Podcasts about slightly

Kev from Mojo in the Morning joins the pod! We’re talking all things Idlewild, the memories, the culture, and the exciting return of one of Michigan’s most legendary summer weekends.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

We all love the pure satisfaction of popping a fresh sheet of bubble wrap, but its original purpose will completely blow your mind!

Could a tiny injury to your brain change your personality? If your friends didn’t know something had happened in your brain, would they just think you're choosing to act strangely? What if the self is nothing but a fragile coalition of neural processes? Join Eagleman today with Masud Husain, a neurologist and neuroscientist at Oxford, to explore fascinating case studies about how changes in the brain lead to changes in the self.

Episode Title: Midwest Meltdown: 80-Degree Dew Points and the Ring of Fire!  Slightly more humid than classic St Louis Missouri. 00:03 - 01:04: Introduction to the heat wave and high dew points for next week, focusing on the Midwest and the consistent heat dome.01:04 - 02:07: Explanation of heat dome decameter readings and how dew points are the "hidden heat" despite seemingly moderate temperatures.02:07 - 03:08: Forecasting extreme heat indices (105-110°F) for next week, highlighting the unusual widespread 80-81°F dew points.03:08 - 04:14: Discussion of how wind affects perceived temperature in low vs. mid 90s, and the continued high humidity in the Midwest.04:14 - 05:22: Mention of Illinois tornado record and detailed forecast of an 81°F dew point around July 1st in western Illinois/eastern Missouri.05:22 - 06:47: Specific cities and their forecast temperatures and dew points around July 1st-2nd, with emphasis on central Illinois, Indiana, and the Iowa-Missouri corridor.06:47 - 07:51: List of cities most likely to hit 80°F dew points, and the periphery status of Chicago and St. Louis.07:51 - 08:52: Detailed tracking of the 589 decameter line and Chicago's position on the edge of the heat dome, intensifying to 594 decameters by July 2-3.08:52 - 09:55: Chicago falling out of the heat dome by Thursday night as the dome shifts southwest and a trough of low pressure approaches.09:55 - 10:43: The pattern breakdown for Chicago, with the dome shifting west and a cold front approaching by July 3rd-4th.10:43 - 11:46: Introduction of the "Ring of Fire" phenomenon: severe storms forming on the northern and western edges of the heat dome's 588 decameter boundary.11:46 - 12:49: Regions expected to experience repeated severe storms (Northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa, Indiana) while Chicago may sit on the ring.12:49 - 13:17: Final summary of the Ring of Fire, explaining how the dome suppresses storms internally but pushes moisture to explode into storms on its periphery, affecting Chicago by July 2-4.20 Hashtags: #MidwestHeatwave #DewPointDanger #HeatDome2020 #ExtremeHumidity #RingOfFireStorms #WeatherEnthusiast #EuropeanModel #IllinoisWeather #IndianaHeat #MissouriClimate #IowaForecast #SevereWeatherRisk #SummerHeat #HeatIndexAlert #DecametersExplained #MidwestWeather #ClimateWatch #JulyForecast #WeatherNerds #StayCoolStaySafeBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/weather-with-enthusiasm--4911017/support.Weather with Enthusiasm is produced by Kol Simcha Productions.New episodes drop daily (B'N)— a morning forecast at 7 AM and historical deep dives Tuesdays and Thursdays. Contact: kolsimchaproductions@outlook.comHistorical content is thoroughly researched and factually verified. After it has been factually verified it often will say so in the description. Should you find any mistakes, please email kolsimchaproductions@outlook.com so we can look into it and correct it. Not affiliated with any government agency or academic institution. Presented for educational and entertainment purposes — with meaning.Support the show — exclusive bonus episodes available to subscribers for just $2/month at spreaker.com/organization/kol-simcha

Do babies born in different countries cry with entirely different accents? Apparently, yes!

Where did the phrase "hat trick" actually come from? The answer is way more literal than you think!

The Blooming Court Ch. 10Rested and relieved in the Magnificent Mansion, the group breaks into different conversations. Arguile helps Turk with his Thieves' Cant; Zechs fiddles with the multitool, prompting him to tell Shanks about the tools at his disposal and ask if any can help; and he later goes to Hoshino's room to check in on him, as he knows that he's feeling the results of weeks and months of reconnaissance with the Journeyman, after which Zechs shares his experience meeting Tumra.Before starting the day's journey, Shanks goes out to scout and informs the group that there are more trees there than there were the previous day. After leaving the mansion, the party is contacted mentally by the Queen, displeased that the group passed their intended destination. A tense exchange occurs primarily between Hoshino and the Queen, and Hoshino convinces the Queen that the group will indeed retrieve the Song Bloom, on the way back from taking care of their other business, retrieving Glad's boon. The Queen, very obviously impatient and suspicious, tells the party to wrap up what they're doing quickly and retrieve the Song Bloom by day's end. Slightly relieved to have the conversation over, the group looks to Glad for guidance on where to go next and what to do. Looking out over the lake, Glad meditates briefly, then informs everyone that they will have to trust her, but they will need to wait until high noon before they can go anywhere. They understand her and reassure her that they trust her. They kill some time having a bit of a beach day before Glad slowly heads into the lake, and suddenly disappears.The group, concerned, tries to follow her in her wake and succeeds in reaching the temple entrance, where they seem to be looking at the water's surface from below their feet and can breathe normally. Once inside, Hoshino asks the group to gather for a spirit session to gather the magical energy needed for the Commune spell. Calling upon the Daughter of the Vine, he asks about their task at hand and what they should do. He gets answers, but not necessarily the ones he was at the very least expecting. Glad and the party traverse deeper into the temple and eventually find an orb that transfers Glad away from the party. Mildly concerned, they try to follow her, but to no avail. We end with the party discussing their exit strategy and whether they will continue to be pawns in the Queen's plans or suffer the wrath of defying the Fey Queen and heeding Shankise's warning to cease what they're doing.There's so much happening, and that's where we pick up…Find out what happens next in this episode of the Medusa's Cascade: Collateral Damage!Theme Music is written and performed by EfflorescenceMixed by Thomas Lapierre IIITitle Card by Pierce Graphics Check out the show at themedusascascade.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Turns out, humans aren't the only ones who cope poorly with romantic rejection...

Slightly later than billed, our latest episode sees a welcome return to Soundtacking to the utterly charming Finneas O'Connell, who joins us to discuss his score for Beef 2. We've already spoken to Sonny Lee, creator and showrunner of the hugely acclaimed and successful Netflix show, so please do listen to that if you haven't already. But it's always such a joy to take a deep musical dive with Finneas, who speaks so eloquently about his craft. We get into Bond and Barbie too!

Jonathan DeBurca Butler joins Seán Moncrieff to take listeners through the week's international stories…

Our stories tonight have us packing up the car and heading out of town to the cottage. They are stories about lounge chairs and lazy days, sailboats and swimsuits and listening to the waves as they rock you to sleep. Subscribe to our Premium channel.⁠⁠ The first month is on us.

Slightly younger versions of Earth's mightiest heroes team up because the one hero's brother, who would later also become one of Earth's mightiest heroes and then ... fix time? Or break it? ... anyway, he's got these space worms, and ... you know what, it's Avengers, you know what it's about. Listen to us revisit the first great team-up of the MCU!Plus, we'll talk about DISCLOSURE DAY, continue the ongoing evaluation of BACKROOMS and OBSESSION, drop in on SCARY MOVIE, HOPPERS, SWAPPED and more!

“能一直走下去，可能就是真爱。”Slightly Open走到第200期了。这一期像一场把新设备、旧回忆和很多听众留言都搬上桌的家庭聚会：为什么六年过去了，一毛钱没赚，还继续投入，我们却仍然愿意坐下来和大家聊天？当一件事没有干货、没有变现，却让我们一再回到彼此身边，它是在浪费时间，还是在组成生命质量，从里面看见30、40、50岁的可能？六年前的我们和今天的我们，真的变了吗？当“脱下社会身份的你到底是谁”这个问题不再只是一句开场白，答案也慢慢从宏大叙事落回一顿饭、一段关系、一次命运轻轻一推。如果说生命质量是由关系组成的，那么SO这些年留下的，会不会正是关系的形状？这一期也读了很多听众留言：通勤、跑步、做手工、低谷、出国、相遇、结婚生子…也许200期是一次确认：感谢来自你们，宇宙无法定义的爱；也感谢有些长久友谊，不必用力证明，只要继续Slightly Open。时间轴02:04｜开场与新设备： “鸟枪换炮”啦！为什么还要为一个没有现金收益的节目继续投入？ Coco说它像“氧气包”，薇薇说它是每周最开心的时刻，老柴则把它放进“与时代格格不入的长久友谊”里。05:17｜回到第一期：三人重听或回望第一期，发现表达变流畅了，默契从未离开，以及真没“硬核干货”输出啊。08:13｜年龄与身体的变化：30、40、50，生理变化和生活状态被放在同一张时间表上。10:07｜关系如何塑造生命：回看六年里身边人的远近变化，“生命质量是由关系组成的”，SO也从一个节目变成三个人的连接方式。11:22｜六年前和此刻的关键词：六年前你眼中的朋友是什么词，今天又变成什么词？Coco从“认真”到“勇猛”：老柴看到Coco的本质稳定，却更勇猛地和世界相处；薇薇则说她眼中的柴一直是“still water runs deep”，一种看破不说破的人间清醒。14:31｜薇薇从“刚”到“坦荡”：Coco说六年前的薇薇很“刚”，现在更像真实加开放；老柴补上一层转折——薇薇从宏大叙事回到了生活与烟火。21:12｜命运轻轻一推：Coco从J人的自我认知里松动，承认很多真正写进生命的东西来自“轻轻一推”22:30｜十年之约从哪里来：老柴追问当年是谁说要做十年，薇薇说像是“向宇宙先发个大愿”；十年听起来荒诞，却已经走过六年。25:00｜什么时候SO不只是三个人的事：Coco讲第一次在办公楼洗手间被认出，薇薇提到听众带来的温暖，老柴则承认有回响和同类感受，会给节目非常多力量。25:38｜流量的在意与不在意：薇薇直面SO并没有大幅增长，Coco也承认阶段性在意；可如果没有更多人听，这件事还会继续吗？28:14｜SO family的出现：嘉宾群、朋友群和反复来录节目的朋友，慢慢构成一个松散组织；SO不大，却让一些人拥有了珍惜的生命记忆。30:18｜变化这个词：薇薇说Coco更“大开大阖”，Coco则说自己的肉身和真实世界有了更多碰撞；32:02｜SO给Coco的支撑：完成了自我认知、心理建设和朋友加速，也给她一组“类亲人”的关系，纵身一跃时心里有底。34:48｜老柴的“去恐惧”：作为I人，老柴被薇薇和Coco拉向不同类型的人，发现别人并非洪水猛兽；关系的开放，不是社交热闹，而是恐惧慢慢退场。36:11｜薇薇作为一个E人反而更封闭了：对社交质量更敏感，会判断一个场域是在消耗还是托举；这不是变I人，而是更珍惜自己时间的质量。42:06｜SO作为一把尺子：薇薇说真正顺着生命的事会自然发生、开花发芽；如果一件事需要午夜梦回、握紧双拳才能面对，它真的是正确选择吗？45:12｜三个人的思想实验：时间拉长后，能不能浮现一种没那么痛苦、没那么费力的人生？45:41｜六年前最在意什么：记得自己当年周五晚上各自拖着困扰和疲惫地来录制，却想不起具体为什么痛苦；当年最困扰我们的人与事，如今都已不复存在。1:01:53｜哪一期带来认知转变？最喜欢哪一期？1:07:32｜SO作为听众们独处时的陪伴：从紫砂壶创作、跑15公里到通勤做家务，听众把SO放进沉浸式的生活场景里；三人的声音变成一种离人很近的朋友。1:13:40｜Jojo与100小时标签：从第38期认识SO，把周末散步听节目变成仪式感；倒水的声音、40岁的不可怕，都被她细细记住。1:16:39｜送给SO的小画、生日饭与“生命舒展”：Morgan为三人画画，Haro写下低谷时被节目托住的时刻；从SO里看见30、40、50岁的可能。1:19:41｜从高中到30岁的陪伴：张平说从高一刷到老柴，到30岁仍在听SO；流量时代喜欢一个节目很容易，时间加成后，它可以被称作爱吗？1:22:12｜人生阶段里的SO：南小希从职业经理人到创业者，Nancy在西双版纳带来具体照顾；留言不只关于节目，也关于节目带来的现实温暖。1:24:17｜听众记住的细节：Jane写下“姐姐，现在就是以后了”、Coco关于真相的判断、薇薇讲宏大叙事等瞬间；被别人记得的自己，和自以为的自己一样吗？1:29:10｜世界各地的听众：陕西、四川、加拿大、北京、新西兰、美国、葡萄牙的留言陆续出现；一个小小的节目散落到这么多生活现场1:33:37｜被Spring11的“永垂不朽”震撼到了1:43:40｜网友因SO相爱同居：新西兰听众因共同喜欢SO与网友相爱并生活四年；播客成了亲密关系的暗号，这件事让三人鸡皮疙瘩都起来了。1:44:22｜SHU在硅谷听SO：老柴读好朋友书的留言，她在硅谷、匹兹堡、卡内基梅隆之间听“没方向的日子”；SO给她的是做自己的力量和许愿的信念。1:46:36｜听众地图展开：许愿成都、波尔多的SO听众，当听众从抽象数字变成地名，节目边界也变得松动。1:48:49｜没有干货的时代异类：反思自己在AI时代也会听硬科技和认知类播客，可SO偏偏“不分享这些”——不是干货，但有重量。1:50:54｜有没有想过做不下去：Coco承认有两段时间没气力表达，老柴也曾因投入产出比想停；关系像婚姻一样，有时凑合着过过，竟又过得出精彩。1:54:56｜成年友谊靠什么维持：薇薇觉得真正该发生的事浑然天成，Coco则补充也有费力的部分；自然发生和持续努力，哪个更接近关系的真相？1:56:01｜命运轻轻一推，也要表达：Coco说友谊里有很多推手，但关系仍需要学习表达；不表达有时是保护，表达有时才是冒险。1:58:44｜十年之约的最后四年：薇薇轻松说会完成，Coco担心人生难料，只希望三人健康快乐；老柴想象到2030年8月办一场线下聚会，哪怕只剩三五个真爱。2:00:08｜要等十年吗：薇薇觉得不如马上就搞，Coco快“背过气”，老柴担心没人来；各有各的悲观，也各有各的期待。2:00:52｜生日与收尾：三人祝薇薇51岁生日快乐。感谢来自你们，宇宙无法定义的爱本期书影音推荐《蓝精灵》《躺在你的衣柜》陈绮贞《花瓶女》SO往期/相关节目：《爸爸再见》《薇薇五十不知天命》《为什么我们不表达需求？》《你大可不必如此周全》《七宗罪》系列、《100天人生清零》《那些没方向的日子，后来怎样了》。相关播客/节目：《岳下｜户外频道》《晚安老柴》。本期思考你生命里有SO这样的关系吗？它没有干货、没有变现，却让我们一再回到彼此身边，它是在浪费时间，还是在组成生命质量？200期录制前亮哥做的绝好吃排骨。在6月13日我们一起去崇礼跑了越野跑！

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Link Up w/The Morning Sickness Digitally All Over:Instagram: @hms_98_official, @bosskupd, @bretvesely, @dickToledoX/Twitter: @HMSon98, @DickToledo, @bretveselyFacebook: @HMSKUPDYouTube: @hmspodcast9320, @98kupdRequest/Call in/Wakeup Song line:(IN AZ) 602.585.9800More HMS: holmbergpodcast.com, 98kupd.comEmail: dtoledo@98kupd.com, bvesely@98kupd.com, bbogen@98kupd.comSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Posh and Fab revise the original episode of And Just Like That featuring Big's funeral, where Samantha cockblocks florists and tries to hint how much she hates Carrie's podcast. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Greg Donaldson, senior vertical market manager, market intelligence, LexisNexis Risk Solutions, discusses evolving auto insurance shopping trends, consumer behavior, affordability pressures and shifting retention dynamics.

It was an unpredictable, choppy ride on the trading floor today as local investors returned from the long long-weekend. The market narrowly avoided a major blowout, staging a recovery after tech stocks rallied and investors sought shelter in defensive supermarket giants.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The guys are feeling pretty hopeless regarding a potential Dylan Larkin trade.

onight the wheels fall off reality on Nonsensical Nonsense Unhinged conversations, chaotic energy, questionable decisions, and zero adult supervision. Pull up a chair and embrace the insanty with The Nonsensical NetworkFOLLOW US EVERYWHERE bio.link/nonsensicalnetworkSUPPORT THE SHOWS CASHAPP $glickglick13

These are all the appearances Matteo Pascale made on The Ryan Show FM, compiled in chronological order. It is a weekly radio program hosted by radio broadcaster Ryan Verneville along with Mr. Cheeks of the iconic hip-hop group Lost Boyz and Hamptons Dave.The full unabridged version is available on www.crooklyncomedy.comThis slightly Abridged Version had the following music samples as listed: CUT OUT:C.R.E.A.M. - El Michels AffairEl Michels Affair - C.R.E.A.M - El Michels AffairVoodoo Child (Slight Return) - Jimi HendrixForest Green - Odd FutureForest Green (feat. Mike G) - Odd Future

Slightly delayed, but we're back with our final takes on this year's Eurovision Song Contest! Tune in to find out what we think of Bulgaria's win and everything else that happened it yet another dramatic year! Thank you to our listeners, new and old, for joining us for another season, and hope to see you … Continue reading Bulgariaranga: A Eurovision 2026 Debrief →

Gas Buddy's Patrick DeHaan on gas prices slightly dipping full 219 Thu, 04 Jun 2026 07:50:00 +0000 pUgTJCFPxR1vP1v6bnDbgT7tZH5qV5ce news & politics,news WBEN Extras news & politics,news Gas Buddy's Patrick DeHaan on gas prices slightly dipping Archive of various reports and news events 2024 © 2021 Audacy, Inc. News & Politics News https://player.amperwavepodcasting.co

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This week on Gamertag Radio! Interview with Stanley Pierre-Louis, CEO of the Entertainment Software Association. Learn how 212 million Americans, from all ages, are gaming weekly, boosting mental sharpness and social bonds. Uncover surprising insights on gaming's impact on mental health, culture, and real world skills. Players continue to break stereotypes for who is a ‘gamer'.• 212.3 million Americans play video games every week, up 3% (7.2 million) compared to 2025.• The gender of players is split fairly equally between men and women, with 53% of men and 46%of women actively playing. Slightly more boys and men play than girls and women in allgenerations except Boomers (ages 62-80) where 52% of Boomer women play games comparedto 47% of men.• Video games are for everyone, not just kids. While more than 80% of Gen Alpha (age 5-13) andGen Z (age 14-29) play video games, the majority of adults are powering up as well: 71% ofMillennials (age 30-45), 56% of Gen X (age 45-61) and 50% of Boomers (age 62-80) say they playweekly. Even 32% of the silent generation (age 81-90) are joining in on the fun.• Adult players are more likely to be employed full-time (39%) or to have children (35%) comparedto the general U.S. population – 34% and 30%, respectively.Parents prefer their kids play video games, and love playing with them, too.• The majority of American parents (75%) actively play video games each week, with most (81%)saying they also game with their children (52% at least weekly).• Nearly half (49%) of parents whose children play video games believe playing games teachesimportant skills to their children, such as problem solving and creative thinking.• Two thirds of parents say they use parental controls with that number jumping to 70% forparents of kids 12 and under.Americans feel overwhelmingly positive about video games.• Most American adults recognize the positive benefits of playing video games, such as thembeing fun (85%), bringing joy (81%), offering stress relief (78%), and providing mental stimulation(79%). Younger players (Gen Z) especially believe that video games offer a great way to bringpeople together (88%) and build relationships (87%).• Most adults agree that playing video games helps develop problem-solving skills (76%) andteamwork/collaboration (67%), as well as adaptability/resilience (58%) and STEAM (53%) andcommunication skills (52%).• Nearly nine-in-ten (89%) players who play a sport both on-screen and in real life say playing thevideo game version of their sport improves their real-world performance.Mobile leads the way, with people playing across genres and platforms.• Playing on a mobile device is the most popular across all age groups (80%), while PC and consolegameplay is more common with Gen Alpha, Gen Z and Millennials.• Puzzle, primarily driven by older players, is the top genre on mobile (66%) and PC (60%) but fallsbehind action (66%), shooter (60%) and arcade (60%) games on console.Americans believe video games offer the most value for their money.• A majority of players (63%) report that video games deliver the most entertainment value fortheir money, compared to video streaming services for music, TV and movies, as well as books,magazines and news articles.• Most Gen Alpha (69%), Gen Z (78%) and Millennial (67%) players have purchased in-gamecontent, typically spending $20 per month (median).• Parents also purchase in-game content for their children (54%). Of those that do, nearly all ofthem (93%) require approval for in-games purchases made by their kids.• More than half (58%) of players downloaded a game for free in the past 12 months, while 43% purchased a game, 35% purchased a game subscription and 19% borrowed a game.The full Essential Facts About the U.S. Video Game Industry report is now available. For more information, visit the ESA's website.Send us questions - fanmail@gamertagradio.com | Speakpipe.com/gamertagradio or 786-273-7GTR. Join our Discord - https://discord.gg/gtr chat with other GTR community member.

