Podcasts about vcr

Hey, Hey Friends!This week on the GTS Podcast, we're firing up the VCR and choppin' it up about V/H/S/94 (2021) and V/H/S/99 (2022). Tap in to hear us dive into these horror anthologies, dissect a few wrap-around stories, discuss the legend that is Ratama, a Field Trip to Ozzys's Dungeon, and so much more!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In episode 172 of Joe & Reese's Pickle and Boot Shop, Joe recounts his time in a Detroit break room ruled by a VCR possessed by Marked for Death, while Reese updates us on his eternal struggle with pantry paint. Joe also dives into tales of off-grid camping with dirt bikes, side-by-sides, and the kind of rugged discomfort that builds character—or at least sore knees. It's the usual mix of nostalgia, sadness, and poor life choices, delivered by your two favorite Christian ska singers who clearly peaked in 1998. We hope you hate it!Patreon: www.patreon.com/pickleandbootshop Merch: www.bonfire.com/store/the-pickle-and-boot-shop--shop/ Email: thepickleandbootshop@gmail.com Instagram: joeandreesepabs Diabolical Discussion by Daniel Rock: facebook.com/groups/diabolicaldiscussion Good Eats: beefaro

Send us a textWhat was the cutting-edge technology of the 1970s? What was it like to go to the movies in 1985? What are some of the biggest animated television show fails?Episode 196 answers all of these questions.

"Time spent traveling on trains, just staring out the window: I don't think that's lost time. That's when we have our best ideas." –Kim Krizan In this episode of Deviate, Rolf and Kiki introduce their interview with Kim Krizan by talking about their own personal love of the movie Before Sunrise, and how they first experienced it (0:30); Kim talks about her early travel experiences in Czechoslovakia as a teenager, and in England in her twenties (14:30); how the low-information technological moment of travel in the 1990s doesn't exist anymore in the 2020s (23:30); how Kim became involved with helping Richard Linklater write Before Sunrise, and their creative process in working together (34:00); Kim's ongoing relationship to the movie, 30 years after it came out (44:00); and an "Easter egg" segment featuring Kiki reading Melissa Fite Johnson's poem "Before Sunrise on the VCR" (55:30). Kim Krizan (@kimkrizan) is the Oscar-nominated cowriter of the Before Sunrise movies, and the author of Spy in the House of Anaïs Nin. Kristen “Kiki” Bush is an actress, known for Paterno, Liberal Arts, Suits, Law & Order: SVU, and onstage performances at Manhattan Theatre Club, The Public, and Lincoln Center. Notable Links: 2025 Screenwriting in Paris class, with Kim Krizan (creative writing class) Paris Writing Workshops (summer learning-vacation classes) Before Sunrise (1995 movie) Before Sunset (2004 movie) Ethan Hawke (American actor and director) Julie Delpy (French actress and director) Richard Linklater (American filmmaker) Kristen "Kiki" Bush in People, Places & Things (2022 play at the Studio Theatre) Thoughts on watching the Before trilogy, 25 years on, by Rolf Potts (essay) BritRail (train pass in the UK) London A-Z (street atlas) Siouxsie and the Banshees (British rock band) Wembley Stadium (London venue) Continuous partial attention (behavior) Slacker (1990 film) Dazed and Confused (1993 film) Anaïs Nin (French-American diarist and novelist) Eurail Pass (train pass to 33 European countries) The Game Camera (trailer for 2025 short film made by Kiki and Rolf) Uncle Vanya (play by Anton Chekhov) Robert Falls (former artistic director of Chicago's Goodman Theater) Melissa Fite Johnson (poet) The Deviate theme music comes from the title track of Cedar Van Tassel's 2017 album Lumber. Note: We don't host a “comments” section, but we're happy to hear your questions and insights via email, at deviate@rolfpotts.com.

