS. Don't see your favorite podcast platform? Please let us know! Music: Rewind by Jay Someday | https://soundcloud.com/jaysomeday Music promoted by https://www.free-stock-music.com Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License
Tessa Szyszkowitz and Yossi Mekelberg discuss the anti-government protests in Iran, EU's support of Ukraine, the UK's prime minister under pressure and US diplomats lost in translation. We also we hear from Iuliia Mendel and her time as spokesperson for President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
In this episode of the Thoughtful Entrepreneur, your host Josh Elledge speaks with the CEO and Founder of https://golance.com/ (goLance), Michael Brooks. GoLance is a freelance marketplace that focuses on lowering its costs compared to competitors while increasing the number of features on its platform. Michael explains some competitors like to keep their interactions between provider and consumer on a texting basis and things like sharing phone numbers could result in the termination of the provider. This is a negative quality as it is easy for things to get lost in translation through texting and having a quick call can clear those issues up almost immediately. GoLance is solving this issue for the common freelancer so they do not feel taken advantage of and can provide the appropriate services to the consumer in an easier way. Michael explains that they plug in Slack, Zoom, and Google Meets platforms so the freelancers can have better connections with their clients which can lead to more valuable services being provided and ending with happy clients. The way goLance operates starts with the consumer posting a job and the freelancers will apply. They will take that job opening and encourage people within that specific sector to apply as they are the individuals best fitted for the work. There is a head of the community that encourages freelancers to apply for jobs, complete their profiles, show off their work, as well as finding out who they are so they can find the best job for them. Key Points from the Episode: What goLance is and how it's unique Competitor downfalls and goLance's strengths How goLance operates The goLance origin story About Michael Brooks: Michael Brooks is a strong believer in harmony, teamwork, loyalty, and partnership. He has spent years building businesses with remote freelance talent and implementing strategic solutions through digital marketing and electronic payments. As founder of the award-winning online freelance marketplace goLance, Michael made it his mission to help others by finding new business solutions through digital marketing and electronic payments. Michael has published two books focused on digital marketing strategy for eCommerce businesses and one book on remote businesses. His perspective is that success doesn't happen without risk – but with the right approach (and some luck), it's possible to minimize the risks while maximizing your chances for success. Tweetable Moments: 06:17 "You're an entrepreneur. You don't want to be owned, right? You want freedom, and that's why you chose the life you have." 07:56 "If you are not constantly providing value, enough value to where people want to use your service, then you're doomed." Apply to be a Guest on The Thoughtful Entrepreneur: https://go.upmyinfluene.com/podcast-guest (https://go.upmyinfluene.com/podcast-guest) Links Mentioned in this Episode: Want to learn more? Check out the goLance website at https://golance.com/ (https://golance.com/) Check out goLance on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/company/golance/ (https://www.linkedin.com/company/golance/) Check out Michael Brooks on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelabrooks/ (https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelabrooks/) Don't forget to subscribe to The Thoughtful Entrepreneur and thank you for listening. Tune in next time! More from UpMyInfluence: ️We are actively booking guests for our The Thoughtful Entrepreneur.https://upmyinfluence.com/guest ( Schedule HERE). Are you a 6-figure consultant? I've got high-level intros for you.https://upmyinfluence.com/b2b ( Learn more here). What is your #1 Lead Generation BLOCKER? http://upmyinfluence.com/quiz (Take my free quiz here).