Let's Chat!!Boo, bitches…This week's Cauldron of Chaos is dedicated to every witch currently trying to remain mystical while sweating through their eyeliner.We're talking: 

I'm excited to work with Microsoft once again as the presenting sponsors of the AI Engineer World's Fair! We'll streaming live from MS Build today for a special crossover pod with our friends at No Priors and the one and only Satya Nadella. However we did not hold back with this interview - we asked all the burning questions about uptime and Copilot that we know you have in your minds. Lets go!For almost two decades, GitHub has been the home of software, where both open source and closed flow, through commits, pull requests, reviews, actions, etc.This ecosystem flourished as open-source maintainers and contributors would continue shipping code for the benefit of the community. However as coding agents began to ship mass quantities of code - growing 1400% in 2026, it marked a new era that was both extremely exciting and challenging for GitHub.While these agents help more people ship more projects, they also significantly increase the floor of how much code is shipped, how often it is shipped, how many people commit code, and basically orders of magnitude multiples in every dimension of GitHub infrastructure:Now GitHub inevitably experiences more pressure on their infrastructure which was originally designed around human developers moving at human speed. This has resulted in a very publicly notable uptime story:So it begs the question of whether current systems around code can absorb what AI produces. Can CI/CD keep up when every idea becomes a build? Can open source maintainers survive floods of AI-generated slop contributions? Can GitHub preserve the human social contract of software while becoming the operating layer for agents?Which brings us to the perfect person to answer these questions: GitHub COO Kyle Daigle. In this episode, he joins swyx to unpack what happens when AI doesn't just autocomplete code, but starts changing how companies operate, how open source works, how pull requests get reviewed, and how GitHub itself has to scale. We go deep on GitHub's internal AI workflows: micro-skills, WorkIQ, MCP, Slack, Teams, email, Copilot workflows, the new Copilot desktop app, CLI, cloud agents, and how Kyle uses agents to look backwards across company context before deciding what to do next. Kyle also reflects on GitHub's history building webhooks, APIs, Actions, npm, Dependabot, and Semmle, why the AI era is breaking GitHub in new ways, how Actions became a general-purpose compute layer, and what Copilot becomes after code completion.Full Video PodWe discuss:* Kyle's expanded role across GitHub* How AI got Kyle coding again after years in leadership* Why GitHub rolls out AI through existing workflows instead of forcing new tools* WorkIQ, MCP, Slack, Teams, email, and GitHub as company context* Why massive “mega-skills” are giving way to small, atomic micro-skills* How AI changes summarization, communications, marketing, and analyst work* Why former developers in leadership may have a unique advantage in the AI era* Kyle's “15 agents on Saturday” workflow* How Kyle built an AI-generated executive presentation for CRO/CFO teams* Why AI changes the chief of staff role without removing the human work* GitHub Actions, webhooks, arbitrary code execution, and secure agent compute* The npm acquisition, supply-chain security, 2FA, and token invalidation* Slop forks, vendoring, and whether AI agents change dependency management* What pull requests become when most PRs come from agents* Prompt requests, vouching, AI review, and trust in open source* What counts as a “developer” when AI lowers the barrier to building* GitHub Spark, low-code, and why GitHub refuses to hide the code* 14x commit growth, Actions load, databases, monorepos, and availability* Copilot's evolution from completion to CLI, desktop app, cloud agents, and SDK* Context, memory, rules, and making GitHub “act like Kyle wants it to act”* Ambient AI, OpenClaw, enterprise security, and the new operating system for agents* What swyx should ask Satya Nadella about Microsoft's AI futureKyle Daigle* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kyledaigle* X: https://x.com/kdaigleTimestamps00:00:00 Introduction00:03:36 Why AI Got Kyle Coding Again00:07:04 Running GitHub with AI: WorkIQ, MCP, Slack, Teams, and Skills00:15:39 The Golden Age for Former Developers in Leadership00:17:31 15 Agents on Saturday and AI-Generated Executive Work00:20:20 How AI Changes the Chief of Staff Role00:21:45 GitHub's History: Actions, npm, Webhooks, and Open Source00:28:45 Slop Forks, Vendoring, and AI Dependency Management00:33:57 Pull Requests, Prompt Requests, and Trust in Agent-Generated Code00:41:21 GitHub Stars, 200M+ Developers, and the New AI Builder Wave00:45:15 GitHub Spark, Low-Code, and Why GitHub Still Shows the Code00:47:38 GitHub's Hardest Era: 14x Growth, Reliability, and Scale00:59:21 Actions as the Compute Layer for CI/CD and Automation01:02:04 The State and Future of GitHub Copilot01:08:24 Ambient AI, Background Agents, and the Future of the SDLC01:13:09 OpenClaw, Enterprise Security, and the New OS for Agents01:18:03 Build Announcements, WorkIQ, FoundryIQ, and Microsoft Context01:21:41 What Should swyx Ask Satya?TranscriptIntroduction: Kyle Daigle's Expanded Role at GitHub and MicrosoftSwyx [00:00:00]: We're here with Kyle Daigle, COO of GitHub. Welcome.Kyle [00:00:07]: Hey, thanks for having me.Swyx [00:00:08]: You're not just CEO of GitHub. People know you as that. You have a new role.Kyle [00:00:11]: So I have an expanded role now. I've been working at GitHub for thirteen years and doing all things developer. Joined as a developer myself. And now, I'm also responsible as the CMO of Developer for Microsoft. And so all the kind of learnings and passion for developers and how we work with them and how we communicate and how we bring our products to market, we're also bringing that expertise to the broader Microsoft ecosystem and helping every developer that uses a Microsoft product or would like to have a sort of similar experience that they've had with GitHub over the years. So it's a different role in some ways, but it's also just building on the experience that I've had at GitHub of just sort of tell the truth, be authentic, show people how to use it and then let the products speak for themselves. Now just doing that with, all of Microsoft.Swyx [00:01:09]: We'll be releasing this in conjunction with Build. You got lots of stuff planned, and we can sort of touch on that whenever it's appropriate. I think one of the interesting things is I rarely meet a COO who's also a CMO. I think you're a very outward facing and you're very confident publicly. That's rare. Do you actually view yourself as COO? What's What is your thing?From GitHub Developer to COO/CMO: Building the Platform and Operating GitHubKyle [00:01:33]: I think for me, it's been funny. The titles have always been, a— have always felt a little strange to me. I joined GitHub as a developer? I wrote so much of theSwyx [00:01:46]: Let's bring that up. You wrote the back ends?Kyle [00:01:48]: I was going through, I was going through, some old photos, when folks were talking about how things were being built or how there was a build GitHub. I built, webhooks and worked with teams building the API, built the platform layer. Anything that integrated with GitHub, up until really twenty eighteen, I built or ran the engineering teams. And that's kind of where my the beginning of my passion always was helping people build things, deliver them to, their customers. And so being a developer, building for developers was always super unique. In a— I think as my role expanded, it became my ability to talk to not just developers, but also enterprise customers or business leaders and have this translation layer. And then through all those years, GitHub has always operated pretty uniquely. Post-pandemic, working remotely was not as novel as it was when GitHub started in two thousand and eight. But all that expertise of running remote teams, doing it well, became this sort of bigger role, ultimately turning into the COO role of how do we operate GitHub in the way that GitHub's always operated after the Microsoft acquisition. And kind of so on from there. So like for me, I think the— I've, I still code. I love coding but the problem has always been, people. It's a much harder problem to both support our own employees, a harder problem to communicate to developers and enterprise buyers what we're building why it matters, ‘cause those are two very different messages. And so getting to work in the mix of COO, CMO, also just being a dev, I think is what's kept me at GitHub for so long.AI Workflows for Leadership: Commits, Retrospectives, and ContextSwyx [00:03:40]: Apparently, you have— your commits have gone up. What's this? What's going on?Kyle [00:03:45]: Rui's called me out pretty aggressively. So I think— as you can imagine, right, you can see my normal era of being a dev In the twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen era, and then moving into management, and then ultimately the COO role. I think what you see there is me, really getting back to coding thanks to AI. I— similar to, attaching problems between how to market and how to operate a business and how to code, I find, building agents and workflows that are connecting very disparate problems to be what's driving this. So that's, some of it's writing software. A lot of it is, connecting a ton of a different data sources to, help me out. But that is completely me really diving in on the AI side in trying out our tools, trying out everyone's tools, But building for me, building for the non-technical leader, though I'm technical and how we're, able to use these tools more than just the simple, call and response that I think a lot of the non-technical, your employers, you have to get— you have to use AI, and so everyone uses, ChatGPT or Copilot or Claude or whatever. To really get into, how is this going to help me out, it— I find that it's not the I need to write a blog post, I need to those simple examples. Helping people find the workflows of, “Okay, I need you to go through all the PRs today. I need you to go through everything that we've posted online. I need you to go through what we did the last three months. Go through all of my Obsidian notes for any mentions of this then go through my transcripts at work.” We use, Teams, so, using WorkIQ, go call that MCP server, grab all the transcripts, go through all the Slack, and then build me out the plan of, what this week's messaging actually was. That's something that was, impossible because for me, I find AI in a what most of this launch here is actually, less building forward. It's actually, a recursive loop backwards. I'm always looking at what had happened first. Go back through the week and tell me what we did, what worked, what didn't work? And then tell me in the next three or four days-What would you tweak based on this sort of like looking backwards and then looking ahead a little bit? I find that to be so much more valuable, especially for like non-technical, because that retrospection is actually LLMs are very good at that. Like finding all the patterns, pulling them out, and then applying that retrospection to just a couple of days or just like a short period of time. Is all a bunch of apps that I've built and launched a bunch of, internal tools. I use the new, GitHub Copilot app, the desktop app with workflows. Every time I crack open my laptop, it's running workflows for me. It's just a ton of different stuff and of course, it all ends up on, it all ends up on GitHub.Swyx [00:06:47]: Of course. That's where, that's where, stuff is hosted. Man, there's so much to ask you. I was going to leave the how do you run a company with AI thing at the end. I have to ask one— double click one thing. You said, you are looking back at the week. You're, you're understanding what happens. When you say we That's three thousand people. How?Rolling Out AI Internally: Skills, CLIs, and Company ContextKyle [00:07:09]: I think when we started rolling out AI internally beyond engineering, right? One of the things that I was really, passionate about is like we have to do this in a way where no one has to change how they work. I don't want to have to teach you a tool. I don't want to have to teach you something new. And so for us, we tried out a few tools. Most of them don't work because I got to get you on board? I got to teach you how to use it. What we've actually ended up doing is we've built like a set of skills internally. We have we each have our set of skills, and we've just been distributing even to the non-technical folks, the CLI. And then effectively, we're just giving it access to like read about everything that we're writing. So that's for us, that's usually GitHub, Teams, Email, and Slack. So Teams for, video chat, generally speaking.Swyx [00:08:03]: Teams and Slack?Kyle [00:08:04]: so we use Teams for video communication, but we don't use it for chat. W-we— GitHub for a long history, right? We're alwaysSwyx [00:08:13]: Also SlackKyle [00:08:14]: Talking about ChatOps and like everything is built into Slack. Like every command, every flow.Swyx [00:08:18]: So even though you have been acquired for I don't know, eight years nowKyle [00:08:22]: we stillSwyx [00:08:23]: You still use Slack?Kyle [00:08:23]: it's a purpose-built tool for us, and I think the reality is that moving off of it would be so bluntly expensive? Simply because all the tooling is, baked in with that paradigm. And they both have their pros and cons but they don't work the same way at all. We still use a bunch of different tools Because it's the purpose-built tools that We need. And thenSwyx [00:08:47]: Well, the same doesn't go for the rest of Microsoft, presumably.Kyle [00:08:50]: like the like various teams like operateSwyx [00:08:53]: They make their own decisionsKyle [00:08:54]: Various ways. I think it just matters what you're trying to what you're trying to do. But we do we do work across kind of every tool that we use, and then by giving everyone access to all of that context and the new WorkIQ MCP server, which is quite cool if you do live in the M365 like world. I can ask it all these backwards-facing questions, and it's incredibly important for our teams that are working remotely. There's a lot of stuff you miss when you're not in an office, and we are spread out all over the world. So most of that is looking back. And then we post, we post either auto-automatically into GitHub issues or discussions, these sorts of like findings or like our industry reports. Like what's happening this morning, today, yesterday. A little automation gets run. We'll use the app. We might use GitHub Actions like with, our agentic workflows just to go do that run, and then we push it into GitHub, and w-we keep having a conversation. So usually for us, it's about that sort of like looking back, looking forward on the non-technical side. And then of course for a lot of those folks, it's also building an app, pushing it to GitHub pages or pushing it somewhere to host it et cetera. But it's just like enabling everyone with that power of it's going to take me a week to figure this out. Instead, we're going “Okay I built a skill. Let's put it into a repo. We'll all share that skill together, and then we'll use the CLI or now the app-” “just to run it.”Micro Skills vs. Mega Skills: How GitHub Uses AI at WorkSwyx [00:10:26]: All right. I think, I think we're going straight into like the team management and productivity thing. I think a lot of people are getting various levels of LLM psychosis. How do you manage the bloat of skills? Like everyone Has their thing, and they're Like trying to promote it to the rest of their peers in their org, right? And obviously, whoever becomes a skill influencer internally becomes like an AI leader, right? Of sorts. I assume you have those.Kyle [00:10:50]: like I think we haveSwyx [00:10:52]: And I assume it's a mess a Yeah.Kyle [00:10:54]: there's like I— like I think the reality is there's two pieces. Like first is I think that we're ending the era of these like massive, beautiful, perfect skills that are just like not any of those things. ‘cause for a while, right every tweet every day is like go download the skills, the perfectly managed thing to do this entire workflow. And I think that like what we've found and what— I was just with my team, this week, and we were talking about the skill side, and we're really talking about these like incredibly micro skills that are just doing one thing for us very well Versus a skill that's going to do I said, that full report. That doesn't really exist on our side anymore. It's usually how do— like a single skill that's going to identify the most important marketing information given any MCP server. Like this is the most important thing. Less about stitch a bunch of tools together and have it produce this mega output because then weeks go by, months go by, things change, and you want to tweakSwyx [00:11:58]: It's brittleKyle [00:11:58]: Your mega skill and you're screwed? You can't do that. And so now we're really just talking about the Legos we're using and just letting the instruction book be something we're all putting together. Whereas I think a lot of AI skills for a while have been that mega instruction book style.Swyx [00:12:15]: I've, thought a lot about Postel's law. I don't know if that's a term that is, means things to folks. It's the idea that you should be liberal in what you accept and strict in what you output, right? And I think that's like a good framing principle for skills. This is my skills, obviously on GitHub. I feel like everyone should have like how like some repos In GitHub are special repos? I feel like we should sort of reify the slash skills and everyone like give it some kind of special presentation. Anyway, so, yeah, this is one of those like download Download anything, transcribe anything, and then you can string together the atomic skills that do one thing well Into like some kind of orchestration skill that calls other skills. I assume, does that match?Kyle [00:12:56]: I like I think so. I think that theSwyx [00:13:00]: Summarize anything.Kyle [00:13:01]: Like I think the- For me, summarizing something for I do communications and PR and analyst relations and marketing and customer activities, and so my summarize everything is very different for each one of those like Contexts. What ‘Cause if I'm summarizing something for an analyst, that's a very different thing than, probably how I'm going to summarize something for like a customer meeting or an engagement. So that's I think like the difference when we're talking about the like the tools I might use on Saturday or the skills I might use on a Saturday when it's just for Kyle. Yeah, those are kind of like they have an atomic actual tool underneath or maybe skill, and then Kyle cares about X. But I think when we're talking about work and enabling the the marketers, communicators there, it's the atomic, this is what good summarization is, and then this is what I care about as for marketing for communications For whatever. And that I think is like the interesting matrix problem when we go from like a developer set of concerns to all kinds of different professions, is that what that word means to me is different than it means to you is different than it means to the analyst or the salesperson, and that's where I think the matrix mess is that we're starting to like still starting to find. It's about these mega skills but they're all just slight permutations, but those permutations are really important. It's the difference between someone reading this and going “Did AI make this?” what Or “This makes total sense, and I would expect this when I'm giving a briefing to Gartner,” or like whatever else.Swyx [00:14:37]: I think the beauty of it maybe is that you don't have to be that careful about what goes in there. It doesn't have to exactly fit as long as it like roughly is contained in there. I used to complain about plugin hell, basically. Like when you have a framework and then you have a hundred things that you need to integrate, everyone does like the GitHub used to be bloated full of these things. And now we don't need them anymore ‘cause now you just use skills.Former Developers in Leadership: AI as a Creation MultiplierKyle [00:15:00]: And like I think the most magical thing is the just that like I can just also crack it open. Like Like yes, I could go like change the how the plugin is coded, or like I could go do that now with AI, but I think there's just something more magical about getting a response back and being “That's not right,” and then you just crack the skill open, you just type English words and it's different. That building block is just, I think very unique. Once I get everyone to kind of understand how to best how to best make those changes to get the most power out of them.Swyx [00:15:36]: Is there a— you have a your peer group that Of people like you. Is there a common framing for Something I'm feeling is, which is true, is that is this a golden age for former developers who are now in leadership? Because you can wield the tools, you would know the right words, you're maybe not too close to the details. Doesn't matter. But like you're more effective than someone who doesn't come from that background.Kyle [00:15:59]: I think that like the secret has always been your ability to identify patterns and solve problems, and I think that for folks that like myself that don't code day to day anymore, that has made me successful as a developer, made me successful as a COO and now CMO. And so now that I have access to get and write code, I'm now applying that sort of like pattern finding and problem solving, and I know enough still about how to then go and say, “Oh, I want to make an app, but I don't want to break into jail or create something that's not going to be able to work or to be deployed scale or whatever.” that ability to apply all that additional business knowledge and still code I think is what makes that so interesting to me. Slightly different than I think some of the other like technical leaders that became business leaders and now are going back to their apps and updating them. Good for them? But I think the more, much more interesting thing is, well, now I have this whole new set of expertise over ten plus years. Why not take that and use that as a developer with these AI tools? So I definitely think that makes me more powerful, but I think that's true for like every dev as well. Most of the dev friends I still have also have some other underlying skill and passion. There's really talented, very kind of linear computer science software devs, absolutely. I just find that the folks that came from a different career, went to school for something else, went off and did this random thing, and then became a software dev, or were a dev, did a random thing, came back. Learning that extra set of information, learning those extra skills, and now having the power of an AI where I can crank up fifteen agents on Saturday while my kids are doing lacrosse, That's like really powerful. And I think it gets me back to that feeling of like creation, and it's very hard to replicate that in most other senses? That first time you build an app and you click it and you show someone that's magical. And so being able to do that not just in code, but across all kinds of different assets that's, that's huge. We were doing we're doing our every year we do our revenue planning. We talk about okay, what is it going to look like for next year? And of course as you imagine, there's, slideshows everywhere talking about what are we going to talk about, what's the narrative, et cetera. And so as you said I'm “Okay, well, I could probably just like build something to build this and then that way I don't have to go build the whole spreadsheet or I have to pass it to my team.” So we went through this process, and I got all the information and used the skills I mentioned. I built like a little app just to make it so I could look at some of the information in a SQLite database, more easily. And I ultimately built this entire presentation without touching any of it and I was “Okay, I'm just going to present this to our CRO, the CFO, their teams,” without mentioning I'd built it with AI. I like built a skill to make it look very much not AI driven. Just not pretty.AI-Generated Presentations, Human Taste, and the Changing Chief of Staff RoleSwyx [00:19:03]: Like a design. Yeah.Kyle [00:19:03]: Not pretty. But just like very clearly not AI. Kind of like don't do anything interesting.Swyx [00:19:08]: That's, yeah, that is valuable.Kyle [00:19:08]: Just go Exactly. We did the whole thing through. It used my notes from Obsidian, it used all the context I mentioned before, the plans, and Never came up once that it was AI generated.Swyx [00:19:20]: It didn't matter.Kyle [00:19:20]: Never once. D It didn't matter. And so now I takeSwyx [00:19:23]: This is a toolKyle [00:19:23]: I can take that tool and go, “Look, I don't want you to go build slideshows.” They're just helping us share information with each other. If this thing can do it With a little bit of crafting from you and then we can look at it together, awesome. There's no value in all that extra work. I think that the ability to, make it look humanly bad and and build a little app to, manipulate the data I think is part of, that upside for devs that are now in leadership roles. Because, the thing that I feel like I said before, this that's all a people, that's all a people problem. I know if you've used a coworker or not to build a slide deck, unless you spent a bunch of time to not do it.Swyx [00:20:07]: I know, but like it was so, I think there's a certain charm to just being blatantly AI. ‘Cause I think that you're well, you're just honest about There may be mistakes here that I cannot vouch for. So how much value is there? But anyway I think, actually the real question I want to ask is, there's a— You were a chief of staff To Thomas. And in the pre-AI world, the that job would've been a chief of staff job of like Can you prep me these slides and all that? And now you do it yourself.Kyle [00:20:35]: I still, I still have a chief of staff. Because, the difference is it's sort of the discussion every time we have some sort of technology evolution is it's not that the jobs the roles don't all go away, they just change? And so yeah, I don't have someone spending all their time building out slides for me and presentations ‘cause I don't need that anymore. But now I need that person that is able to go and find all the different connections between humans in those discussions to help me find out, okay, I should be meeting with this group and this team, and they have an opportunity, and I'm going to be in San Francisco today, I'm going to be in Seattle tomorrow. Those sorts of human connection aspects are still incredibly valuable and has always been a big part of that chief of staff role. But now just like chiefs of staff are not opening up, letters to process, they're doing emails. What It's the same thing. And now they're, they're not building out as many of these presentations because they have the the ability to have a AI take it on for, and share that with me and great. Let's keep moving ‘cause it's allowing us to go faster and make better decisions more quickly.Swyx [00:21:45]: Awesome. Well, so we can dive into more sort of, Productivity insights as you go. I did want to do a little bit of a brief history of colleague and hub. Because, we started here. And then you also involved the NPM acquisition. I did, I do want to touch upon that. And then more recently, I just want to bring up to present day where we're having uptime issues Which transparently we've already Addressed publicly, but we'll, we'll discuss in the pod. Did I miss anything? Like what, any other major highlights? Obviously, it's, it's a lot of years to cover.A Brief History of GitHub: Webhooks, Actions, Acquisitions, and Platform EvolutionKyle [00:22:15]: No the I think one of one highlight was right before the acquisition closed in twenty eighteen, I got to launch the first version of ActionsSwyx [00:22:27]: OhKyle [00:22:27]: At GitHub Universe. So it was OSwyx [00:22:29]: They're that young?Kyle [00:22:30]: It was October of twenty eighteen, I think. Yeah. Yeah.Swyx [00:22:33]: Gee, Jesus.Kyle [00:22:34]: I got to I was the engineering leader on that project and got to launch that. And then, yeah, we did acquisitions of NPM you said, Semmle, Dependabot Pul Panda a whole bunch of things. That was a bigSwyx [00:22:47]: Pul Panda.Kyle [00:22:48]: Abi is doing well.Swyx [00:22:51]: DX. Holy crap.Kyle [00:22:52]: Did well on DX. I and like that was a that was the big shift, after the acquisition. I had to join the sort of business side.Swyx [00:23:00]: So I need to hit you on some of these things ‘cause you were there. Right? And how often do I get to talk to someone who was there? But yeah, Actions. Is that the number one source of security issues on GitHub?Kyle [00:23:11]: Oh, sh I think that the number one source of, security issues is probably like all, the literal code in everyone's like underlying repositories. I would say back further than that is, if you remember I had to show in this graph was this is, I'm, didn't say this before, this is ultimately webhooks.Swyx [00:23:30]: You yeah.Kyle [00:23:31]: Like circa whatever it was.Swyx [00:23:32]: It says Hookshot in there.Kyle [00:23:32]: I forget. Yeah. Yeah, Hookshot's in there. And so like back then, it says GitHub Services. Do you see, it says Hookshot FE for front end, and then it says GitHub Services. GitHub Services back in the old days, right? You we had a repository that was Ruby code, and you could write any Ruby code in there, and then we would execute that On your behalf As a service, and then that way if an if you were trying to integrate with something, it didn't we would run it for you.Swyx [00:23:57]: And of course no containers ‘causeKyle [00:23:58]: No, ‘cause it wasSwyx [00:23:59]: Well, no containersKyle [00:24:00]: Twenty fourteen. And so there was some isolation obviously, but it was mostly the separations on the server level. That's like an example as long as the very old version of Pages, which ran on its own containerization infrastructure, not on Actions.Swyx [00:24:15]: Which like all-time great product.Kyle [00:24:16]: Pages powers the internet at this point to some degree. Those were places where like clearly there were no like issues like to my knowledge. But it was those things where I'm looking at and going “Okay, well we can't be running arbitrary Ruby code,” like on everyone's behalf. Then containerizing all of that up intoUh into actions now where yeah the containerization, is r-really good. The pinning most folks aren't pinning it the like to a particularSwyx [00:24:48]: ImagesKyle [00:24:48]: Sha, et cetera like their workflows, and so that's a big that's a big place Of pain for folks if they're just doing similar to any dependency management, just V1 or newest or latest, I think. But, that journey from that day to “Okay, we're just going to run all this arbitrary code, and, it'll basically be okay,” to now, no, we have, really good containerization. We have a new, underlying, ag-agent, containerization, service. It's like we're using it under the hood. It's through Azure. They recently announced it. The Azure, Dev Compute, but it's, very fast, very fast compute to be able to, spin up your own cloud agents, or whatnot. We're using it under the hood for some parts of the new,Swyx [00:25:36]: Microsoft Dev Box?Kyle [00:25:37]: No. Dev Compute, yeah.Swyx [00:25:41]: Hmm. Not finding it just yet.Kyle [00:25:44]: Oh, it's, it's in there somewhere.Swyx [00:25:46]: All right. Well, we'll cut that out.Kyle [00:25:47]: Sorry. But with, Dev Compute, you can, run, really fast, spin up really, small VMs really quickly, so you're doing a tool callSwyx [00:25:58]: Same conceptKyle [00:25:58]: Just do it containerize exact-exactly. So we're using that so definitely moving that direction to protect us from every every piece of code that we're ultimately running.Swyx [00:26:07]: look, that grows into the full SDLC? Code hosting was just the start and and then it's grown beyond that. Let's talk about NPM may-maybe ‘cause I think that's also, a very