"Time spent traveling on trains, just staring out the window: I don't think that's lost time. That's when we have our best ideas." –Kim Krizan In this episode of Deviate, Rolf and Kiki introduce their interview with Kim Krizan by talking about their own personal love of the movie Before Sunrise, and how they first experienced it (0:30); Kim talks about her early travel experiences in Czechoslovakia as a teenager, and in England in her twenties (14:30); how the low-information technological moment of travel in the 1990s doesn't exist anymore in the 2020s (23:30); how Kim became involved with helping Richard Linklater write Before Sunrise, and their creative process in working together (34:00); Kim's ongoing relationship to the movie, 30 years after it came out (44:00); and an "Easter egg" segment featuring Kiki reading Melissa Fite Johnson's poem "Before Sunrise on the VCR" (55:30). Kim Krizan (@kimkrizan) is the Oscar-nominated cowriter of the Before Sunrise movies, and the author of Spy in the House of Anaïs Nin. Kristen “Kiki” Bush is an actress, known for Paterno, Liberal Arts, Suits, Law & Order: SVU, and onstage performances at Manhattan Theatre Club, The Public, and Lincoln Center. Notable Links: 2025 Screenwriting in Paris class, with Kim Krizan (creative writing class) Paris Writing Workshops (summer learning-vacation classes) Before Sunrise (1995 movie) Before Sunset (2004 movie) Ethan Hawke (American actor and director) Julie Delpy (French actress and director) Richard Linklater (American filmmaker) Kristen "Kiki" Bush in People, Places & Things (2022 play at the Studio Theatre) Thoughts on watching the Before trilogy, 25 years on, by Rolf Potts (essay) BritRail (train pass in the UK) London A-Z (street atlas) Siouxsie and the Banshees (British rock band) Wembley Stadium (London venue) Continuous partial attention (behavior) Slacker (1990 film) Dazed and Confused (1993 film) Anaïs Nin (French-American diarist and novelist) Eurail Pass (train pass to 33 European countries) The Game Camera (trailer for 2025 short film made by Kiki and Rolf) Uncle Vanya (play by Anton Chekhov) Robert Falls (former artistic director of Chicago's Goodman Theater) Melissa Fite Johnson (poet) The Deviate theme music comes from the title track of Cedar Van Tassel's 2017 album Lumber. Note: We don't host a “comments” section, but we're happy to hear your questions and insights via email, at deviate@rolfpotts.com.

00:00-15:00: Buddy Boeheim joins the show to chat about his amazing basketball childhood, watching hours of Syracuse games on the family VCR, battles at home with Jimmy, putting on the Orange uniform, when he decided shooting was his thing and more. Plus, a look at Boeheim's Army, his love for SU fans and more. Presented by CH Insurance. In your corner.

Coming soon to own on videocassette! It was something we loved seeing, knowing that we could continue to build our ever expanding VHS movie collection. This week we talk with Chris Luby from Chris Collects Stuff on YouTube about the art of collecting VHS tapes.  Will the movie you want to rent be at the video store? We hope so. Otherwise, we'll just watch Killer Klowns from Outer Space Again. Because it's a classic! Let's look into the world of VHS. What we're Enjoying Shua found a cool noir detective audio drama on Audible. The Big Fix: A Jack Bergin Mystery stars Jon Hamm as the classic style detective, trying to get a wrongly accused man out of jail and solve a murder, all surrounded by the Brooklyn Dodgers moving to LA. Totally fun, and totally free. Jay has been wanting to see what the new Apple TV+ series starring Seth Rogan called The Studio. It is an interesting look at the movie industry and the chaos that makes it.       Sci-Fi Saturdays This week on Sci-Fi Saturdays Jay revisits the 2012 kind-of-Alien prequel called Prometheus. It is a gory telling of the classic tale of aliens destroying man. Read his article on RetroZap.com. And make sure to play around with the interactive map on MCULocationScout.com. Plus, you can tune in to SHIELD: Case Files where Jay and Shua talk about great stuff in the MCU. Enjoy Video Tapes!  This week we are joined by friend and collector Chris Luby. His YouTube channel Chris Collects Stuff spotlights some of the great things he loves to collect, particularly VHS tapes. This quirky and growing hobby is not only fun, it's also a way to preserve a historical era when we were obsessed with consuming as much media as we could, in magnetic, rectangular form. We discuss the why of the hobby, some rare finds, and some that are elusive.    And make sure to like and subscribe to Chris Collects Stuff on YouTube Do you still have VHS tapes? What tapes did you wear out watching them so often? First person that emails me with the subject line, “Who needs WiFi when we have HiFi?” will get a special mention on the show.  Let us know. Come talk to us in the Discord channel or send us an email to EnjoyStuff@RetroZap.com 