major point in the industry. I do think, it was looking for a home. It was, kind of struggling as a business, right? I don't know, I don't know how you would characterize that whole acquisition and how itNPM, Package Security, and Keeping the Internet RunningKyle [00:26:33]: like when we were talking to the team, I think the big thing for the both of us was to find a way to keep NPM, which was basically powering the internet then and way more so now to some degree running. Keep it going keep continuing to scale. It was having scaling problems, if I recall, back at that time. They were doing some rewrites. ItSwyx [00:27:00]: that's cute compared to now.Kyle [00:27:01]: Well, that's the thing is like when I'm talking to folks now, there's there's so many more underlying uses of NPM than there were back when we had them join in with GitHub. But that was ultimately the goal. It was really okay, we used to have pages. We have, the world's code. Let's make sure that we can keep NPM running well for the world. And we put a bunch of time and investment into fixing some of the underlying backend, changes, some of which we talked about some of the manifest work, et cetera. And then now, really trying to bring the the security posture of NPM up to speed. But, it is a unique challenge in that every move that we make to make it more secure will break a lot of people. And security is paramount. And also, we take it very seriously. We're, the any time that we have a problem with GitHub or we make a change that makes us more secure but hurts, there's, a snow day for developers or a really bad fire that they have to go put out. And so we've, have changed the 2FA policies. We've changed the way the tokens work. When we find tokens that have been exposed or potentially, exposed, we invalidate them, andSwyx [00:28:22]: I love that feature in GitHub. Yeah, it's greatKyle [00:28:23]: That creates issues, but, the but that's the thing is we're trying to push the community, forward without necessarily, doing something that is going to break the contract that's been for 15 years or close to it or some amount of years on NPM.Slop Forks, Vendoring, and the Future of Open Source Supply ChainsSwyx [00:28:43]: I think the— So now we're talking about, open source and publishing. And I think there's something here with what people are calling slop forks, which, I think Malta from Vercel is doing. And, part of me thinks, well, the way to get past any vulnerabilities, we just, let's just get rid of the concept of NPM. And we only publish source code. And anytime you want to import it you have your coding agent look at it and then adapt whatever subset you're going to use into your vendor it. But, the AI vendor it. Is that realistic? I don't know. Is it— Will that solve all our security issues? I don't know.Kyle [00:29:24]: I don't think it'll solve I so Mitchell was just talking Mitchell Hashimoto Was just talking about this today, and I think that I-in some ways, it's all all things, old or new again? Yeah, absolutely vendoring everything. Like I do I do remember twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen.Swyx [00:29:42]: This is Yeah. Let's, we must return toKyle [00:29:43]: That's what is We were vendoring everything. We were having actual discussions around, or at least I remember we were “Should we take this full thing?” “Why is this so big? We only need this one file.” And so I do think there's something true there where having either taking only what you need or the dependencies just getting incredibly small over time, I think will help to some degree, but it's not going to solve the fundamental problem, I don't think, because the vulnerabilities in an agent looking at them, there's time and time again, there's a million different ways in which we can convince an agent that this thing is, secure or not and pull it in. Or we can do static code analysis or runtime testing to say whether the code works or not. That is, I think, the step that needs to continue to be, invested in. The question is just on, how much scope. Should it be this enormous project that I'm pulling down, or should it be this piece? Either most companies are running some amount of security checking on the on the packages that they're bringing in or vendoring. That I think won't change. That's like what advanced security does to some degree, Socket does some degree. Like everyone is doing a piece of that. How we each do that like especially when we're talking to enterprise customers, is just like very different. No there's no one wants one single way to do it. And I think that's always been GitHub's, unique position in the world. I talk a lot to maintainers, I talk a lot to folks about this. It's we're— we rarely start like a process and a practice and like push it onto the community. We usually wait for the sort of like RFC process socially or literally, everyone agreeing, and then we'll cement something in. Because otherwise we'reMaintainers, RFCs, Vouching, and the Social Layer of TrustSwyx [00:31:35]: That fits your role in the ecosystem, yeahKyle [00:31:36]: We're GitHub. Yeah, we don't want to shape the whole thing. We want it to be figured out. But like how do you balance that like sort of Role in the industry to keep everything as secure as is possible and make sure that you're you're not going to be compromised as a human, ‘cause that's usually how it all happens. And Not not create a process or lock us into a flow that you're not going to or like Mitchell's not going to or other open source projects aren't going to like. That's always been a tricky balance for us, and I think that's something that we haven't talked about enough is we're not going to be able to fix everything for everyone in a way that everyone is going to like. So tell, help us, tell us what is working. When Mitchell was talking about, the Upvote, the upSwyx [00:32:22]: I was going to bring up his thing. Yeah.Kyle [00:32:23]: I forget what it Yeah. When he's talking to us, I was chatting with him and talking to him about this and I put it on Twitter and we talked to, also over DM, was “We're going to keep working.” but I think the important thing is I do actually want to hear what isn't working for you. And as, be as specific and clear for your project as is possible. And to every piece of credit over the many years that we've known each other through the industry, he's always done that and I appreciate that ‘cause there are places that we need to fix up, and we hear from him, and we'll fix up just like we do all other kinds of maintainers. But that that process between making those types of improvements and being more secure and like creating, I forget what he calls it's not the proof process, not the claims process. Do what I'm talking about? He has that he his projects have a way for you to kind of like,Swyx [00:33:13]: VouchKyle [00:33:13]: Vouch. Thank you. Yeah. He has like the vouch system for saying, “Hey, you should accept my PRs.” That's beenSwyx [00:33:20]: I just built this into GitHub. I don't know.Kyle [00:33:22]: Well, see, but that's the thing is that you say that and like he and his community really likes this and then I'll go talk to other maintainers and other maintainers, globally, and they're “No, this doesn't work for me.” And that is the tension, but also the kind of beauty of GitHub, depending on which way you look at it is we want to help maintainers, so we create all these tools to let you have more control over how much you take in from AI and PRs. But you can also use this. What You can go use this project, and if it takes off and becomes the kind of mostly standard, then yeah, we probably wouldn't enforce it but we would add it in because that's the flow that we tend to do?Swyx [00:34:02]: I hear a lot of people don't know the history of the pull request. And like like that's how, that's something that GitHub standardized basically.Kyle [00:34:08]: Yeah. It was a very messy process Like beforehand, and now the we have the benefit of it being the process? And now we have to go and Figure out the next best process or what adaptations change, or what does a pull request look like when eighty percent of your PRs are just coming from your agents and not From other devs?Swyx [00:34:31]: Do you like the prompt request idea from Peter?Kyle [00:34:34]: like I think that for each like each idea I think has its merits. I'm not, I'm not avoiding saying anything good or bad, but I feel like I've seen a version of we have that we have entire Thomas' store. Take all the assets of what you've built and put that in. I think that's got great ideas. There's all these various permutations of the PR flow, but I think the reason why there's not a single answer is ultimately we're trying to codify trust. We're trying to say “Okay, if Sean reviews this I'm going to trust it because you're Sean or you're the senior dev or you're the whatever.” And right now, when we are working in a flow where an agent writes code and another agent reviews code and then Kyle goes and looks at it the trust is kind of diffuse. And most of the tools that we're talking about are talking more about verification flows. We have more assets to look at, so I can probably say whether this is a good PR or not. But that still doesn't solve, I think, the human problem of I'm looking at a PR and I want to know if I can trust it. And we're still, we still tend to use human signals for that? Mitchell approving it or Kyle approving it or whatever. And so I think that's, I think that's why most of these options haven't really solved it is because, it's a social problem ultimately. It's a it's a human problem to review it and agree. Or you fully trust the tool and you're imbuing that tool with full trust Which I think in some cases that absolutely exists.AI-Generated PRs, Trust, and the Waymo AnalogySwyx [00:36:08]: And so like in the same way that there will be a tipping point in society when we don't allow humans to drive anymore Because machines are measurably better than Than humans. I'm looking for that tipping point, right? Like Mythos is ridiculously expensive. Someday we'll have Mythos on a desktop. I don't know. Will, does that change the equation?Kyle [00:36:30]: I think it's more I took a Waymo here, and I was on my phone and not looking around at all. There are other, self-driving, vehicles that I would not trust while, staring at the road. And I think that trust is something that isSwyx [00:36:48]: Is this a Zoox thing? What is itKyle [00:36:50]: I think that is both. I think that is both. LikeSwyx [00:36:53]: There's Zoox in this robo taxi. That's it. It'sKyle [00:36:56]: Well, depending on what level Of self-driving. But, my point is sort of that I think part of that is I strongly believe that's, a mixture of verifiable proof. Like how many accidents, how much data, and so on, and the human aspect of how I feel when I'm in this car, what it tells me, et cetera. And so that's why I think some of the like Some of these some of our AI tools tend to, imbue me with more of that feeling of trust, even if the data says this is 100% accurate. I feel like it takes more time for us to go, “Should I trust this or not?” And that's in the soft sense of, startups with high agency, weekend projects, and open source. And then there's enterprises and regulated industries and everything else, and that is an even harder problem to go solve because even when it is fully verified, not only do you have to have trust from the humans on the team, you probably have to have trust from multinational,Swyx [00:37:55]: Oh my GodKyle [00:37:55]: Multi governments around the world and regulating agencies. And so that's where I feel like until we tip over to your point on the sort of like human EQ side of it. I feel okay this feels okay I've been proven enough. Then the ball will start to roll a lot faster, where we'll end up getting to the “Okay, we can trust this,” and feel good about it in the Most difficult of cases.Reputation, Sponsors, Stars, and Bot Activity on GitHubSwyx [00:38:18]: If human trust is the thing that matters, I feel like GitHub as the developer social network could maybe do more there. Like vouchers are one system But, we have star counts, and then we have Contributor rights, and that's it. And I feel like there should be more in that space. I don't know if there's any other design decisions there.Kyle [00:38:37]: I think that one of the places that we don't really expose right now in this sort of way is, some degree of like hard trust and support, which would like for me is like sponsors is a good example of that.Swyx [00:38:49]: Ah.Kyle [00:38:49]: It like costs you something. To prove that I believe in your project and I trust you To some degree or I want to support you at the very least.Swyx [00:38:56]: Solve payments for open source. Why not?Kyle [00:38:58]: I think that I think that like as we keep moving forward, right, there's more and more projects where I'm, adding more and more dollars into sponsors personally because I want to like support them, but I also like know of I've probably never met them in person, but, I know of enough of their work that I want to support them. I think the thing that I don't love about stars or commit counts or anything else is ultimately, even with all of the various, abuse and de-spamming and deduplication work that we do or anti-abuse work that we do, these are all, not active social signals. They're passive ones that are ultimately gamifiable. And you may trust me, but another open source maintainer may not. And on what heuristic should you be, trusting me? That I think, is kind of where some of our thinking is right now. What signal from me is most important to you? You— If you can define that potentially, honestly in an agentic workflow that's what we see some of these open source projects do, where you have GitHub actions, and then you have like an agentic workflow that's calling AI, and you're setting these rules. Like if Kyle has submitted and gotten accepted PRs across any given project and has a social handle tied to his account in GitHub, and that social account's older than a certain amount. Really complex measures that matter to you ‘cause most open source projects have that heuristic built into their heads, if not written down in the contributing guidelines. You could take that and then go apply that and then just say, “Oh, we're not going to accept this PR.” Building something that is, I think, malleable to everyone's needs, is a little bit better, rather than going “Hmm, this account's too young.” Because what happens? The attackers just go and go and create a multitude of accounts, and they wait Until it ages up. Needs to have a certain amount of stars. That's how star inflation happens. Need to have a certain amount of reposSwyx [00:40:46]: Oh my God. YeahKyle [00:40:47]: With PRs. They all just create repos and submit PRs to each other, and then they come in and do something nefarious. And so, it's hard. It's hard to find the measure. So I think we're, we're looking more at how can we provide you tools so you can kind of choose what's best for you. And of course, we'll give you some standards. But the trust vector, gets down to I don't know, some version of like human digital ID like everyone's been talking about. Like how do I prove that it's meSwyx [00:41:13]: Give me your eyeballsKyle [00:41:14]: On the internet. Give me your eyeballs. Exactly.Swyx [00:41:18]: The I got to keep moving on Topics, but obviously I can go all day on this stuff because, I've been involved in GitHub and open source My entire professional career. Stars. Very superficial. Everyone knows it. But I think time to one hundred thousand stars is the fastest I've ever seen. Like people just reached that in I don't know, months. And then like at the same time I don't trust it right? Like how many of these are real or bot or like whatever. I don't know how to ask this but like what can we do about it? LikeKyle [00:41:49]: JustSwyx [00:41:49]: Is stars broken? Is stars fine?Kyle [00:41:51]: I think that there's kind of two, there's like two pieces. Obviously we're constantly like trying to find ways in which like your users are producing spam, which would, I would include like be like only doing star gamification. When we find them, we pluck ‘em out and we,Swyx [00:42:08]: But it's like a Whac-A-MoleKyle [00:42:10]: It's a hundred percent like a Whac-A-MoleSwyx [00:42:11]: There's no wayKyle [00:42:11]: Now, powered by AI to be helpful. But I think more so what I'm seeing is, a lot of the like fastest time to X tends to be because we're now inviting so many more people into like software development on GitHub That like the zeitgeist is just swarming? And it'sSwyx [00:42:32]: It's not just developers anymoreKyle [00:42:33]: And it's not you and I. Like like however you want to say like what a developer is it's not just folks who have been coding for a very long time. It's folks that have maybe started coding or only joined in since the AI era. And nowSwyx [00:42:44]: what's the latest Octoverse number? I know eighty million was my lastRem- member that a number of developers on GitHubKyle [00:42:50]: Oh, we're over 200 million now.Swyx [00:42:53]: Okay. Well, so you see?Kyle [00:42:55]: Like over 200 million developers now.Swyx [00:42:56]: But it's not developers, right? It's, it's people with a GitHub account.What Counts as a Developer in the AI Era?Kyle [00:43:00]: So, so this is, this is the biggest debate that I would say, everyone loves to have at GitHub at this point. From my perspective, right, I think that there's, there's clearly a difference between, professional enterprise developer and then developers. But I think that I think that the idea that we should be I don't know, splitting hairs or segmenting developers in the early era of software development is, not worth our not worth the time. SoSwyx [00:43:29]: When you get into gatekeepingKyle [00:43:31]: 100%Swyx [00:43:31]: What is a developer?Kyle [00:43:31]: 100%. ‘Cause I wasn't a developer when I started writing code? I was going toSwyx [00:43:36]: Oh, no. I made— I cloned a thing, seven years before I learned to code. And then I and then I wrote about my learning to code journey, and people Just called me a fraud ‘cause I had a GitHub account. And I'm “Well, no, I just use GitHub, but I don't know-” “I didn't know what I was doing.”Kyle [00:43:49]: I I remember that. I remember those sets of posts, and like that's, that's b******t. So I fight very clearly on the line of, if you create code, if you have an idea and you create it into some way of, I'm, I'm going to run it and use the app right now, you may still use AI in that moment, but that's okay. At some point you're going to do the next thing. You're going to create a big— You're going to have to learn about this database. You're going to fix a bug, whatever. We're all on some same journey, and those people are also hearing about the great new agent skill package or a new CLI tool or a new whatever. And those projects are going up because you want to be a part of this moment, just like I wanted to be a part of the Ruby community when Ruby was popping off when I started becoming a developer, and now I can just click the star button. And so I think that yes, there's clearly some amount of like spamming and game gamification that we're working against, but I really think we're just seeing this whole new cohort of folks that are moving from technology to technology because they're not working on a 20-year-old software application. They're working on a side app that they built on the weekend for their friends or for their new idea or whatever. And that's how you see these enormous charts going up and to the right with With stars.Swyx [00:44:59]: I think something that's remarkable is the persistence or, that GitHub extends to those folks. Usually when I see platforms go into a new audience, they usually have to, have like a second platform with a different name that wraps the main platform. But somehow GitHub has been able to sort of persist and extend, and it's friendly and whatever? So it's, it's nice.Spark, Low-Code, and Always Showing the CodeKyle [00:45:19]: I that's partially why I think as we've tried to move into I don't know, more like low-code-y things. We so we started working on Spark as like a way to, build an app and run it. I think that the reality is that we anytime we try to, kind of put even a veneer on top of it without when we put a veneer on top of something, we still always show you the code. That's kind of like a tenant. We're never going to, hide the code from you ever, because whatSwyx [00:45:52]: Why would you?Kyle [00:45:52]: That's, yeah, that's the whole point? However, I think that what we learned with things like Spark is that really the value of Spark for most devs is, easy runtime. And you may have a runtime or a host that you're going to use for that or you just build something and run it but, the package of making that even more simple isn't really needed for folks that are trying to build software and not just trying to build, an app, which is, slightly different, a slightly different goal. So I want to get you in, I want to get you comfortable. I think the best thing for me as, someone that did not traditionally come into software dev way back, I want anyone to be able to breach that chasm and not be in the I don't know, I feel like we're, we're still in an era of, STEM. I've got a 12-year-old and an eight-year-old, and it's “We got to get ‘em into STEM,”? Over and over. And I like I do, I do the things that good parents do. I was “Oh, you want to do coding?” “Yes, I want to do coding.” Do coding classes. But now they're just not afraid of doing software. And that's, I think, the thing that's honestly kept me at GitHub for so long. Anyone should be able to go and build a thing, just like I can go change a light switch in my house. I'm not going to go into the breaker box ‘cause I'll probably kill myself? But, I can go change that light switch. Everyone should be able to go and say, “This fricking app doesn't do what I want. I want it to work like this.” And that I think, is what's kind of kept us all connected with GitHub through the years and some and during the easiest of times or in the hard times because of that opportunity of, we're the home for all developers, and we want everyone to be able to have that feeling that we've had of, had an idea, I created it and holy s**t here it is.Swyx [00:47:37]: Here it is. All right, I'm going to try to do more spicy questions.GitHub's Hardest Scaling Moment: Growth, Agents, and UptimeKyle [00:47:42]: Great.Swyx [00:47:42]: Is it an easy time now or a hard time?Kyle [00:47:45]: Oh at GitHub? It's a hard time. Like, it's a hard time and also, I was just with my team and I said, “This is also, the best and most exciting time that I think I can remember at GitHub.” BecauseSwyx [00:47:57]: Best of times, worst of times. It's never oneKyle [00:47:59]: ‘cause we've we were talking about Octoverse reports and, usually we do an Octoverse report once a year, and we look at the numbers, and we say, “Oh my goodness.” I was at Universe in October saying, “This was the fastest year of growth that we've ever had,” right? And now we're doing more in a month than we did in a year last year.Swyx [00:48:20]: You're talking about PRs.Kyle [00:48:21]: Commits.Swyx [00:48:21]: Commits, yeah.Kyle [00:48:22]: PRs. Kind of like you name it by roughly every measure that we're looking at, there's some amount of sort of growth that is much bigger, and that is breaking our system in new ways, not old ways. Like webhooks were always notoriously, unreliable over the years?Swyx [00:48:38]: Whose fault is that?Kyle [00:48:39]: not anymore mine, but for a period of time, I'm sure you could pull up a tweet that was “It was me. I'm sorry.” but, now, that got rewritten at a scale level that is still working and is not having problems today. Now what we're finding isn't just the isn't the-The simple stuff that folks are on the sometimes on Twitter or on the internet are “Hey, why is this like this?” Sure. There's absolutely silly problems that we shouldn't exist. But now we're talking about, unique, novel permission problems that happen only at a scale across all different objects or whatever, that now we have to go rewrite this underlying system. And so it's, there are problems that yeah, caught us off guard, which I think I said. Like the growth is astronomical, but also we're making such material progress in that I'm excited once we're once we've kind of like reimagined the underlying foundation layer, or pieces of it at least, what's going to be possible when it's not just all of us and all the new people that are being developers and all of their agents and all the tools like working together. Because that'll still happen in that in that GitHub tool, that GitHub community. But it's a it's a hard day anytime we can't give you what you're looking for. We have the same problem internally. We operate through github. Com. Of course, we have backups when things go down and whatnot for our own operations but we feel it too. If it's not working it's not working for us, and that's kind of like the promise of dogfooding for GitHub. It's always been true. We're using the same tool you're using. We're not using a super secret version. We and so we also need it to be great for us for our customers of course for open source. And now an exponential growth of agents, Doing it too.Swyx [00:50:32]: I wanted to load for audio listeners who maybe haven't seen your tweets, whatever. So one billion commits in twenty-five. Now it's two hundred and seventy-five million per week on pace for fourteen billion this year, if growth remains linear. Is that still the pace? I don't know. It's been aKyle [00:50:48]: it's, it's speedingSwyx [00:50:50]: Roughly.Kyle [00:50:50]: It's still speeding up.Swyx [00:50:51]: It's, it's April, so yeah.Kyle [00:50:51]: Exactly. This was in April.Swyx [00:50:53]: All right. So basically you have fourteen x growth, right? Year on year on year. And I think that's a scaling issue. I think, I'm going to like try to really steel man this thing. People have experienced fourteen x growth. They haven't had your downtime. And that's like— C-can we go dig into that? Why? Like what's the— what broke? What are we doing to fix it? Like just anything for the community to reassure them.Why GitHub Reliability Is Breaking in New WaysKyle [00:51:18]: so there's a Like I was saying, there's a couple different places that we've seen the growth issues. Some of the growth issues, which is why we're t— I was talking about pushing hard on more CPUs is in actions in particular. More tools, more agents, more PRs mean more builds, more builds mean more CPUs. And so we are expanding through not just our data center, but obviously we were talking about moving to Azure and moving to, adding an additional cloud compute because we simply need more CPUs. Not as much GPUs. We definitely need GPUs too, but now CPUs are becoming a factor.Swyx [00:51:53]: It's very CPU heavy.Kyle [00:51:54]: Underneath the hood when it comes to some of the underlying services, we've been breaking up over the years our database infrastructure, so that way we have, more cognitive separation between our the various services. The place that we continue to have pain is in, permissioning. And so right now m-many of our permissioning layers sit into a database that we like internally call MySQL One, and old Hubbers will know what I'm talking about. And so we've been pulling things out of MySQL One for many years, because like and we use we use Vitess and we use other technologies to shard and we do it as one bigSwyx [00:52:31]: Famous thing, PlanetScale was born from this andKyle [00:52:32]: A hundred percent. Sam Old Hubber and friend. And so finding these opportunities to like break this out and then do that globally. The other thing that I think is interesting and both a unique opportunity and tricky is we also run everything I just talked about in a black box container with GitHub Enterprise Server for people that work on-prem. So we take everything I just said, and we also do it on-prem, and we also do all of that and we do it in a data residence setup for customers that need to have their data in a single location. Each of these has the unique characteristic around how we're sort of storing that data in MySQL or in a permissioning setup. That's where some of these outages have oc-occurred, where you're seeing it more like across the board rather than just like the one pieceSwyx [00:53:17]: Filling the databaseKyle [00:53:17]: Isn't quite working. Exactly. And so part of it is that. I think there's been some other places where agents are much more or more projects appear to be moving towards monorepo versus we were going the other direction for many years in the industry. Repos were smaller, but there were more of them, and now we're seeing the opposite. Repos are bigger, and there's, not fewer of them per se ‘cause there's new growth, but, we're just seeing many more big repos. Big repos, big monorepos have always had, a unique performance problem. Because each one, is slightly different if, particularly if the underlying blobs are incredibly big Inside the repos. And so we've done a ton of work that you pro— like most people haven't probably experienced, unless you're in this case of the monorepo. But that Git, infrastructure layer improvement does help the overall, system because, many of the improvements that make monorepos work better make all repo infrastructure work better. And so, I could kind of keep going down the line where it's another thing where we're moving out of, We're changing how we do j I'll just say job queuing for lack of a better, explanation changing the underlying technologies there.Swyx [00:54:32]: I spent two years being a job queuing guy, so.Kyle [00:54:34]: And so it's kind of a little bit of a little bit of piece by piece, and it's mostly because as we were— as it was built, we built everything in a way that assumed, I guess in some ways that the size of the pipe of work was going to remain the same. There's just going to be more people coming through each of those pipes. But instead now in places whereA git push was, generally a certain size for example, is now, no longer true.Swyx [00:55:03]: Oh, yeah.Kyle [00:55:03]: OrSwyx [00:55:05]: I push a thousandKyle [00:55:06]: On the average. 100%Swyx [00:55:06]: A thousand line commits like dailyKyle [00:55:07]: Same thing with PRs. Like PRs same thing. And like we've talked about optimizing that and making changes where, and there were technology choices that did not work there? And it got slow, and it didn't It was not fast. It did not do what the users wanted. And so we've been reeling that all out and going “Okay, that's just not right. Let's stop putting good money after bad and do it the do it the right way or the right way now.” So there's It's a it's a lot of things, not quite when I've experienced scale at GitHub historically, it's almost always two options that we've used. We go vertical scaling, particularly with databases, right? And we go horizontal scaling. Oh, we just have more people using this service. Great. We're going to add more servers, and we rack them in our data center, or we use it in a cloud. And now we're sort of in a like diagonal, where like vertical doesn't really work anymore. Horizontal isn't work either because we're all We all have some CPU or GPU constraints in the world now, and now we have to go in and like crack open services that have been running for 10 or 15 years and go, “Okay, the rules of this service have legitimately changed, and now we have to rewrite them.” None of this is an excuse. This is like we're We have to do the work. We have to make it better.Swyx [00:56:22]: actually as an infra guy, I'm “This is like one of the most fascinating scaling challenges I've ever seen.”Kyle [00:56:26]: That's that's, that's the thing that's the thing that it's hard for Like when we weren't talking about it publicly, and I was like I came out, and I was “Hey, I just want to explain what's going on.” Part of it comes from a very old GitHub ethos, which is it's our it's our uptime. It's down. W What I know you're a developer, so you're, you're inclined to want to understand more what's going on. But at the same time us going “Hey, this service didn't, perform the way we expected, and now we have to go change it,” we weren't We're not trying to hide anything from you i

AI is everywhere right now, and so is the advice telling you to use it to replace your social media manager entirely. In this episode, Andrea gives her honest, unfiltered take from someone who uses AI every single day inside her agency: what it genuinely does well, where it falls short, no matter how sophisticated your setup, and the one thing AI simply can't replicate, no matter how good your prompts are.IN THIS EPISODE YOU WILL LEARN→ What AI is actually useful for inside a social media agency and where it has to hand back to a human→ Why AI plus a non-marketer is not the solution you think it is→ The real reason so much content looks the same right now and what your audience is craving instead→ Why AI will replace some social media managers and exactly which ones are safe→ What experienced strategic thinking gives your content that no AI tool can replicateLINKS MENTIONEDBook a content shoot (Illawarra businesses, June only): https://r0zov660ttj.typeform.com/to/khP778b4 Follow Andrea on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/andreamareecreativeENJOYED THIS EPISODE?If this episode made something click for you, take a screenshot and share it on your Instagram stories. Tag @andreamareecreative so I can celebrate you.If you haven't already, follow the show so you never miss an episode. And if you've been listening for a while, leaving a rating and review takes two minutes and helps Instagram for Bosses reach more business owners just like you.ABOUT INSTAGRAM FOR BOSSESI'm Andrea, founder of Andrea Maree Creative, and my mission is to help established service-based business owners turn Instagram into a profitable enquiry channel. Instagram for Bosses is a globally top 2.5% podcast dedicated to simplifying Instagram marketing so you can consistently attract ready-to-invest clients without posting every day or living on your phone.

MRKT Matrix - Wednesday, May 27th Dow rises 200 points to record as oil declines, but a pause in the chip rally weighs on the S&P 500 (CNBC) Goldman raises its S&P 500 year-end forecast. It's for one simple reason (CNBC) Bank of America says prepare for a ‘summer correction' after rally to record highs (CNBC) Americans Are About to Pay Even More at the Grocery Store (Bloomberg) Mortgage refinance demand drops 18% as rates hit highest level since August (CNBC) JPMorgan, BofA CEOs Predict Another Round of Trading Windfalls (Bloomberg) Robinhood Lets Customers Use AI to Trade Stocks, Make Credit-Card Purchases (WSJ) Ford's Stock Is Surging—and It's Got Nothing to Do With Its Car Business (WSJ) China Wants Its Companies to Embrace AI—Without Firing Workers (WSJ) --- Subscribe to our newsletter: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://riskreversal.substack.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ MRKT Matrix by RiskReversal Media is a daily AI powered podcast bringing you the top stories moving financial markets Story curation by RiskReversal, scripts by Perplexity Pro, voice by ElevenLabs

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals won't reinstate a law to ban certain gun trigger mechanisms. And gas prices were down slightly today after hitting a four-year Memorial Day high yesterday.Those stories and more in today's evening update from MPR News. Hosted by Emily Reese. Music by Gary Meister.

Are your dogs up to date on vaccines? On this week's episode, we talk dosing your dog for vet appointments, because a high dog might just be a happy dog, Ali's latest health scare—with a happy ending—a kerfuffle in the Beachwood Canyon dog-osphere, and the story of one very lucky and deeply loved Doberman. Tune in for all that and more on this week's Dear Dog.

Comedy: Gulf Screen Guild Theater “Ballerina, Slightly with Accent” 3/10/40 CBS, Favorite Story “The Man Who Married a Dumb Wife” 4/17/48 Syndicated.

The Rebelde puppies turned two in March! (I know, I cannot believe it! Where does the time go?!) So we're checking in with the only one who's got an English speaking human: Joan, Judge's person, has had quite the year with the little purple-collar boy formerly known as Oso! Shout-outs to Judge's village:Sara Brueskehttps://www.happydoglodge.com/Dr. Debora Brown—Chinese medicine vethttps://pequotvet.com/Amy Delong—energy workhttps://www.amywilliamsdelong.com/meet-amyAimee Johnson—massage therapisthttps://littlebearanimalmassage.com/John Nielsen—conditioning and fitness at K9 Elite Edge Performance (website under construction)Get in touch with Caden:caden [dot] cristopher [at] gmail [dot] comhttps://adventuredogsanarchy.com/https://www.patreon.com/AdventureDogshttps://cadencristopher.bsky.social/Thank you ...to Lesfm for providing the royalty-free intro and outro music and to Isabelle Grubert for designing the show logo!

become a member and get early access to videos, exclusive content, and a closer connection to the work

The future of war has been evolving before our eyes in Ukraine, yet the west still plans to fight the last war. In this special episode, guest host Noah Smith (@noahpinion) and Brandon Anderson sit down with Yaroslav Azhnyuk (@YaroslavAzhnyuk), a serial tech founder who went from building PetCube to founding The Fourth Law, one of the world's most advanced AI-guided drone companies. Over two hours we cover the technology, tactics, and geopolitics of drone warfare, and why the modern battlefield has already left the West behind:* Yaroslav's personal history and the Ukraine war [00:01:04 – 00:14:01]* The modern drone tech stack: why FPV drones are the new god of war, the future of the rifleman, fiber optic vs. AI, five levels of autonomy, and the eight dimensions of the autonomous battlefield [00:14:01 – 01:05:13]* The geopolitics and economics of drones: China's manufacturing advantage, the drone race, Western defense readiness, countermeasures, and why the gap is widening [01:05:13 – 01:58:57]For those looking for Noah Smith's commentary, it really gets going around the 00:51:31 mark.Yaroslav Azhnyuk / The Fourth Law:* X: https://x.com/YaroslavAzhnyuk* LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/yaroslavazhnyuk/* The Fourth Law: https://thefourthlaw.aiNoah Smith:* Substack: Noah Smith * X: https://x.com/noahpinionTimestamps00:00:00 Cold Open: China's 4 Billion Drones and the Cameras-to-Explosives Pipeline00:01:04 Introduction: Brandon, Noah Smith, and Yaroslav Azhnyuk00:05:41 From Tech Entrepreneur to Defense: PetCube, Brave One, and the D3 Fund00:10:42 The Ethics of Building Weapons: Dual-Use Technology and the Wolf at the Door00:14:01 The Tech Stack: Cameras, Autonomy Modules, Interceptors, and a Semiconductor Fab00:18:47 Fiber Optic vs. AI: The Radio Horizon Problem and $32/km Cable00:25:32 FPV Drones: The New God of War — 70–80% of Frontline Casualties00:28:28 The Five Levels of Drone Autonomy: From Terminal Guidance to Full Autonomy00:41:37 The Eight Dimensions of the Autonomous Battlefield00:45:32 AI Safety and the Morality of Autonomous Weapons00:51:31 The End of the Rifleman? Noah's 2013 Prediction vs. Battlefield Reality01:05:13 China's Manufacturing Advantage and Western Vulnerabilities01:24:21 Policy Advice for Western Defense: Defense Valley and the Widening Gap01:32:54 The Drone Race: Who's Ahead, Category by Category01:41:57 Countermeasures: Shotguns, Jammers, Lasers, and Fishnets01:58:19 The Wedding and Final Takeaway: Be Prepared for WarTranscriptCold Open: China, FPV Drones, and the New Warning SignYaroslav [00:00:00]: Think about this. Last year, Ukraine produced 4 million FPV drones. Ukraine is not the most industrious nation in the world. China can produce 4 billion of these FPV drones.Noah [00:00:10]: Would you say that right now China is now the supreme conventional military power on Earth, given its ability to manufacture and deploy drones in the quantity and quality that you just described?Yaroslav [00:00:20]: I don't think we have all the information to claim that but we cannot count it out, and that alone should be a big warning sign. As I say, at some point in my life I went from making cameras that fling treats to pets to cameras that fling explosives to the occupiers. So that's the short story. And when you think about what your nation, what your patriots are going through, you realize that's the only morally right thing to do is to fight back, and it is immoral not to fight back, and then the choice becomes very clear.Introduction: Yaroslav Azhnyuk, Petcube, and the Last Flight into KyivBrandon [00:01:04]: Welcome to Latent Space. I'm Brandon. I normally do science podcasts, but today we're going to do something a little bit different. I'm joined by Noah Smith of Noahpinion on Substack and Twitter. And he has lots of interesting things to say about drones. And as a guest, we have Yaroslav Azhnyuk, founder of The Fourth Law and several other, drone-related startups. To get started, it is February 23rd, 2022. You are running a pet startup. You're connecting pets with their owners. Let's go in just a little bit of background. How did you get started in tech, and what were you working on before the Ukrainian war started?Yaroslav [00:01:50]: Good to be here. Thank you. On February 23rd, late in the evening, 11:00 PM Kyiv time, my wife and I landed in Kyiv. Actually, then she was a fiance. We came from Lviv, where we were looking at a church, where our wedding should have taken place. And we got into this cab ride from the airport to our home, and the driver was like, “You crazy. Like, everyone's leaving Kyiv. Why do you come?” We're like, “What? Nothing's going to happen. Dude, chill.” And then obviously, eight minutes later, or eight hours later, the bombs fell in the city. It was quite surreal. We probably landed on the last flight that landed in Kyiv, or one of those last flights. My background, I'm a tech guy. Studied applied mathematics in Kyiv Polytechnics, born and raised in Kyiv. My parents are old PhDs from academia, and grandparents too. Like, everything, from linguistics to nuclear physics. And I'm an entrepreneur, so I've built a bunch of companies. Petcube is the one you were referencing. So I lived in San Francisco 2014 to 2020, building Petcube, which is one of the leading, pet device companies in the world, selling lots of pet cameras. And then, yeah, as I say, at some point in my life I went from making cameras that fling treats to pets to cameras that fling explosives to the occupiers. So that's the short story.February 24th: Leaving Kyiv as the Invasion BeginsNoah [00:03:28]: February 24th, I guess a few hours after you, go to check out your wedding chapel, what do you do?Yaroslav [00:03:37]: We had a plan for this situation. So my parents and family live in Kyiv, and we're like, “Okay, this has actually started. The worst has, come true.” And so we basically packed our belongings and got in the car and spent 17 hours driving west. And that was pretty sure most people in our audience watched at least one apocalyptic movie in their life, so that was exactly like that. Like, felt exactly like that. Missiles are falling. Like, there was smoke in Kyiv. Like, my dad and I went, like, to central part of the cities. It's probably, likeYaroslav [00:04:20]: 800 meters from presidential office, to pick some stuff up at his workplace. Because he's, like, the head of an academic institution, so he had to get some of the things with him. And super surreal. Like, the streets are empty. Like, the gas stations are out of gas. Like, we found some gas station. We didn't have, like, spare canisters with us, so we're like, We figured out, like, the car was diesel, so like, we figured out, if it's diesel, you can actually store it in plastic, canisters, and we bought some window wash for the cars. We poured it out of the canisters, and we poured the diesel into that. Yeah, so it was like that. And then, like, helping friends get out, like my friend and his dog. Like, we found Like, my brother was also, like, riding in a separate car. We found a place for my friend who didn't have a car. It was like, yeah, it was like, totally surreal. And we didn't know of course, and you didn't know this will last for so long. You didn't know whether Ukraine will be able to defend Kyiv. And it was like, yeah, very little information and very little insight into future.From Pet Cameras to Defense Tech: Building for Ukraine and the Free WorldNoah [00:05:42]: What are your thoughts with regards to how do you, defend, Ukraine? So you eventually start building drones Like, what is the process to get from there from where you were building, devices that connect owners with pets to building drones, and what other things did you do to help the war effort in the process?Yaroslav [00:06:07]: It's definitely non-trivial, right? Like, I didn't go, to I didn't get any, like, military education when I was a student. Like, normally, in Ukraine, you would, you would go to like, this military school even if you're getting higher education in any other, sphere. I decided to skip that which is like, an unusual way to go. And I never thought that I will be somehow engaged in a war effort. Like, what is war? Of course, wars are over. It's the end of history. So one thing you got to understand about, like, many Ukrainians and like, I guess, it's also true about most of the people I met here in the US, that your who you are in terms of your nationality is a big part of your identity. So when that gets under attack, it's something deeper than just the country you live in gets under attack, right? And I Day one, I figured I'm going to I'm going to fight back with everything I can, right? But I didn't think on day one that I'm actually going to do, weapons. And a bunch of things. We were reaching out to a number of American, congresspeople and senators, and basically advocating for support of Ukraine, for voting for lend lease, which has happened in May 2022, but didn't actually work as expected. We helped start, Brave One, which is now a very important defense innovation cluster, sort of like a DIU here in the US. We helped start, a fund called D3. It's like, it was started or co-started by Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google. So a bunch of these odd things, but then eventually I was like, “Okay,”by 2023 it was obvious this thing, A is going to last a lot more time, and B, that the whole world is shifting and that there's going to be a new arms race, that the warfare is redefined by drones as platforms. And for the first time in history, you have a platform that is software defined, that can increase your battlefield capabilities, in a in a step change just overnight. So it's like if you were able to push a software update and get all of your Roman legionnaires a new helmet? That has never been possible before. It's the first time in the history of war this is possible. So all of that and many other things like, supply chain fragilization, and the impact that AI is going to have on all of this all these things have become evident to me in 2023, and it's like, “Okay, I should do what I do best, or what I know how to do best, start a tech company, and sort of leverage the global techno capitalist machine, to provide, defensibility to Ukraine and the free world.” So that's literally the mission of the company, increase defensibility of Ukraine and the free world. And then there was some sort of soul-searching and like, asking yourself. It's like, “Okay, am I Actually, I know nothing about weapons. Am I actually, like, ready to make, things that other people use to kill other bad people?”Yaroslav [00:09:36]: When you think about what your nation, what your Compatriots are going through And think about all the terror of places like Bucha, the occupied cities in the east and south, the abducted children, the raped women, all the economic damage that's being done, and the intention to destroy a whole nation, to genocide the people of Ukraine, you realize that's the only morally right thing to do is to fight back, and it is immoral not to fight back. And then the choice becomes very clear. And look, we're just passing the ammunition. We're not doing the actual job. The actual fighters and defenders and heroes are people in the armed forces. We're just support.The Moral Question: Weapons, Responsibility, and Fighting BackNoah [00:10:33]: I have so many questions. Actually, I know you seem to have a question. Do you want to ask anything?Yaroslav [00:10:38]: No, I'm just listening. Go ahead.Noah [00:10:40]: I do want to talk about, some of let's say, the moral issues, like you just said. You endYaroslav [00:10:50]: I think there are no issues there.Yaroslav [00:10:52]: What would an example of a moral question be in this case?Noah [00:10:55]: No, I mean Okay. As you just said, you are creating the tools, but others are using them.Noah [00:11:05]: I was maybe thinking of having this conversation later, but one of the questions is like, is it actually you are going to be building them for your homeland, which you are building it for your homeland, which is I think, very a strong morally defensible position, but this technology is not going to stay with you, right?Noah [00:11:26]: This you will probably be selling these to other people Yeah. So the future is really where the moral issues may come into playYaroslav [00:11:38]: The this question becomes, easier and more complete if we ask this not about a particular technology or particular weapon, if we think that this question actually applies to any kind of technology Right? So -Knife or fire. You can use knife to do surgery and save people's lives, or you can use it as a weapon to take people's lives.Noah [00:12:06]: Cut tomatoes, too.Yaroslav [00:12:08]: Cut tomatoes too.Noah [00:12:09]: Yes, knife.Yaroslav [00:12:09]: That's helpful.Noah [00:12:10]: In Japan, sword and knife, they, call the same word.Yaroslav [00:12:14]: It's like, it's with any technology. Large language models, right? Look at how powerful they are and yet they're available to anyone in North Korea or in Russia.Yaroslav [00:12:29]: That's one side of the argument. The other side is As a maker, what is your responsibility for how the tools you're creating, will be used? There's definitely some responsibility, right? Then How should the decision process look like? Should you, like, try to calculate all the possible scenarios before starting to work on something? Or do you create something that is needed now to save people's lives, and then think about, addressing the unwanted edge cases later? In ideal world where there's like, or okay, it's not ideal world. In a mythical world where there is some one governing party and it gets to decide everything, and there is no other country, that can, decide on their own, you could say, “Well, we need to calculate for all the consequences, and only then, maybe build this building, by replacing this park because, maybe we need this park in the city,”right? So that kind of situation. But when you're in a situation where you're in a forest, in front of a wolf, you first going to deal with the wolf that wants to eat you, and then you're going to go consult Greenpeace. So that's kind of situation that Ukraine is in.The Fourth Law, Odd Systems, and Ukraine's Drone StackNoah [00:13:59]: Enough. Because this is a tech podcast, I did want to spend some time talking about, sort of the tech in that you've developed and what you've been working on. So can you explain, I guess, first of all, like, the problem that you were trying to solve from a technical standpoint? And I think, and then maybe, like, go into some of the solutions and some of the design process that led you from designing, little laser-guided, guiding lasers with a with an iPhone versus Having drones.Yaroslav [00:14:34]: Like, it so happened, that my partners and I, we sort of So I started one company called The Fourth Law, and its goal was and is to Make, massively scalable on-drone autonomy. And then In parallel with that together with my, Petcube co-founders, partners, and friends, we started another company called Odd Systems Which, was focused on making thermal cameras. Cameras, thermal cameras are seeing thermal radiation and are used to see at night. And we're now sort of those companies are getting closer and closer together and we're probably going to merge them. And this group of companies is currently the leading, team in on-drone AI and thermal imaging on the Ukrainian battlefield, and Likely one of the leading, if not the leading in the world. So We have these, like, three sort of business units, which are cameras, drone autonomy, and drones. So the cameras and drone autonomy sell daytime and nighttime cameras and different types of drone autonomous modules to other drone manufacturers, over 200 drone manufacturers in Ukraine. And then the UAV, business unit sells the drones themselves to the armed forces of Ukraine, Ukrainian government. And there are different types of drones. Those are sort of front strike, as we call them, so those are sort of FPV strike drones and the bombers, and then interceptors. And there are different kinds of interceptors. We do Shahed interceptors and we do ISR interceptors. We don't do the deep strike-FPV Drones, Interceptors, and Battery-Powered WarfareNoah [00:16:32]: What's an ISR interceptor?Yaroslav [00:16:33]: ISR is stands for intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, and those are basically drones which are which, Russians are using to watch over positions and then communicate where, the targets are coming.Noah [00:16:48]: It's a reconnaissance.Yaroslav [00:16:48]: That's, the ISR is sort of a classical term for a for a reconnaissance drone.Noah [00:16:53]: Are all of these battery-powered drones that you just described? ‘Cause I know that the sort of deep strike drones still have, like Some sort ofYaroslav [00:17:01]: Internal combustion engine?Noah [00:17:02]: Internal combustion engine. Are all the things you're talking about battery-powered?Yaroslav [00:17:06]: What we're working on is all battery-powered, right? We don't do the deep strikes, right? And then in terms of autonomy-Noah [00:17:12]: You can catch a Shahed with a battery-powered thing. It's not Fast to catch.Yaroslav [00:17:17]: No, absolutely. Look, Shahed interceptor, like ours, it's called Zero, it goes up to 326 kilometers per hour.Noah [00:17:26]: For reference, how fast is a Shahed?Yaroslav [00:17:28]: Eight, like, in internal phase it could be 280, but in cruise phase it's, like, 220-ish.Yaroslav [00:17:36]: Yeah. And sorry, I'm not like you can convert that into miles if you're interested.Noah [00:17:41]: No, that's fine.Noah [00:17:41]: Multiply by two thirds or point six or something.Yaroslav [00:17:44]: That's easy. Yeah, I was saying that for autonomy modules, right, we, -We make systems, autonomous systems for frontline, for interceptors and some for deep strikes as well, and then different levels of autonomy. So from terminal guidance, which is like lasts 500 meters, give or take, to autonomous bombing, to autonomous target detection, to autonomous navigation and all of that across day and night, different terrains, different time of the year, different platforms like quadcopters and fixed wing, and maybe some other platforms. So it's quite a wide variety of products. We also have like our own simulation. We have our own training school for the war fighters. And we're about to start construction of two, semiconductor plants to make, sensors for thermal cameras. So that's super exciting for me as a computer science guy is Doing semiconductors. Super cool.Noah [00:18:49]: Like in terms of kind of core drone technologies, you basically are one is an FPV replacement without fiber optics, and the other isYaroslav [00:18:59]: YouNoah [00:18:59]: Signal tracking with interceptorsYaroslav [00:19:00]: With or without fiber optics. Fiber optics Is just like, sort of a communication module.Yaroslav [00:19:05]: You can, you can use classical analog, video link and radio link. Those would be two separate radios. You can do digital, or you can do fiber optic, and then fiber optic Has its own advantages but also adds weight and decreases, the distance and decreases, how fast you can, sort of turn and With a drone. Yeah.Noah [00:19:33]: Do you need AI for fiber optic drones?Yaroslav [00:19:36]: Like you can use AI for fiber optic drones. AI replaces a human, right? Fiber optic is making your communication link more resilient. So those are slightly different goals. Like if you want, you can have, AI controlling hundreds of fiber optic drones instead of having 100 operators for each.Fiber Optics, Radio Horizons, and Terminal GuidanceNoah [00:20:03]: I guess I thought that the key reason that people moved to fiber optic drones was for like electronic, countermeasures. Or I guess to counter those.Yaroslav [00:20:13]: I think that's a correct assessment from sort of a public awareness standpoint. In practice it's somewhat more difficult Because besides electronic countermeasures, you have these issues of a radio horizon For FPV drones, which means that asYaroslav [00:20:36]: I believe Earth is round Some people disagree. But basically if you fly a drone and you have a land station over here and a drone flying over hereYaroslav [00:20:49]: If your drone is flying high, you have good direct radio visibility. If your drone goes low, and usually, Russian infantry and vehicles, they're on the ground and you want to hit them, you need to go low. Lower you go, maybe you'll get behind a hill or behind a forest, and if you're far enough, you'll just get behind the curvature of the earth. You get into what's called a radio shadow. And then That is a real bummer because for the last, be it 60 or 20 meters, you won't be able to see anything and it will be very difficult to hit the target. So to counter that what-- And then the distances that these FPV drones, act on they're, they can be quite large. So for example, here in the US there was this drone dominance program competition, and in drone dominance the furthest distance was about 10 kilometers.Noah [00:21:44]: What was drone dominance? What was that competition?Yaroslav [00:21:47]: Drone, the drone dominance is a is a program started, by the US government, to accelerate the development of drone technology here in the US.Noah [00:21:57]: Got it. And the longest range thing they were using was 10 kilometers.Yaroslav [00:22:00]: Was 10 kilometers, right. In Ukraine, like if your drone doesn't fly at least 20, 25, it just, no one's interested in it, and the usual hits are happening. It was like, okay, many hits are happening between 30 and 40 kilometers, and that's what expected from a regular 10-inch, FPV drone. So at that distance, even at altitudes of like 60 to 100 meters, you might start losing, the link. So some of the earlier AI technology that was fielded in FPV drone was this terminal guidance technology. That was the first product that we ever, launched that helped you as an operator, once you see the target from two, three, 500 meters, you lock onto the target and then, it just, drives the drone towards the target no matter what, even after you lost the visual connection. So optic fiber solves that. However, if you want to go like 20 kilometers with optic fiber, that will add an extra three kilos, of useful weight to your drone. SoNoah [00:23:12]: ‘Cause the cable that you have to unspool as you go weighs.Noah [00:23:15]: It is heavy.Yaroslav [00:23:15]: At first, like the spool is about 800 grams, so a bit less than a kilo, and then, and then think about 10, 10 kilometer optic fiber is another kilo, something like that. That takes away from your useful mass and then now you have like, you need a 15-inch drone and it can only carry maybe one or two kilos of explosives if you want to go, 20 kilometers. If you want to go to 30 or 40, like 30 is probably max. 40 is like very problem problematic on optic fiber. And then the problem with optic fiber is it's actually getting super expensive. So and why? Because of all the data centers for AI. That's literally the same optic fiber-Noah [00:24:01]: We're running out of centersYaroslav [00:24:02]: That's being used there.Yaroslav [00:24:02]: Like when Ukrainians and Russians come to Chinese factories to buy the optic fiber, they're like, “We're out. We sold it out to the Americans.”? That's the craziest thing. So optic fiber went up in price from like, $4 per, kilometer to like, $32 per kilometer in a few months in the beginning of this year. And I'veBrandon [00:24:26]: Claude Code is stopping the Russian drone effort here.Yaroslav [00:24:30]: Ukrainian as well. Yeah.Brandon [00:24:31]: Ukrainian. But I read somewhere that the Russians had grown more dependent on fiber optic drones relative to the Ukrainians, and that's one reason why the Ukrainians have sort of regained the initiative in drones recently.Brandon [00:24:42]: How accurate's that?Yaroslav [00:24:43]: The Russians were the first ones to scale that. I think by as of now, Ukraine has caught up. I think, like, as of maybe three months ago, Ukraine is mostly caught up on fiber optic. Yeah.Brandon [00:24:57]: What percent of damage would you say is in terms of FPV drone damage would you say is now fiber optic versus, like autonomous?FPVs as the New God of War: Tanks, Artillery, and Cost per KillYaroslav [00:25:07]: For our, for our audience, I actually, I cannot answer that question. Like, it's like I know the answer, but I would not disclose that. But for our audience, I think another interesting fact is out of all the casualties on the front line Between 70 and 80% are done by FPV drones.Brandon [00:25:30]: FPV drones are the new weapon of universal weapon of warfare.Yaroslav [00:25:34]: It'sBrandon [00:25:35]: Land warfare, anywayYaroslav [00:25:35]: They used to say that artillery is a god of war because artillery used to cause, like 80% of casualties, and now On that ranking-Brandon [00:25:46]: FPVYaroslav [00:25:47]: FPV drones rule.Brandon [00:25:48]: FPV drones are the god of war.Yaroslav [00:25:51]: Sort of. Dethroned artillery. But it's not to say that artillery is not useful, is not needed. Like, all of these systems are needed. Maybe except cavalry, although Russians still use it. I know, have you seen the videos of Russians using mules and horses?Brandon [00:26:09]: What is the usefulness-Yaroslav [00:26:10]: It'Brandon [00:26:10]: Of a tank in the in the modern-Yaroslav [00:26:11]: That's where we need Greenpeace to say a word, but they're silent. Yeah.Brandon [00:26:15]: What's the use of a tank on the modern battlefield?Yaroslav [00:26:21]: It's diminishing.Brandon [00:26:22]: Diminishing.Yaroslav [00:26:22]: However, I think there might be technologies which will, revive the tank. Look, tank still provides you armor, and armor is important. Like, you still need to armor and firepower, right? Like, you can be an armor personal carrier that provides you, armor. The challenge that currently exists is armor is not very well protected against incoming drones. However, there are ways to do to protect it. We were previously talking about this before the podcast. The CEO of Rheinmetall, recently sort of ridiculed, Ukrainian drone industry, saying that like, there is nothing interesting there, no real innovation, no to stand Compared to like, Rheinmetall or Boeing, and it's all made by housewives. There was like, obviously a ton of memes about this people ridiculing the CEO of Rheinmetall. And one of the best quotes, I heard on this topic is from my friend, Alexey Babenko, who's, the head of and founder of VIARI Drone, which is one of the largest manufacturers of FPV drones. They're our partner. They're using our autonomy. So he said that the drones we manufacture in one day will be more than enough to destroy all the tanks Rheinmetall manufactures in a year.Yaroslav [00:27:52]: Then, yeah, cost-wise, of course, a drone is like, $500 and a Rheinmetall tank is what, probably 5 million-ish or maybe more.Brandon [00:28:00]: Don't mess with those housewives.Yaroslav [00:28:03]: Drone wives.Brandon [00:28:04]: Drone wives.Yaroslav [00:28:06]: That's it.Noah [00:28:06]: There's a classic saying that everyone always fights the last war.Noah [00:28:12]: Yet do How did So from your standpoint, how did we get to the point where tanks became irrelevant in at least for now In a matter of just a few years?Yaroslav [00:28:24]: Look, I think it's the same way, how do we get to the point that calculators become irrelevant?Yaroslav [00:28:31]: Now we have iPhones. Like, why would you need a calculator? Technology progresses and its influence grows non-linearly. It's all exponential. So I can tell you that full autonomy, when you put it on a drone Look, so if you, if you think about a tank and a like, it's not a direct comparison, but even, like, a drone and a artillery shell or like, sort of cost per kill, an artillery shell for 155 caliber, which is a standard NATO caliber Currently market price is about $4,000 per piece. So compare that to say, $400 per drone. That's 10 times more expensive. Account for the amortization of the artillery gun and for how vulnerable it is and what is the sort of tactical, capabilities it gives you as compared to a drone. You'll figure out that an FPV drone is maybe three orders of magnitude, more versatile, more useful, more capable than artillery and many of than a classic artillery. Many of Because there are different types of artillery. Not just, like, one 155. You have mortars, you have all that. But give or take, roughly three orders of magnitude maybe. Again, it doesn't have that firepower. It's not one-to-one comparison still.Yaroslav [00:29:53]: Now, take that FPV drone. When you put full autonomy on that FPV drone, which can be not very expensive, like systems that we're, producing are like, in hundreds of dollars of pure bombFull Autonomy: From Human Pilots to Smartphone-Directed Drone MissionsNoah [00:30:06]: Just interrupt. You said full autonomy Just a second ago you were saying that the autonomy here is guidance, right? It's not decision-making.Yaroslav [00:30:14]: No, I was I was saying that's the f-First and sort of easiest pieces of autonomy that was fielded by us. But if you, if you add full autonomy to a droneBrandon [00:30:24]: He, I think he's asking what does it can you, for the listeners, can you explain What the term full autonomy means?Yaroslav [00:30:29]: Basically, I think a good way to think about an FPV drone is like an iPhone of warfare. It's, like, very inexpensive, very mass producible, very versatile. You don't need a bunch of other things when you have a iPhone in your pocket. You don't have, need an MP3 player, you don't need a calculator, don't need other things. All right? So FPV drone is an iPhone. Or like, okay, Apple please don't sue me, is a smartphone. And then, when you add autonomy to it sort of becomes like Uber or ride sharing. Okay? So what it means is instead of actually being a trained pilot who has this complex remote controller device which requires a couple months of training to actually pilot the drone, and then having to pilot it for 30 minutes, flying towards the target, et cetera, et cetera, now you basically, you have your smartphone, you have a drone, you pick your smartphone, you say, “We are here. The bad guys are here. Go and get them.” And the drone goes up, flies in a given direction, localizes itself on the map, finds the dedicated area where they, the bad guys are supposed to be sees the bad guys, bombs them, return, like, watches, so does a damage assessment, returns back, sits down, and then you can pick it up and watch the video if you didn't have the radio link, right?Noah [00:31:59]: That's a bomber drone.Yaroslav [00:32:00]: That's full autonomy for a bomber drone, right?Noah [00:32:03]: You're saying that no human decision is made in this entire process?Brandon [00:32:06]: That's not, that's not what he's saying.Yaroslav [00:32:07]: A human decision was made at the beginning of the process-Noah [00:32:09]: I get it. I get itYaroslav [00:32:09]: The same way as you would fire an artillery.Yaroslav [00:32:12]: When you fire an artillery, you don't stop at like, 500 meters away from a target and ask it whether, you want to strike or not. That's exactly, a human decision is always made at some point. So when you do that's full autonomy, and such full autonomy is happening as we speak. And such full autonomy increases the capabilities of an FPV drone, which is already, like, three orders more powerful than an artillery shell. Full autonomy increases its capabilities by four orders of magnitude because now you can have 100 times as many people who can use it, because you don't need to train those people, and this is important. You can have 10 times, mission success rate, and you can have 10 times utility per drone because now instead of being one-way kamikaze, it's, it can be a bomber.Brandon [00:33:05]: Now wait, let's, you said 10 times mission success rate, which means that fully autonomous bomber drones succeed in their missions 10 times more often than human piloted bomber drones do. That's an important thing to know.Noah [00:33:17]: Maybe, to push back onBrandon [00:33:19]: They're super, they're superhuman. They're, they' 10X superhuman.Yaroslav [00:33:22]: They're not vulnerable to electronic warfare. They don't care about the radio horizon. They don't lose track during navigation. They are not susceptible to human error when, an artillery shell or other drone blows up besides you and you're like, “Hell no,”like, “I'm getting out of here.” Right? That doesn't happen to an autonomous drone. Like, all of those things. Like, we have, like, one of the brigades that's using our drones with just first level autonomy They literally said that their success rates-Brandon [00:33:53]: What's first level autonomy?Yaroslav [00:33:54]: First level autonomy is just the terminal guidance.Yaroslav [00:33:57]: By the way, we have video of that. We can watch that.Brandon [00:33:59]: Terminal guidance means a human gets it nearby and then the AI takes over.Yaroslav [00:34:03]: The human flies it all the way, like 30 kilometers towards the target, and obviously the target was probably given to that human by someone who's flying some ISR drone, some reconnaissance drone, right? So all the way to the target, and once you see the target from a distance of 500 meters, you do target lock, and from there drone flies autonomous. So just that feature alone, it has increased the guy's, his call sign is Grom, so it has increased his, mission success rate, like precision of mission, yeah, mission success rate from 20% to 71%, and it also increased his kill zone from three kilometers to 10 kilometers, which means there's certain area around the front line which is designated kill zone. Whenever enemy goes into that area, it's almost guaranteed to be to be destroyed by a drone. And then obviously the drones are not launched from like, the zero line. They're usually launched from like, minus 10 kilometer-Mission Success, Failure Modes, and the Five Levels of AutonomyBrandon [00:35:03]: What is a zero line?Yaroslav [00:35:05]: Zero line is sort of an imaginary line of control, of two conflicting forces.Brandon [00:35:14]: It's important to explain these things to a lot of the listeners who areYaroslav [00:35:17]: Thank you for askingBrandon [00:35:18]: Familiar with warfare.Noah [00:35:20]: Myself.Noah [00:35:20]: I'm one of those listeners.Brandon [00:35:20]: You said that level one autonomy, in other words just terminal guidance, just, like, human gets it to the finish line and then it goes over the finish line, increases mission success from 20 something percent to 71%, or something like that.Yaroslav [00:35:33]: Increases the kill zoneBrandon [00:35:34]: Increases the kill zoneYaroslav [00:35:34]: Three kilometers to 10 kilometers.Brandon [00:35:36]: Got it.Yaroslav [00:35:36]: On both parameters-Brandon [00:35:37]: What is full autonomy, dude? AndNoah [00:35:38]: Actually on real quick, can we define mission success and like, maybe in a way, what are the failure modes of missions?Brandon [00:35:44]: I have a guess what mission success is.Noah [00:35:46]: But I couldBrandon [00:35:47]: Get ‘em.Yaroslav [00:35:49]: No, but that's a very good question, in fact, because, even if you fly into the target, well, first the target can be damaged or destroyed. Those are two different modes. Then there can be different targets. A sole infantryman is one kind of target. A dugout where supposed there are some, enemies there is another kind of target, and a some mechanical equipment is another type of target. Radio emitting equipment, which, like, often, like, the targets that the military want to get more than anything else is the some enemy radio tower or something like that or some small radio dish that really makes life difficult in that area, in that combat area. So those are different targets, right? It can be destroyed, can be damaged.Then sometimes, the drone hits but doesn't explode. Like, that happens. And then, there are other failure modes. You didn't even reach the target because you were A jammed by electronic warfare; B, you lost the control over drone because of the radio horizon; C, you were jammed by a different type of electronic warfare that happens way before You hit the target area. It's, impacting your, video receiver. So like jamming on video or jamming on control are two different types of jamming. Then something malfunctioned on a drone, just a mechanical malfunction, maybe like a motor broke or like, whatever. So all of those are different failure modes. Yeah, or maybe you got lost, you're navigate navigating to your, to your target. That happens, too.Noah [00:37:41]: The Level one autonomy, basically you manage to point in a direction.Noah [00:37:49]: You go there, and then the last mile The drone taking over.Yaroslav [00:37:52]: We define this like, I define that but it sort of got picked up by the industry. We define five levels of autonomy. So level one is terminal guidance. It's what we just discussed. Level two is bombing. Level three is autonomous target detection and engagement decision. Level four is autonomous navigation. And level five is autonomous takeoff and landing.Noah [00:38:15]: Those are good things to knowYaroslav [00:38:16]: Those are five levels of autonomy. Now, if youNoah [00:38:19]: I have a question for you.Yaroslav [00:38:19]: Sorry. Like, let me finish withNoah [00:38:21]: SorryYaroslav [00:38:21]: Theoretical part.Noah [00:38:23]: What is Tesla running at right now?Yaroslav [00:38:25]: Tesla?Noah [00:38:25]: No, sorry.Yaroslav [00:38:26]: That's very good point. Like, it's exactly, it was inspired by the levels of self-driving autonomy.Noah [00:38:32]: Waymo's level five, right?Noah [00:38:35]: You just tell it where you want to go, it picks you up, and then you go there.Yaroslav [00:38:36]: I think, like, if you, if you look at the classic definitions of self-driving cars, Waymo is still, like, level four because it still requires even remote, but still, like, human control. It's like if Waymo gets in trouble, there is an operator who takes over and resolves this. So that would still be a level four. It doesn't map directly, but it's also five levels.Brandon [00:38:58]: Can I, can I interject a question here? In terms of an FPV drone that's like a suicide drone that'll just blow itself up killing something, how do what it hit? Like, does it, just transmit back, or do you sort of like, lose track of it and hope it hit? Like, what happens to that?Yaroslav [00:39:16]: That's a great question. SoBrandon [00:39:18]: You need another droneYaroslav [00:39:19]: Like, the current battlefield in Ukraine is saturated with different types of drones. So obviously you have all the FPV drones and last year alone, Ukraine manufactured about 4 million of these, and then Russia's maybe, like, 20% less than that. And for this year, the publicly voiced target was 7 million on Ukrainian side. So it's, like, serious numbers. We're getting in serious numbers here. And then besides those, there are different, reconnaissance drones, ISR as we call them, and there are sort of tactical level ISR where we, both Ukrainians and Russians usually use, Mavic, drone by DJI. And then there are a bunch of locally produced drones, which are sort of fixed wing drones that can stay in the air for much longer than Mavic, maybe, like, half an hour. And then, there are drones that can stay for many hours or even up to a day. And those drones have, are more expensive, have more expensive cameras, et cetera, et cetera. We hunt those drones that Russians launch. The Russians hunt our drones, and so on. But ideally, when you, are a group of soldiers operating an FPV, you'll have someone in your, company, or someone in your platoon who has an ISR asset that will do target designation for you. They'll say, “Oh, like, there's a Russian vehicle over there. Go and get him.”and you go there, you get it, and they're like, “Okay, confirmed.”Battlefield Surveillance and the Eight Dimensions of AutonomyBrandon [00:40:57]: Those guys are watching. They have their own drones in the sky.Yaroslav [00:40:59]: Target destroyed. They have, like, a carousel of drones because One Mavic cannot stay more than 30 minutes. ItBrandon [00:41:06]: They're constantly surveilling the battlefield.Yaroslav [00:41:07]: Almost every spot on the battlefield.Yaroslav [00:41:11]: It's not always the case. Sometimes you will not have a surveillance asset, so then you would launch another FPV just to confirm that there was a hit. Then if you see there was a hit and you're not sure if it completely destroyed, you maybe hit again for good measure.Brandon [00:41:26]: You double tap.Yaroslav [00:41:28]: That's how it works. But I was about to give you another sort of piece of taxonomy. So you have five levels of autonomy, right? Then you have sort of eight dimensions of autonomous battlefield. So what is eight dimensions? It's crucial to understand how autonomy evolves in a modern, battlefield environment. So dimension number one is level of autonomy. What are the capabilities that your asset has? Dimension number two is the platform you're operating on. So it can be a quadcopter, a fixed wing drone, different types of maybe, like, a long range drone or short range drone, but it can also be a missile. You can have autonomy even on an artillery shell or a ground vehicle or a sea vehicle. So all of those are different platforms. Level three would be domain. So it's ground to ground or ground to air as an intersection, or ground to sea or sea to air. They're all, like, all the nuances with different domains. Then level four, would be higher levels of autonomy, such as swarming, drone carriers, drone nests, et cetera.Brandon [00:42:39]: Now when you're saying level, you're talking about dimensions, not about-Yaroslav [00:42:42]: Sorry. YeahBrandon [00:42:43]: Autonomy levels. So dimension four.Yaroslav [00:42:43]: The dimension. Yeah, I used to say I was supposed to say dimension. I say dimension because each of them works with another, right? So you might have, like third level autonomy, fixed wing drone operating in land to air, and stuff like that right? And then operating in a swarm or operating from a nest. Right? Then you have, sort of dimension number five is environment. So is it day or night? Is it summer or winter? Is it, humid, cold, dry? What kind of target is it? Is your target hiding in a forest, or is it, behind a hill or within buildings? So all of that is environment. Then you have, dimension number six is command and control. How are you dealing with or like, tens of thousands of those assets around the battlefield? How are you coordinating that on the higher levels of command? How are you collecting data? All that.Yaroslav [00:43:44]: Dimension number seven would be infrastructure, so things like simulation, data collection tools, security, deployment mechanisms, et cetera. So all those systems have to be developed separately and integrate with all the others. And finally, dimension number eight is sort of distribution. Have you deployed 100 of these systems or 100,000 of these systems? Because those are two very different ballgames. So that now gives you a more broad overview of how autonomy propagates across the battle space.Targeting, Human Responsibility, and Rules of EngagementNoah [00:44:23]: As someone who has done machine learning and had gone out of distribution and had things, go horribly wrong, you were talking several of these, kind of axes of thinking about drone warfare seem like they could be very susceptible to some sort of distribution shift if you start making things autonomous.Yaroslav [00:44:41]: Like what?Noah [00:44:41]: I mean Well, first ofYaroslav [00:44:43]: If the I'm very interested Sort of sort of kinds of scenarios that you're thinking about.Noah [00:44:48]: Like the most obvious one is you, if I assume these are computer vision guided systems for at least the last mile, how do you ensure that oh, well, like you now have some fog roll in or something, and you, the drones just attack the wrong thing? Or maybe, it probably will not turn around and fly back and attack you, but youYaroslav [00:45:10]: Same, the same, the same question, how do you ensure that your mortar fire hits the right thing? Well, it's like mortar fire, give or take half a kilometer could be plus or minus. So maybe you fire one, and then you fire another. So drones are actually, much better in being precise in those scenarios. And I think, to your point, I think five to 10 years from now it will be immoral to use weapons without AI.Yaroslav [00:45:44]: ‘Cause weapons without AI will be more likely to cause, collateral damage or unwanted damage. Same way, it will be immoral to drive your own car manually on a public road because it's more likely to cause, unwanted damage.Noah [00:46:02]: Wow, I never considered that mightBrandon [00:46:04]: Really? That's definitely coming.Yaroslav [00:46:07]: Anyway.Brandon [00:46:07]: No, but that' I don't know, it's an obvious, an obvious thought. I agree with you.Brandon [00:46:12]: I, No, they, obviously they're not going to let you drive once most of the cars on the road are autonomous.Noah [00:46:17]: No, that one, don't I believe.Yaroslav [00:46:19]: No, I think you were you were talking about drones, right?Brandon [00:46:21]: The drones, right. Cool.Yaroslav [00:46:22]: The weapons, right?Brandon [00:46:23]: Friendly fire and collateral damage and stuff like that is all minimized with AI.Brandon [00:46:27]: Here's my question. Take all let's go to level six autonomy. Let's take all of the target selection. Let's take all the battlefield data, integrate it into one big AI, and have that big AI basically be in command of the battlefield And agentically do target selection.Yaroslav [00:46:44]: Be the general, right?Brandon [00:46:44]: It's a general. It's, you've cut humans out of the loop except maybe as dexterous robots, repairing drones and fastening things to drones or maybe something like that because you don't have those robots yet. How soon are we there? AI general.Yaroslav [00:46:58]: The most important thing to ask ourselves is who will be faster to that us or our adversaries?Brandon [00:47:07]: I assume us, but how fast will we be to that? I hope us.Yaroslav [00:47:11]: I hope so too.Brandon [00:47:12]: How fast can we Like when are we looking at that in terms of like horizons years?Yaroslav [00:47:18]: Like technically, it could be done now. The question is of course, there's, some engineering work to be done. The bigger challenge is deployment. Right? So okay, technically Like operation in Iran, right? They, the publicly, it was claimed that I think Palantir system was used for target designation, et cetera, et cetera. So it is not exactly as you say, the AI makes all the decisions, but basically AI goes through all the data you have, gives you these 1,027 different targets and says, “You-- To confirm, please press Okay.” And you look at the targets and you're like, “Yeah, sounds right. Press Okay.”so that's, I think that's where we are now already, or we were a couple weeks ago as we're recording this on April 10th. Another question is how massively deployable it is. Is it, like, every decision being made like that or is it, like, just some of the decisions made like that? And then different levels of command and control. There you have, like, the platoon, the company level, the battalion, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. But the tricky thing here when we get into that territory, the tricky thing is If your enemy is getting advantage of being Thousand times faster than yourself by deploying such systems What do you do?Yaroslav [00:49:10]: You got to-Brandon [00:49:12]: The if the enemy is a thousand times faster than you at deploying those systems?Yaroslav [00:49:16]: Like, if enemy starts deploying level six autonomy, as you call And you have not started doingBrandon [00:49:22]: You're in troubleYaroslav [00:49:23]: Yes, exactly. So you have to catch up. So my point is that it is very important to think about the safety of these systems, but that thinking should not slow you down in developing them because they are critical for your existential, survival, right? And like, one person who doesn't think, doesn't get to think about the ethics of the war is a dead person. That person surely doesn't get to think about that.Brandon [00:49:52]: What would be the safety risk of such a system?Yaroslav [00:49:55]: Of course-Brandon [00:49:56]: Friendly fire?Yaroslav [00:49:56]: Just wrong decisions, right?Brandon [00:49:59]: I see.Yaroslav [00:49:59]: Maybe, these decisions-AI Command Decisions, Dead Zones, and Complex BattlefieldsBrandon [00:50:06]: Skynet AI decides it's going to useYaroslav [00:50:08]: No, these-Brandon [00:50:08]: Drone army to kill usYaroslav [00:50:09]: Decisions will not only be made about drones. They are likely to made about what the humans should do on your side as well. Then obviously some environments are more like Ukrainian-Russian war, where you haveBrandon [00:50:26]: It will have to choose to risk lives. It will have to choose to sacrifice human lives-Yaroslav [00:50:28]: Of courseBrandon [00:50:29]: On your side.Yaroslav [00:50:29]: Of course. And then some environments are just, like, dead, like, dead zones and there are no civilians there, or virtually no civilians close to the front line because, like, super dangerous. Everyone has evacuated from there. But there are other environments which are more like, okay, there's a counterterrorist operation. There's, like, a group of terrorists or a group of civilians. Or like, it's like the recent operations in Iran, I imagine that the US and Israeli forces do not want to harm civilians. They only targeted the military targets there, right? So in those situations, it's a different level of responsibility for that decision-making as well. And then there is just such a big variety of those military missions, and I'm not even, like, well-informed or well-educated in military science to tell you about all those scenarios. We would need to put some general besides me, and maybe a Ukraine general and American general would have told you very different stories about these things.Brandon [00:51:34]: Got it. Can I ask a few more questions? All right. So in 2013, I wrote one of my first, paid articles ever was about how the era of drones will change human society. I was just sitting around bored thinking about things.Yaroslav [00:51:54]: You were way ahead of your time.Brandon [00:51:55]: I said, I said, “The following will happen.”Yaroslav [00:51:57]: It's, this article is real. I've read it.Yaroslav [00:51:58]: It's actually-Brandon [00:51:59]: I said small autonomous, suicide drones, will cleanse the battlefield of human infantry. Human infantry will not be able to stand against swarms of AI-powered, suicide drones. That was I didn't even know about, like, AlexNet at the time, I think.Yaroslav [00:52:19]: You're just an avid sci-fi reader.Brandon [00:52:23]: I'm an avid sci-fi reader, but also, like, it's not Like, there will be a way to do that. It's a it's a nonlinear multidimensional search problem, and you get enough compute, you'll find some search algorithm that will get you there. And soBrandon [00:52:38]: I, yeah, I think that one sentence describes the bitter lesson right there.Brandon [00:52:41]: It's just like it's a multidimensional search space. You search it somehow. I don't know. Figure out some get a grad student-Yaroslav [00:52:47]: Sooner or laterBrandon [00:52:47]: To make a search algorithm.Brandon [00:52:48]: It's not that hard. Anyway, so but then, but I guess the point is The point is that human infantry on the battlefield will be will be gone at the end. I wrote that in 2013. Many people on social media laughed at me for that called me hysterical, said things like, “Electronic warfare will knock all the drones out of the sky.”like, “You need humans to hold ground.”that's something you still hear from a lot of people on social media today. I feel that this article that I've written has never been directionally wrong. It has gotten more and more right steadily over time, and that we're very reading the battlefield reports from Ukraine, where, human infantry are basically guy, like a few guys hiding in dugouts for months, and I'm not sure what they're doing.Yaroslav [00:53:35]: That's on Ukraine's side. On the Russian side, that's just like a zerg rush.Brandon [00:53:38]: The zerg rush, and then they just die. Then, but they have some guys in dugouts too, right? Like hiding in dugouts for months.Yaroslav [00:53:45]: They have. Yeah.Brandon [00:53:45]: Like, but that like, what are those guys doing in the dugouts? Are providing, like, frontline, like, reconnaissance? Like, what are they doing?Yaroslav [00:53:54]: If there is a guy in a dugout with some bullets and automatic weapon, the other guy cannot come and take the that dugout. That'Brandon [00:54:07]: I seeYaroslav [00:54:08]: They are they're establishing control over territory.Brandon [00:54:10]: I see. So that is so there still is a use for human infantry on the battlefield as of today.Yaroslav [00:54:15]: LikeBrandon [00:54:15]: How long will that last?Yaroslav [00:54:17]: I think it will last for a while. This is funny. There's this whole Layer of the modern culture, a modern Ukraine culture built around the war-related stuff. So there is this -Punk rock band, that is called SZC, I guess in English that would be. Which stands short for like a deserter or something like that. So anyhow, this band has a song titled “2030.” It's basically about the year 2030, and the war still goes on as like the whatever, third world war or whatever. And they basically, they, sang about the AI and like cyborgs and everything, but the simple infantry is still needed, and we're still, like, getting cold in those dugouts, and we're still doing our job. That's sort of the theme of the song. And it seems like that's actually what's going to happen. There areGround Robots, Simulation, and the Limits of World ModelsBrandon [00:55:30]: Ground robots will not replace humans in the dugouts soon.Yaroslav [00:55:34]: I'm very much interested in following the whole humanoid robot theme andBrandon [00:55:39]: What about like a dog robot?Noah [00:55:41]: Or just mobile controlled platforms or something.Brandon [00:55:44]: Spider robot, yeah.Brandon [00:55:45]: Everything evolves into a crab.Brandon [00:55:46]: You build a crab robot.Yaroslav [00:55:47]: A humanoid-Noah [00:55:48]: The carcinization of warfare.Yaroslav [00:55:51]: There is a lot of utility in humanoid robots because the world is designed around humanoids. So I would not, like, 100% disqualify the possibility that sometimes 10 years in the future, humanoid robots, will be actually fighting. So that's an actual Terminator kind of scenario.Brandon [00:56:14]: Yeah, in the first Terminator movie, you look at what they've got on the battlefield, they've got flying bomber drones and humanoid robots.Yaroslav [00:56:20]: Look, the cost of large language models of running them is getting so low, you can have basically an inexpensive computer running, what was a state-of-the-art model a year and a half ago, running it locally on a device with an open source model, which also means that the Chinese can have it, the Russians can have it, the North Koreans can have it, et cetera. So that is already possible. And with when we're looking at the acceleration of the neural nets, I would've, if not the acceleration of the large language models, I would've said that I don't think that humanoid robots will be able to be useful in the battlefield earlier than in 10 years. But if you account for the exponential, it might be five years or so. The problem with all of the autonomous systems, and it's like starts with self-driving cars and even with all the AI, like modern day AI agents, to make them really, useful, you have to solve such a long tail of edge cases, that it's really difficult to make them useful. Like we were promised, self-driving cars, what, like 2007, Sebastian Thrun and Google, and even before that all the challenges, everything. And Elon of course told us it's going to be one year from 2014, and now we still don't have self-driving Teslas everywhere. We have Waymos in SF and some other places, but they're still, like, not perfect. So I think, I expect something similar from self-flying drones and fully autonomous drones, and we saw that firsthand as with each level of autonomy that we're adding, there is a very wide distance between a prototype and something that is ready to be scaled to millions of units and something that has been scaled to millions of units. But the race with like AI coding tools is just insane. So things might accelerate very fast, faster than we can imagine.Noah [00:58:46]: I think your point is that with due to this long tail behavior Level one autonomy as you've defined it, is actually very natural. Like you basically are just solving an image recognition and tracking system.Yaroslav [00:59:02]: It's actually interesting that you say it that way, and I thought about this the very same way, and we have this joke that there are like 200 companies in Ukraine which are trying to solve last mile, targeting or terminal guidance. It seems like we're like the only company that actually solved that because even that problem-Noah [00:59:22]: I'm not saying it's, I'm not saying it's trivial, but it's at least something that you imagine given our current state.Yaroslav [00:59:26]: Like us and Eric Schmidt, like Eric Schmidt's companies are pretty good.Yaroslav [00:59:29]: Like, I actually have lots of respect to what they're doing, and they're, they have been practically influential and helpful on the battlefield, and they have good engineering.Noah [00:59:38]: I wasn't, I wasn't saying it's trivial. I'm just saying this is a something naturally adaptive based upon things that we know work, well. But some of the other domains that where you do have to make decisions and you have a long tail become much harder, and you worry about edge cases more.Yaroslav [00:59:57]: Like the more, the more complex behavior you're trying to simulate, the more edge cases there are right? The more ways to do it wrong there are. And then there are different approaches. It's like if you think about, if you read academic papers about robotics, right? You sort of the robot is represented as something that has the sort of sensor input, and then you have three, levels of sort of logics or decision-making, which are perception, planning, and control, and then you have actuators as output.So pre-neural nets, you would do perception output and control all with classic logics, right? Then, with AlexNet and computer vision, you could do perception with neural nets and the rest with logic. You cannot currently do each of those separately with neural nets, each of those separately with logics, or you can just have one huge neural net that just takes lots of sensory data. It's not just pixels. Could be sound, could be accelerometer, could be everything, as input, and just outputs the controls. And some of the self-driving car companies are doing that or like, experimenting between different ways of doing that. So you can also, like, think about that and the way you implement those features, also influences how much degrees of freedom the system would have, right? Like control, you can do it classical algorithmic control with common filters and PAD filter, PAD controllers, et cetera, or you can do a neural net, that was trained in a gym with a reinforcement learning, et cetera. And those would be two different behaviors of a system.Noah [01:01:53]: I-- Maybe my point was just much more high level. It'Yaroslav [01:01:56]: Or you can If you go even like, if you go high level, you can, you can like train to like have whatever, like Feifei Li and folks who are doing like physical, sortBrandon [01:02:08]: World modelsYaroslav [01:02:08]: World models, right, physical intelligence, they're trying to make these big models and sort of understand the world and then supposedly you have such model and you can tell a drone, “Okay, like, go over that hill and like, find the bad guys and then get them,”or “Make me a video, make me a photo of the guy smiling and get back to me.” Right? That's one way. Another way you have like these subsystems, like one is navigation, another is finding the person, another is like getting to them to take a photo. And those are again, very different behaviors. And then it's not that one is necessarily better than the other, and we might have more technological ability to do one or another. But all of those systems will exist. And then again, you should always keep in mind that it's only the not only the good guys that are developing these systems, the bad guys are developing these systems as well.China's Drone Supply Chain and the West's Manufacturing GapNoah [01:03:00]: I guess where I'm going with this back to Noah's original thought with the end of the end of the soldier. And so in order to replace-Brandon [01:03:10]: Or at least the end of the rifleman.Noah [01:03:11]: Or the end of the rifleman, yeah.Yaroslav [01:03:13]: I'm not seeing that very close, and it was like I'm, as much as I'm a lover of sci-fi and all of that and a technologist, the more I try to beYaroslav [01:03:27]: Like the I try to have certain humility about these things, and like the military, domain and there was just so much human history and blood and tears, dedicated to sort of understanding this art of war and perfecting it and so on. There is so much knowledge in there that I don't feel like I even started to comprehend, a lot of that. But one thing that I really understood is that even though drones are now making eighty percent of the casualties, you go to the actual officers, you talk to the actual, like, brigade commanders, corps commanders, and they explain to you, how all of it fits together, how when you're thinking about an operation that involves a couple thousand people to get this piece of land, out of the enemy's hands, deoccu deoccupy it, how it is so complex, it involves, dozens of different types of drones and then land operations and reconnaissance operations, psychological operations and then aviations and tanks and logistics and all kinds of these different assets. So modern warfare is really very complex, and the fact that the drones are the latest, coolest thing, and then the AI is latest, coolest thing, doesn't mean that now it's that and only that right? So yeah. Whoever's looking into that I think should realize that it's not just what the press talks about, that the reality is much more difficult, much more complex.Brandon [01:05:17]: Let's talk about China and China's manufacturing capabilities. So suppose that someone, like suppose the United States went to war with China. AndYaroslav [01:05:26]: I hope not.Brandon [01:05:27]: I hope not as well. And then but suppose that drones were very essential to that war of all the types of drones that we're talking about here, and that suppose that China said, “All right, well, you need X and Y and Z, to make those drones to fight us, and we control the production of X and Y and Z, so we're just going to cut you right off, and now you have no drones.”Brandon [01:05:47]: I know that a number of countries, including Ukraine and Taiwan, have been making moves to China-proof their drone productions that China couldn't do that. Examples of things they might be able to cut off might include rare earths, fiber optic cable that you were talking about before, various other things that where even if they don't control one hundred percent of the production, they control enough of the production that would be extremely expensive to produce it without relying on Chinese sources. Or the market's fragmented enough, et cetera. What do you see as China's key bottlenecks, and how easy are those to overcome in terms of China-proofing drone production in case of a war against China?Yaroslav [01:06:30]: Let me start with a saying that -Although China does not sell directly to Ukraine and it does sell directly to Russia, a lot of Ukrainian supply chains, they start in China, right?Yaroslav [01:06:49]: We're not in a conflict with China, and we would not want to be in a conflict with China. And we'd hope that China stays a neutral power between Ukraine and Russia and the US as well. That said, the scenario that you're describing, everything is much worse.Yaroslav [01:07:11]: Think about this. Last year, Ukraine produced four million FPV drones. Ukraine is not the most industrious nation in the world.Yaroslav [01:07:19]: China can produce four billion of these FPV drones.Yaroslav [01:07:23]: China can make them not drones with propellers, but fixed-wing drones, which go not forty kilometers far, but maybe two to three hundred kilometers inland.

USDA's latest forecast estimates California's 2026 almond crop at 2.7 billion pounds, down 1 percent from last year.

USDA's latest forecast estimates California's 2026 almond crop at 2.7 billion pounds, down 1 percent from last year.

This week’s Money Diary is one of those “wait… this is actually so relatable” conversations. She’s a newly admitted lawyer who spent years living paycheck to paycheck while studying, prioritising travel over investing and genuinely having no idea what an ETF even was. Fast forward a few years and life suddenly got very expensive, very quickly. An apartment. A wedding. A honeymoon. Another holiday. A puppy. Moving costs. Furniture. And somewhere in the middle of all of that, she and her husband had the slightly nauseating realisation that they’d spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in a year… without really stopping to think about where any of it was actually going. And honestly? I think a lot of people will see themselves in this one. We talk about the pressure to buy property because everyone else is doing it, the reality of owning an apartment with brutal body corporate fees, lifestyle creep, ADHD hyper-fixation becoming an unexpected budgeting superpower, and what happened when she finally sat down and looked at her finances properly. Now she’s investing 40% of her income, building a portfolio she actually understands, and rethinking what financial security is supposed to look like in the first place. This one feels a little bit like a group chat with your financially self-aware friends. Slightly chaotic. Slightly confronting. But in the best way. SORT YOUR INSURANCE: A big thank you to our partner Skye Wealth for bringing this episode to life. If you're ready to get your insurances sorted, you can learn more about them here.We have a long standing referral partnership with Skye Wealth and only ever partner with people we trust. GET VICTORIA'S BUDGETING SYSTEM: Master your money here.NEW HERE?: Take our Money Personality Quiz and we will send you free resources based on how YOU actually manage money here. Ready to binge more relatable, inspiring, and downright juicy money stories? Check out our ultimate Money Diaries playlist. Listen now Join our Facebook Group AKA the ultimate support network for money advice and inspiration. Ask questions, share tips, and celebrate your wins with a like-minded crew of 300,000+. And follow us on Instagram for Q&As, bite-sized tips, daily money inspo... and relatable money memes that just get you. Acknowledgement of Country By Nartarsha Bamblett aka Queen Acknowledgements. The advice shared on She's On The Money is general in nature and does not consider your individual circumstances. She's On The Money exists purely for educational purposes and should not be relied upon to make an investment or financial decision. If you do choose to buy a financial product, read the PDS, TMD and obtain appropriate financial advice tailored towards your needs. Victoria Devine and She's On The Money are authorised representatives of Money Sherpa PTY LTD ABN - 321649 27708, AFSL - 4451289See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, I talk about offering a prompt, but I completely forgot to share.Here's a prompt I asked Listing Engine to create for a landing page.Prompt:[Location] is ...insert your city.You are a world-class direct response landing page designer, conversion copywriter, and Go High Level AI Studio website builder.Create a simple, clean, mobile-first landing page designed to generate property appraisal leads from homeowners in [Location].The purpose of the page is to invite homeowners to submit their details so they can receive a fully researched, accurate property market update for their own property within 24 hours.The page should feel professional, local, trustworthy, premium, and helpful.DESIGN STYLEUse a modern real estate lead generation style.The page should be:- Mobile-first- Clean- Premium- Uncluttered- Easy to read- Focused on one clear actionUse a dark charcoal background with white text.Use bold, tightly spaced Inter font throughout the page.Use strong contrast with an electric blue accent colour for buttons, icons, highlights, borders, glow effects, and key visual details.On desktop, use a simple two-column hero layout:- Left column: hero copy- Right column: 24-hour clock graphic and opt-in formKeep the text column and opt-in form visually close together so the page feels focused and conversion-driven.On mobile, stack the hero copy first, then the clock graphic, then the opt-in form.Do not add unnecessary navigation links, menus, extra buttons, or distracting sections.TOP BANNERAt the very top of the page, add this centred context line:HOW MUCH IS YOUR [Location] PROPERTY WORTH TODAY?Make this line bold, clean, and highly visible, but not larger than the main hero heading.HERO SECTION — LEFT SIDEHero Heading:Our Free 24 Hour Update Delivers A Researched and Accurate Property Market Opinion.Subheading:Find out what your property could be worth in today's market with a personalised market opinion prepared specifically for your [Location] home.Supporting Copy:No generic estimate. No automated guesswork. Just a researched property market update based on recent local sales, current buyer activity, comparable properties, and today's market conditions.Add these 5 bullet points with check icons:- Receive your personalised property market opinion within 24 hours- Based on current [Location] market data- Includes recent comparable sales and local buyer demand- Helpful whether you're thinking of selling now, later, or simply curious- Free, accurate, and obligation-freeBelow the bullet points, add a small trust line with a shield icon:Prepared by a local property professional with current market knowledgeHERO SECTION — RIGHT SIDEAt the top of the right column, above the opt-in box, create a large, prominent round 24-hour clock-style graphic.The clock graphic should look sleek, modern, and premium.It should include:- Circular timer ring- Subtle electric blue glow- “24 HR” displayed clearly inside the graphic- Clean, minimal real estate styleBelow the clock graphic, create a clean opt-in box/card.The opt-in box should have:- Slightly lighter charcoal background- Rounded corners- Subtle shadow- Subtle electric blue top gradient line- Strong visual focusOpt-in Box Heading:Get Your Free 24 Hour Market OpinionOpt-in Box Subheading:Enter your details below and we'll prepare a researched property update for your home.Form Fields:- First Name- Address of Property to be Assessed- Email- MobileAdd a tick box with this exact wording:I'm planning to sell. Please send me your marketing options and costs.CTA Button:Get My 24 Hr Market OpinionButton style:- Large- Full width- Rounded corners- Bold text- Bright electric blue background- High contrast- Strong hover effect if possibleBelow the CTA button, add this privacy microcopy:Your details are private and will only be used to prepare your property market update.HOW IT WORKS SECTIONBelow the hero section, add a simple “How It Works” section.Keep this section clean, short, and visually simple.Heading:How It WorksAdd 3 steps with simple icons:Step 1: Submit Your Property DetailsStep 2: We Research The Local MarketStep 3: Receive Your 24 Hour Market OpinionCLOSING CTA SECTIONAdd a final simple closing CTA section.TextWant to know what your [Location] property could sell for in today's market?Button:Get My 24 Hr Market OpinionIMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS- Keep the page focused on one action only.- Do not add unnecessary navigation links.- Do not make the page busy.- Prioritise mobile readability.- Make the opt-in form the main visual focus.- Use strong spacing, bold headings, and clean sections.- Keep the design premium, local, trustworthy, and conversion-focused.- Make sure the page is suitable for real estate agents generating homeowner appraisal leads.

The Pussycat Dolls reunion tour has reportedly collapsed after poor ticket sales and, if we're honest, there's something almost beautifully symbolic about it. In this episode of Mark and Pete, we look at the cancelled Pussycat Dolls comeback, nostalgia culture, fading celebrity, and the strange modern reality that fame now burns hotter, louder, and much shorter than it used to.Once upon a time the The Pussycat Dolls were absolutely unavoidable. Mid-2000s pop culture practically ran on “Don't Cha”, reality television, low-rise jeans, nightclub remixes, and tabloid saturation. Then the internet fractured culture into ten million tiny tribes and suddenly even genuinely huge acts discovered that memory alone does not automatically fill arenas. Slightly awkward conversation to have with accountants, one imagines.Pete and Mark discuss why reunion tours increasingly struggle, why modern audiences no longer share one giant pop culture conversation, and why today's celebrities often feel temporary before they have even finished becoming famous. There's also the oddly melancholy side of all this. Not tragic exactly. Just human. People trying to reopen a moment in history that perhaps only worked because everybody involved was younger and the world itself felt different.Along the way:why nostalgia is now a major industrythe collapse of monoculture2000s pop music and celebrity culturetouring economics after Covidsocial media vs old famethe strange sadness of reunion toursand why every generation eventually discovers that time is undefeatedThere's also a biblical reflection from Isaiah on the fleeting nature of human glory, success, beauty, and public attention. Which sounds heavy, admittedly, but is actually rather freeing once you think about it for a moment.Wry, thoughtful, gently sardonic cultural commentary from two middle-aged Britons watching civilisation age in real time, preferably with tea nearby.

Our stories tonight feature a fan favorite character who has been known to get up to some gentle floral-related trouble. We'll come along for a lilac heist in the countryside, then spend some time restoring an old house, and finally visiting the farmer's market for a bit of community service. Subscribe to our ⁠Premium channel.⁠ The first month is on us

We're back… for real this time.After a weird stretch off-mic, we kick things off with a personal update, a reset for Season 4, and a promise to get this thing rolling the way it should be. Then it's straight to the casino.We recap a chaotic night at the boat—losing at craps (again), chasing slot machine dreams, and finally meeting a real-life listener (shoutout Pat the Plow). There's also a near-miss that still stings… the hand pay that got away.From there, we zoom out and get into something bigger: how sportsbooks are getting more aggressive—and more casino-like—by the day. We break down FanDuel's “bet protect” and DraftKings' bizarre new “replay” feature, and ask the question: is this still sports betting… or just slots in disguise?Finally, we give an update on our upcoming project, Gambling Under the Influence: The Evolution of the Hook—a deep dive into how we got here, where it's going, and what it all means for bettors.Same chaos. Slightly more perspective.Good JuJu to your week.Support the showFollow along on Twitter or Instagram @goodjujubets.goodjujubets.net - All Things Good JuJu

The Phillies broadcast team reacts to the Phils' fourth-straight win under Don Mattingly and look ahead at what kind of damage the team can do as they try to climb out of the hole they dug themselves into.

What happens when musicians stop trying to look cool and start trying to tell the truth? We continue our sit down with Slightly Famous Somebodies for a freewheeling ride through creativity, aging, and the weird influences that make a band sound like itself. The deeper we get, the clearer it becomes: authenticity is not a brand, it is a practice, and sometimes it shows up only after you have failed enough times to stop performing for approval.We trade left field favorites and guilty loves that somehow make perfect sense once you hear the why. Then we go full music history mode with jam band love and a personal Allman Brothers Band thread. You will hear the backstory of the Brothers and Sisters cover photo and the band's origin story. We wrap with AthFest plans and making live shows feel rare and special.RootsRockRevival.com for tickets and details.Learn Something New orRemember Something OldPlease like and follow the Music in My Shoes Facebook and Instagram pagesReach out to us at musicinmyshoes@gmail.comSend us a one-way message. We can't answer you back directly, but it could be part of a future Music In My Shoes Mailbag!!!

Welcome back to another episode of the unSeminary podcast. Today we're joined by Ronee de Leon, Executive Director of Partner Church Success at TouchPoint Software. With nearly two decades of ministry experience and now serving churches across the country, Ronee brings a unique perspective at the intersection of systems, strategy, and shepherding. Are you relying on attendance and giving numbers to understand your church? Wondering how to actually “see” your people as your church grows more complex? Ronee shares a practical framework for turning data into meaningful ministry action. You can't shepherd what you can't see. // One of the biggest challenges Ronee sees across churches is a lack of visibility. While most churches are passionate about reaching people, many rely on high-level metrics—attendance and giving—that only tell part of the story. As churches grow (especially beyond 300 people), intuitive leadership alone is no longer enough. Leaders can't be in every room, and without deeper insight, they miss critical moments in people's lives. The result is a gap between what leaders think is happening and what's actually happening in people's spiritual journeys. From data to discipleship. // Ronee emphasizes that data itself is not the goal. Rather, discipleship is. The opportunity for churches today is to transform raw data into actionable insight that helps people take meaningful next steps. Instead of just knowing how many people are in groups, leaders should be asking deeper questions: Who is still engaged three weeks in? Who dropped off halfway through? What patterns are emerging in people's participation? These insights reveal where discipleship is thriving and where it's stalling. The four stages of data-driven discipleship. // To help churches think clearly about this process, Ronee outlines a simple framework: conviction, collection, clarity, and care. Conviction asks whether leaders truly believe data collection matters enough to prioritize it. Collection focuses on consistently gathering meaningful data, not just sporadically. Clarity is the ability to interpret that data, moving from information to insight. And finally, care is where action happens – using those insights to connect with people and shepherd them effectively. Every church, she notes, is somewhere along this progression. Where most churches get stuck. // Many churches struggle in the gap between collection and clarity. They gather data but don't translate it into meaningful action. Data becomes a warehouse rather than a tool. The shift happens when leaders move from asking “What happened?” to “What does this mean and what should we do next?” This requires intentional conversations, regular review rhythms, and a willingness to engage with the data rather than ignore it. Drifting is the key moment to watch. // One of the most important indicators Ronee highlights is disengagement. When people begin to drift—missing groups, serving less, or disengaging from community—it often signals deeper issues. Behind that drift could be doubt, divorce, depression, diagnosis, or financial stress. Without visibility, churches miss the opportunity to respond. But with the right systems in place, leaders can proactively reach out, offering care at the exact moment it's needed most. From surveillance to stewardship. // Data collection isn’t surveillance, but rather stewardship. When used correctly, data enables pastors and leaders to care for people more effectively. A simple phone call or conversation, prompted by data, can change someone's trajectory. Ronee shares examples of pastors identifying disengaged individuals, reaching out, and discovering significant life challenges—leading to holistic care that addresses spiritual, emotional, and practical needs. Culture matters more than tools. // While technology plays an important role, culture is the starting point. Churches must first align around why data matters. Without that shared conviction, systems will fail regardless of how advanced they are. Teams need clarity, support, and accountability to consistently engage with data. Leaders must normalize conversations about it by reviewing insights in meetings, celebrating wins, and integrating it into everyday ministry rhythms. Measuring what really matters. // One of the most important shifts happening today is moving beyond weekend attendance as the primary measure of health. Many churches are discovering they are actually ministering to two to three times more people than their weekend numbers suggest. This broader view changes how leaders think about staffing, engagement, and discipleship pathways. It also raises a deeper question: are we promoting participation, or are we cultivating transformation? To learn more about TouchPoint Software and access the free church health assessment, visit touchpointsoftware.com/unseminary. Thank You for Tuning In! There are a lot of podcasts you could be tuning into today, but you chose unSeminary, and I'm grateful for that. If you enjoyed today's show, please share it by using the social media buttons you see at the left hand side of this page. Also, kindly consider taking the 60-seconds it takes to leave an honest review and rating for the podcast on iTunes, they're extremely helpful when it comes to the ranking of the show and you can bet that I read every single one of them personally! Lastly, don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on iTunes, to get automatic updates every time a new episode goes live! Episode Transcript Rich Birch — Hey friends, welcome to the unSeminary podcast. So glad that you have decided to tune in. You know, we say here at the podcast that it’s like stuff you wish they taught in seminary. And 100% know that today’s topic is one of those that they’re not talking about in seminary, but for particularly my executive pastors, senior leader type people that are listening in, you think about this almost every single day. And your team interacts with it multiple times a day. And it’s something you’re gonna wanna lean in on for an incredible conversation today with Ronee de Leon. She is the Executive Director of Partner Church Success at TouchPoint Software. If you do not know who TouchPoint Software is, you have been living under a rock. It’s a church management and engagement platform that serves churches across the country. She brings over 18 years of experience working in and alongside ministry, combining strategic systems, thinking with a deep heart for shepherding. TouchPoint, this is an incredible organization, has a mission for helping churches transform their data into discipleship, and they really talk a lot about engagement. And so we really want to dive in with this today. Ronee, thanks for being here. Thanks for being on the show.Ronee de Leon — It’s my pleasure. It’s great to be back, Rich. Thank you.Rich Birch — Yeah, it’s so good to have you back on. Slightly different context, but same kind of conversations, but glad to have you back on. Why don’t you bring us up to speed? Tell us a little bit about the Ronee story and tell us a little bit about TouchPoint. How’s all that work together?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I have been on a journey. Anybody following the Lord, I feel like is on a fun adventure with Jesus. And I have definitely felt that in the last couple of years. I’ve been at TouchPoint for a little less than two years. But before that, I was at a large multi-site mega church based in Columbus, Ohio, and just grateful for the way that the Lord pivots us in our journey when it’s time. And so I had the opportunity to move from serving one church to lots and lots of churches across the country. And I just, it’s such a privilege to serve the bride of Christ in the way that we do at TouchPoint, like you said, through technology, but it’s so much more than that.Rich Birch — Yeah. and I want to take advantage, friends, I want to take advantage of the with the fact that Ronnie’s here. You see churches across the country. You’re working with churches across the country. You have a great experience. And friends, if you’re listening in today and you’re like, oh, like we already have a system like this, I want you to listen in because we’re not we’re not here to sell you on anything. We want to have a bigger conversation, ask some bigger questions, to help you wrestle with and think about this issue, but frankly, to take advantage of your position TouchPoint because you see so much. Rich Birch — When you think about the landscape of churches, when they’re looking at, you know, particularly the leaders, we’re thinking about executive pastor type person, when they come to actually knowing their people, where are their people are at at their church, Where what does a landscape look like for us on that front? How do we know kind of the people in our church? How do we get a sense of who are they? What are they do and how are they engaging with us?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I love the church, Rich. I recently have been kind of working through the language with the Lord of, I think the calling on my life is to be the best maid of honor to the bride of Christ that I can be. So it’s such a unique vantage point… Rich Birch — I love that. Ronee de Leon — …at TouchPoint serving churches all over the country, like you said. The church has a lot of passion and we’re doing a lot to reach people. But some things that I see are that we still have visibility gaps and why that matters is because churches cannot shepherd what they cannot see.Rich Birch — So true.Ronee de Leon — And so we we’ve got a lot of people in our care, but if we’re just taking ministry snapshots instead of understanding meaningful steps as people take their discipleship journey, we’re still struggling with visibility into what’s actually happening in our church.Rich Birch — Wow, I’m looking forward to digging into that. I know many of us, ah you know, I like to call it the nickels and noses issue. Like we know, in fact, probably 100% of the pastors that are listening in today, they know how many people attended last weekend. And they probably know generally where things are at on the revenue side, particularly, hopefully on the expense side too. But that’s just a really high level, maybe not that helpful, if I hear what you’re saying. Where does the picture start to break down when all we see is these two? If if if we’re just looking at these two numbers, how does that kind of limit our ability? I like that, you know, to see our people, to ultimately disciple them.Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say there is a ton of opportunity to transform data into discipleship. And when we stay high level, we’re missing the opportunities that double clicking into those things would allow us.Ronee de Leon — Like you said, with an attendance example, we know how many people are in groups. Sometimes that’s roster based. Churches really are getting into this might know what their retention rate is, you know how many people actually are staying in groups over the course of the season. But like if we keep clicking and keep drilling into this, there is the ability for us to understand as people are engaging in these groups and disengaging from these groups. Ronee de Leon — You know, who’s still connected. three weeks into the season, six weeks into the season, 12 weeks into the season, and who’s not? And why did they fall off? And so there is a high level view that’s helpful year over year, season to season. But again, we’re missing a lot of discipleship opportunities by not drilling down into this to kind of these personal levels.Rich Birch — Yeah, well and I can imagine as particularly as our churches grow, I think ah there’s a lot of leaders in the church that are like really intuitive leaders and they like to kind of like get in a room and like, I can feel this thing. I just know how it’s going. But as the church grows and becomes you know, more complex, that’s harder to do. You can’t, you just can’t, you can’t get in all the rooms. There’s, there’s, you can’t be in more than one place at once. If you have multiple locations, you can’t do that. And so how, as that happens, what are the kind of maybe questions that you see leaders asking that that doesn’t work anymore though? They can’t get answers out of that. They want answers for that, but they just can’t get it. What, what are those? Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say, Rich, intuition is God-given…Rich Birch — Right. Ronee de Leon — …but feelings are fleeting, right? Rich Birch — So true.Ronee de Leon — I’m a big believer in facts are our friends. So we’ve we’ve got to have the data and make data-driven decisions. But I think the questions that leaders are are trying to answer that sometimes they can’t with those feelings. In my experience, it feels like the breaking point of visibility is around like that 300 mark. If your church is growing to or above around 300, your, your staff’s eyes just can’t see everything anymore on a weekend.Ronee de Leon — And so the questions that I think we want to answer that we, we lose visibility to as we grow and bigger churches obviously suffer from this as well, but we want to know who’s new. We want to know who’s stalling in their discipleship journey. We want to know who needs care, who’s drifting. And, that’s the part, Rich, that I think is is really important. Because when people are drifting from something that they were previously engaged in, it’s probably the things of life that they’re going through that we, the church, are responsible for caring for them and connecting with them, shepherding through.Ronee de Leon — You know it’s it’s a bunch of Ds, Rich. It’s doubt. It’s divorce. It’s depression. It’s diagnosis. It’s economic duress. It’s disgruntlement. It’s distraction. It’s all of these things that we can’t see if we’re not double clicking. But but we want to know who’s drifting. We want to know who needs care and we want to show up in a timely mannerRich Birch — Okay, that’s fantastic. I love the D list as well. Good, great preacher. Lots of Ds there. I love it. So let’s double click another D on this this. I know you have a framework to help churches wrestle through this, to to actually you know get beyond just these kind of high level to undersee, both see these people and understand them, move them along. Do you want to kind of talk us through this framework? Give us a high level over and then maybe we’ll kind of dive into pieces of it.Ronee de Leon — Yeah, let’s alliterate some more. Rich Birch — Love it.Ronee de Leon — Like I said, I was on church staff for a long time. Rich Birch — Yes, exactly. Ronee de Leon — It feels like it’s more memorable, right? Rich Birch — Yes.Ronee de Leon — So um this is a really simple framework that really is more stages. It’s a progression. But even though it’s simple, whether they know it or not, every church is in one of these stages when it comes to data-driven discipleship.Ronee de Leon — And so four kind of C’s of this or stages are conviction, collection, clarity, and care. And I’ll just give a brief description of each of those…Rich Birch — Yeah. Ronee de Leon — …and then we can go dive in a little bit deeper.Ronee de Leon — But conviction, really the question that we’re answering here is, do you truly believe this matters even when it’s not easy? So leaders believe that shepherding is important, but do we want to move into doing it proactively? And are we comfortable using data as a tool to do that well? So that’s kind of the conviction piece. Do you really believe that this matters?Rich Birch — Yep.Ronee de Leon — Collection then, are you committed to consistently gathering the data that’s needed? Not just once, but as a rhythm. It’s hard work, but it is a worthy cause, a valiant effort.Ronee de Leon — Let’s move to clarity real quick. Rich Birch — Yep.Ronee de Leon — Again, the question we’re answering is, now that you have the data, do you have the insight? Do you really see what it’s telling you and what are we doing with it? Ronee de Leon — And then the last one, care, of course, is where we’re acting on the insights to connect with our people. Will you actually act on the insights and shepherd people or will it stay theoretical? That’s that’s kind of where we’re headed with this.Rich Birch — Okay, that makes sense. So again, so that’s conviction, collection, clarity, and care. I’d love to talk about collection a little bit. So I think our churches would love to collect data. And in fact, I know there’s lots of leaders that are listening in that are like, they’re like, yeah, that sounds right. I would love to get more data. I’m just not sure how to do that. How do we build a system for collecting that data, for getting, you know, even the things you talked about, people dropping out of groups, you know, not just people rostering, but like, how do we, how do we do that? What’s the starting point for collecting data?Ronee de Leon — To be honest, I think the starting point is your culture. Rich Birch — Okay. Ronee de Leon — I think that this is often an upstream problem when we think it’s a downstream one. I think that we think people just need to follow up or just be more regular about it. But if we don’t have a strong culture around why we gather the data and what we’re doing with it, there’s just a lack of clarity with the team. So I think culture really matters as a starting point. Of course, we can get into…Rich Birch — That’s good.Ronee de Leon — …of of how to collect it. But I think we have to start there.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s a good insight. Because I can see where, yeah, we have to even just at a high level, is this a is this a conversation where we’re willing to have, want to have, want to be a part of, and we’ve got to deal with it, like you say, upstream rather than, okay, let’s dive into the actual tool first. Let’s figure out you know how important this is. Rich Birch — But my experience…I’m going to play a little bit of devil’s advocate on this question. Hopefully you can take it Ronee. Our relationship can sustain that. Ronee de Leon — Yeah.Rich Birch — But like, I feel like churches collect more data that they than they use. Like I I’ve bumped into churches where they’re like, yeah, we’ve got this data, but we’re not actually doing anything with it. What’s the difference between a church that does that? Like that just sitting on data, not using it. And one that actually can gain some clarity from it. What’s the pivot between collection and clarity? How do we do that?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, the difference is data and discernment. A church that’s collecting information knows what happened, but a church with clarity understands what it means and what to do next. And like you said, we’ve got to be willing to talk about it. We have to spend the time to translate it. It is a pivot. That raw data is is rarely helpful. And um to what do they say to to push back on your pushback?Ronee de Leon — I am surprised as I deal with churches, how many of them don’t have all the data. I think sometimes we make an assumption that above a certain size, they just collect group data and they take attendance and that’s what they do.Ronee de Leon — Or our volunteers check in or our kids and students check in regularly and they’re excellent at it. I find that that is actually less frequent of a case than than I think you or I would hope to believe.Rich Birch — Okay, that’s cool. Well and so again, I said, we weren’t going to be like selling TouchPoint, but I do want to understand kind of your unique position on this issue. How is TouchPoint accelerate… because to me, I think the model turns here on this collection clarity issue. It’s like, man, we’ve got a, we have to use technology to enable us to collect data. And then that And then have some sort of intermediating technology that helps us gain better clarity on that. Talk us through where is TouchPoint’s kind of expertise in these these two parts of the four Cs?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say that TouchPoint obviously helps with collection. We’re a church management software with some unique features that are going to help you get um an intuitive kind of collective view of people’s engagement.Ronee de Leon — So we offer things like engagement scores, which which not a lot of church management softwares have kind of baked into it. We want you to understand that overall participation and be able to see what level at what levels people are engaged and as they’re disengaging. There are ways to do that and and other softwares, but TouchPoint does have some unique kind of approaches to that built into the software.Ronee de Leon — I would say another piece to this that kind of separates us is we have a team of consultants and those consultants are not only partnering with churches as they’re kind of getting up and running in TouchPoint to learn how to use the system.Ronee de Leon — We’re kind of ministry consultants. We often, just a couple of weeks ago, I had a church in Texas approach me and say, you know, we have a lot of great people on our staff, but to be honest, a lot of them have transitioned from the marketplace. We don’t know what we don’t know. What processes should we have? What should our baptism process look like?Ronee de Leon — And so we have a whole team as part of our TouchPoint team that sits with churches and helps strategize around ministry philosophy and best approaches. And so I’d say that’s another place where we we kind of shine in the space. Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s great.Ronee de Leon — Everybody in the space wants to see the church win. Everybody has good hearts. And I can only speak to the team that I’m on. And these guys, they really counted a privilege to serve the church.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s, that’s amazing. Like, and and you can see, you know, a church when this is done well, when you have got a solution like TouchPoint at the core of what you’re doing, it ends up touching all of your processes. It doesn’t surprise me that a church like that would reach out and say, Hey, like, can you help us work through because you start to see the value of like, man, if we can embed this into the core of what we do, we get a better, like you say, it’s not just like, oh, look, we get a good engagement score. It actually helps us minister to people better. It actually helps us to, and so it makes sense to me that you find yourself in increasing conversations that are obviously related to technology. They they have a, for lack of better word, a touch point to technology, but they are, they’re also, you know, other kind of related systems in the church. Rich Birch — So obviously, ultimately, this all points towards care, maybe paint a bit of a vision for us, maybe think of a church that’s doing this well. That’s like, hey, here’s some of the telltale signs that they’re actually following through that they’re, yes, they’ve got, they’ve at a high level kind of culture, they’ve got this conviction. Yes, we’re going to do that. They’re, they’re finding lots of places to collect data that doesn’t seem intrusive. They’re ultimately gaining some clarity on that. And that’s translating into real world care. Give us some, a few pictures of what does that actually look like when you’re like, oh, that’s working well.Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say um one of the best kind of tells of this is we hear less and less stories of people disengaging and nobody knew and they were hurt by that. We missed an opportunity to care for or connect with them when those things of life came up.Ronee de Leon — You know, it’s as simple sometimes as a phone call or a text, a conversation on a weekend when when the data is showing you that this person has been disengaging or not around, to to just reach out and say, hey, how you doing? You know, this is not um surveillance. This is stewardship. This is this is caring for our people. Ronee de Leon — And there’s a story out of the church where where I used to work that I love and I still tell just because of the multifaceted kind of piece of the engagement that came out of it. So a campus pastor who was using data really well saw an individual in his church on a list of people who were disengaging. And so he reached out and he learned that this individual had lost his job that was causing doubt in his faith. And he was actually beginning to struggle with some depression. Rich Birch — Wow.Ronee de Leon — You know, if we play that scenario out, if we never saw that, we didn’t reach out, what happens to that guy? You know, the story could have looked very, very different.Ronee de Leon — But because that pastor was able to use the data for the purposes of discipleship and make that connection, we we saw him and connected him. We were able to address his physical needs. You know, there was some assistance the church could provide or or point him to. We were able to help with mental needs, emotional needs, spiritual needs. There was pastoral care and Christian counseling. And so, so many different ways that we were able to engage and and and walk alongside this individual. Like I said, the way I think the church wants to and should be, but we maybe would have never known about that individual if we hadn’t had the indicator ah because of the data.Rich Birch — Yeah, so you something you said there caught my attention. I'm like, oh, we got to loop back around on that. The example used there, you talked about the campus pastor type person. They had like a disengagement report. There was like the system ended up generating, hey, here’s a list of people. I’m assuming by what you said, here’s some people who you know I you should connect with.Rich Birch — Talk to me about how that happens. I I I'm not like I’m not putting down any other solutions out there. I’ve worked in a number of them. I have not had that experience where it’s like, hey, these are some people you should talk to. Talk to me about how TouchPoint actually does that. What does that look like at at the level of a church? How how do we get to the point where we’re using this well enough that we can have a report like that, that we could actually take action on? That’s incredible.Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say um it comes down to consistency in some ways, right? You build some reports in your system. TouchPoint has a lot of unique reporting that we can do to surface that data for you. But no matter what system you’re using, I would say if you and your team aren’t using some something as simple as absentee report of some sort, people who have been missing three or more consecutive weeks from groups or something like that.Rich Birch — Volunteering, yep.Ronee de Leon — I mean you can start there and and it’s really that easy. But there are more complex ways to understand rather than the arbitrary, I want to call everybody who’s missing three weeks, understand as personal participation patterns change. And that is a really unique approach to it. Rich Birch — Wow.Ronee de Leon — And I would say it does take a software like TouchPoint or even one that TouchPoint just partnered with called Path we’re getting into seeing those personal participation patterns and that’s where I think we get into some secret sauce and just be able to show up in a really timely manner.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s incredible. Like being able that that to me, friends, okay, I’m just going to stop pretending like I’m not biased. Like I’m biased. You should be checking out TouchPoint. But like the the I was I tried. I held for almost 20 minutes. I tried to be the the but the unbiased, you know, second voice or whatever. Rich Birch — But but I think a part of the all of these systems have, for years, have like, this is the thing that’s all been talked about. Like, this is going to be amazing. But actually what they end up doing is being, they they’re just like warehouses of data. Like it’s just, it’s just a big list. It’s basically a complex spreadsheet of people’s names. And that’s not helpful. That doesn’t actually help us. And the the vicious cycle I’ve seen with my team is our people, our people people, the people that actually interact with our folks, they don’t see the value in this helping them. So then they don’t end up interacting with the tool and giving data and all of that stuff because they’re like, well, this doesn’t actually help me do my job. So why am I interacting with it? What I love about TouchPoint is we’re saying, hey, how do we get to the to the idea of a personalized path, a personalized understanding of where people are at? That’s, you know, that’s incredible.Rich Birch — So you’ve worked with lots of churches, hundreds of churches, and, you know, lots all across the country, great, lots of different contexts. What trends are you seeing right now that church that are helping churches think about engagement differently than maybe a few years ago, that things that are like, okay, this is, you know, kind of the cutting edge stuff we we should be thinking about, you know, in the in the future, what are some things we should be looking at?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I’m really grateful that in the last few years, I think there has been started to see a shift, at least in churches moving from simply gathering the data to asking what they can do with it. How can we actually leverage this for discipleship? I think churches are taking that more seriously. It even used to be a little taboo for churches to gather data. That’s not the case anymore. And and I’m grateful for that.Rich Birch — Right.Ronee de Leon — I see that moving in a really positive direction. I’m seeing churches being willing to evaluate their technology stack, which I think is really important. Again, we’ve been gathering the data long enough long enough.Ronee de Leon — If it’s not useful, what are what are we doing? What are we doing with it?Rich Birch — Right. Why are we doing this?Ronee de Leon — And so yeah, understanding is our technology really serving us well and as a tool exactly for those people you just mentioned. Your people people, your pastoral people, is it quick and easy and getting them to their people more quickly? Ronee de Leon — And then even the idea of decisions being made around data about specifically the actual size of our ministry. I think this has been said for years now, pre-COVID it was true. Now it’s it’s even more true. Weekend service numbers don’t tell the whole story… Rich Birch — Right. Ronee de Leon — …of who is in and around our ministry pond. And we have to understand that and start making decisions around that.Rich Birch — That’s so true.Ronee de Leon — Or in those spaces, how are we discipling them towards the importance of the weekend service and that gathering? And so, I’m just seeing some things shift in that area as well. Executive pastors don’t love this conversation, Rich. I’m just going to throw that out there. Because a lot of our staffing ratios are based on weekend service attendance numbers, but we’re actually serving. The patterns that I’m seeing are somewhere between two and a half to three times that number of people in our ministries.Ronee de Leon — So there’s there’s a lot of movement in the world of data, but those are some of the things that are kind of surfacing that I think is really helpful and productive for churches.Rich Birch — Okay, I want to, I would like I said, I was want to take advantage of your expertise. An area that, speaking in this whole this consistency issue, hey, how do we keep our people engaged, keep our staff, our volunteers, key volunteers engaged in um collecting data and, you know, ensuring that they’re engaging with the tool. What have you seen as best practices either on the front end, like, hey, when we’re rolling out a new system, if we’ve, if we’ve switched, say, for instance, if you’re listening in and you want to switch to TouchPoint, what are some best practices on that front or just ongoing to keep our people using this? How do we, how do we, yeah, what’s what’s best practice on that front?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, what you’re kind of hinting towards is a little bit around change management and the stick-to-it-ativeness around that, right?Rich Birch — Yes, yes.Ronee de Leon — There is a leadership coaching company that I’ve worked with in the past that talks about to achieve anything, you need clarity, support and accountability. And I’m a really big believer in that clarity. Again, we’ve talked about what are we doing? Why are we doing it? Support is do we have the tools and the training to make that happen?Ronee de Leon — The biggest lacking piece that I see often in church world is the accountability side. Rich Birch — Right.Ronee de Leon — You know, we we wrestle with the idea of grace and truth. And a lot of times we want to lean really heavily into the grace side of things. I think there is a huge opportunity for accountability to be reframed in church world. It doesn’t have to be a drop the hammer approach. Rich Birch — Sure.Ronee de Leon — You know, it’s seeing people do the right thing and helping them continue to do that. So I would say if you don’t have all three of those pieces, you’re probably going struggle to achieve just about anything. And the part, like I said, that I see really, really with area for opportunity in the church world is that accountability piece.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s great. Any that I think that’s a clear framework. That’s like the cost of the price price worth the price of admission of today’s episode right there.Rich Birch — Clarity, support, accountability. That’s fantastic. On the accountability side, how do we do that? What what what are some ways to, ou know, I’m thinking carrot and stick. It’s like I can we’ve celebrated where it’s like, hey, look at this person. This department’s doing a great job with this. How how else are should are have you seen churches that are particularly effective at driving that kind of consistency, driving accountability? What are they doing to ins ensure or that that’s, you know, that’s actually happening in their organization?Ronee de Leon — Yeah. Casting the vision of this being stewardship, I think really matters. Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s good. Ronee de Leon — You know, there’s a verse in Hebrews that talks about, your church leaders will be accountable to the Lord for the people they’re shepherding. And so I think really, casting the vision around stewardship as part of that. But then practically it can’t be weird to talk about it.Rich Birch — Right.Ronee de Leon — You know, let’s talk about it in department meetings. Let’s talk about it and celebrate in staff meetings. Let’s bring it up in one-on-ones. Pull the technology up with the people that you lead and look through the lists and say, what are the stories? How are things going? You know, how can I support you as you move this forward? But I just think it can’t be weird to talk about.Ronee de Leon — So between taking the stewardship side seriously and just starting to incorporate it into every conversation, every meeting, if it matters to us, and it does. It does because people are the mission of the church, right? How do we just continue to build that culture around it?Rich Birch — Yeah, it’s so good. So you’ve put together a great resource that I want to make sure, if you’re listening in friends, you’ve invested almost 30 minutes here, you need to jump on this resource, like super helpful: the church health assessment. Talk us through what is this tool? How will it help? Why should we jump on board? You know, what what what kind of conversation could it help us with but with our team even this week?Ronee de Leon — Yeah. The church health assessment is looking at five widely accepted kind of industry benchmarks to understand how your church is comparing to those. So like we talked about earlier, this could give you a starting place to understand, according, you know, based on those benchmarks, how is your church doing? How are a few of these ministries doing? And then it’s, it’s probably going to highlight somewhere specific for you to start drilling into and double clicking on. So, that assessment is going to be at TouchPointsoftware.com/unseminary. Rich Birch — Ooo, look at that. Ronee de Leon — Like I said, it’s going to take you, if you’ve got the data, which is part of this conversation, right?Rich Birch — Yeah.Ronee de Leon — But if you know the numbers, it’s only going to take you two or three minutes to get these five key areas kind of benchmarked to understand how your church is performing compared to those accepted benchmarks.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s amazing. Like, again, friends, I would love for you to check that out. We’ll put a link in the show notes to that. Thanks for doing that. What a great gift, tool for people that are listening in. That’s super helpful. I appreciate that. I think I can see where this kind of thing could be super helpful for us, even to have like a bit of a leadership conversation around, let’s do it and then talk about it together. It’s a good conversation. Rich Birch — So taking a step back, if I’m if i’m an executive pastor or senior leader who’s listening in, and I feel like I’m constantly, or we’re mostly reacting. We’re constantly reacting to problems at our church. You know, we’re not getting ahead of this. We’re not seeing kind of data but as it, you know, we’re not developing, like you say, ahead. We’re just, it’s stuff happens and then we you react. How could we use data to help us get ahead of that rather than, you know, just reacting all the time? What’s one of the first areas we should look at and consider as a church?Ronee de Leon — Yeah, I would say that a simple place to start is kind of revisiting this framework of conviction, collection, clarity, and care. And ask yourself, what C is my church stuck on? Where are we stuck in this journey? And dive in there, ask the questions, reach out to another church who maybe is doing this really well. But that’s where I would say, practically, I would ask yourself, where are you on this kind of progressive journey of data-driven discipleship?Rich Birch — Yeah, so good. This has been a fantastic conversation. If you were, I’m going to get one more last question in for you here. What’s one question you wish every church leader who’s listening in today would would ask about their church that almost nobody’s asking right now, that’s thinking about this area, that’s thinking about like, hey, what are we, you know, here’s a question I wish we were thinking about that we’re not thinking about today.Ronee de Leon — Yeah, churches are asking a lot of good questions. And I love this topic. I’m passionate about data-driven discipleship.Rich Birch — Love it.Ronee de Leon — But I think the question behind the question behind the question kind of comes down to: are we promoting participation or are we cultivating transformation? And that’s what I hope that we’re asking through this kind of sea of data and everything that we’re we’re looking at. The core of things. Are we promoting participation or are we cultivating transformation for the people of our churches?Rich Birch — Well, this is fantastic. There’s a ton we could talk about on this front. This has been helpful conversation for us today. Friends, I want to encourage you to take the church health assessment. Give us that address again that we want to send people to.Ronee de Leon — It’s going to be at touchpointsoftware.com/unseminary.Rich Birch — Great. Well, you can do that right in your phone right now. We’d love for you to go and check that out. We’ll put a link to that. Anywhere else we want to send people online, Ronee, if they want to track with TouchPoint or maybe we’re sitting in today and we’re thinking, you know what, maybe we should relook at this area. I’m not super happy with what’s going on with our, you know, church management software. Where do we want to send them online to get more information and about what what you guys do?Ronee de Leon — Go ahead and just check out touchpointsoftware.com. I would recommend you get a demo. Like I said, it’s kind of a conversation that churches are having right now, evaluating their tech stack. If you haven’t looked at it in a while, just take a look, maybe just look around and we would love the opportunity to connect with you and demo TouchPoint for you. So that same website without the backslash, get a demo and we’d we’d be just thrilled to have a conversation with you.Rich Birch — Yeah, that’s that’s good. Friends, I just want to endorse that. I think that’s a great next step for lots of our churches that are listening in today. Listen, friends, your team spends a lot of time in this in this tool. Whatever you use on this front, they spend a lot of time on it. It’s worth a sober second look. It’s worth, if you haven’t looked at this in a while, to take a step back and say, hey, let’s take a look at this again. And TouchPoint would be a great one to for you to to to take a look at and say, hmm, I wonder if maybe we should be looking at a change.Rich Birch — So Appreciate that, Ronee. It’s so great seeing you again. I’d love to have you come back on in the future. I’m sure there’s more we could talk about, but thanks for being here today.Ronee de Leon — Sounds good. Thank you, Rich.

This episode begins with a slightly defensive rant by Eric Trexler, followed by a very defensive rant by Eric Helms. After that, they dive into new research uncovering the complexities of ultraprocessed foods, their impact on obesity, binge eating, and the food industry's role in creating and promoting hyperpalatable ultraprocessed foods. Iron Culture is proudly presented by the MASS Research Review (massresearchreview.com) If you're in the market for some high-quality gym gear or apparel, be sure to support our friends at elitefts.com and use code "MRR10" for a 10% discount. Chapters 00:00 Intro 10:14 Trexler & Helms respond to social media criticism 15:48 Slightly defensive rant by Trexler 23:10 Extremely defensive rant by Helms 32:25 Roles in The Ecosystem of Science Communication 41:39 Exploring the Impact of Ultra-Processed Foods 46:20 Understanding Ultra-Processed Foods and Their Nuances 51:16 The Role of Food Processing in Feeding a Growing Population 55:53 Hyper-Palatable Foods and Their Effects on Eating Behavior 59:07 The Evolution of Eating Disorder Treatment Perspectives 01:04:30 The Relationship Between Hyper-Palatable Foods and Binge Eating 01:09:05 Neurophysiology of Food Consumption and Addiction 01:12:20 Conclusions & practical applications for food selection

As humans, we all experiences negative emotions from time to time, but most of these feelings aren't too strong. Many of the daily emotions we feel include small levels of irritation or something that makes us a little unhappy for a short time.It's useful to be able to put a name to these emotions, so today, I'll be sharing a few slightly negative emotions and behaviours, what we can call them, and some stories from my own life when I'm in a bad mood and experience these too. Show notes page - https://levelupenglish.school/podcast374

Our stories tonight carry us into the bright days of Spring, with stories about time spent in gardens and neighborhood streets, enjoyable chores and small adventures, seeds and shovels, and the joy of growing sunlight. Subscribe to our ⁠Premium channel.⁠ The first month is on us. 

Listen to the full 48 minute Between Friends episode. Go Directly to this Patreon Episode "What We Really Think About Celebrities (Unfiltered and Slightly Brutal)" https://www.patreon.com/posts/what-we-really-155331513   Picture this: a simple game of "say the first thing that comes to mind" between Chalene and Bret… and it completely goes off the rails. What starts as harmless celebrity opinions quickly turns into brutally honest takes and the kind of unfiltered commentary that probably shouldn't be said out loud. It's messy, funny, and exactly the kind of thing you get on Patreon that you probably weren't supposed to hear.   This story is part of The Saturday Spill series a little peek into the wild, unfiltered stuff that usually stays on Patreon. Some weeks it's hilarious, some weeks it's jaw-dropping, but it's always real life that doesn't quite fit on the regular show. If you're into a little chaos and behind-the-scenes tea, you're in the right place. If you love it, amazing…you can listen to the full, unedited version here http://Chalene.com/more