Travel through time as we take you on a journey to explore the darker side of technology! That's right, folks, for tonight's shift, Kyle & Abby Smith read two Inks Bones Press horror anthologies. First, we have THERE'S NO ESCAPE (2024), the darker side of cinema and theater, and second we have CAPTURED (2024), the darker side of VCR's & camcorders. So, are any of these anthologies any good? Well, give this review a listen and find out...if you DAAAaaaare!Already read them? Let us know your thoughts!OMINOUS MEDIA LINKS:WebsiteOminous NewsletterHumming Fools - PodcastEvil Cast - ComicINK BONES PRESS:WebsiteKYLE LINKS:WebsitePatreonInstagramLetterboxd ABBY LINKS:InstagramLetterboxdMUSIC:Intro - Cory NelsonOutro - Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio

Without soaps, we wouldn't have melodramas or reality shows. Without soaps, we wouldn't have many of the TV tropes and shows we love to stream and binge-watch. Cliffhangers, serials, vixens — in television storytelling, all come from soaps. Network television would not exist if not for the financial success of soap operas, according to Elana Levine, author of Her Stories: Daytime Soap Opera and US Television History. During the 1970s, Levine said soaps brought in 75% of the networks' revenue. “Soaps were a legitimate kind of pop culture sensation. As a result, the networks are able to charge more for those ad slots,” she said. “It's a way to reach young people in particular for a time. [Networks] were willing to pay more, because what they were paying was still a whole lot less than what primetime TV cost them, in terms of advertising time.” Ad sales on soaps bore the load of a broadcaster's overall business model, even as production costs inevitably increased. Production costs for a soap opera, Levine said, were “still never at the level of what it cost to make a primetime show.” The decline of soaps can't be attributed to a singular event. Over time, viewers' habits changed and how we consume television evolved, from the VCR to streaming. Soaps are not dead, though, and there are good reasons why they have endured.

PUBLIC VERSION. The terrifying trio of filmmakers behind THE LAST VIDEO STORE (Tim Rutherford, Cody Kennedy and producer/star/video store guru Kevin Martin) join Joe to discuss the making of their VHS culture/meta slasher film. From the films that got them interested in making movies themselves… to the impact that video stores had on them growing up… to their favorite FRIDAY THE 13TH films… to making films both short and long and how it all culminated in their grand thesis THE LAST VIDEO STORE (available now on Arrow Blu-Ray and Arrow TV)… to how Kevin played a heightened version of himself and made the “Video Store Clerk” character a hero instead of a zero… to seeing their film for the first time at FantasticFest 2023 and why they believe video store culture is making a comeback, this conversation is as fun and as geeky as it gets so put it in your VCR, sit back, and enjoy! (Just remember to please be kind and rewind.)

We guess a what the heck is it, test out something that literally sucks (but in a good way!), and light up the campsite without burning the marshmallows. Chad gets colorful with a mess-free masterpiece, and in the warehouse we rewind time with a blast from the VCR past!

We guess a what the heck is it, test out something that literally sucks (but in a good way!), and light up the campsite without burning the marshmallows. Chad gets colorful with a mess-free masterpiece, and in the warehouse we rewind time with a blast from the VCR past!

Andy Cowan joined me to discuss his Seinfeld episode, "The Opposite"; his book and chapter on rejected Seinfeld plots; Danny Thomas; his idol, Jack Benny; Leave it to Beaver & The Honeymooners; going to Boston University; loving Letterman & VCR's; Nancy Sinatra and Seinfeld finale; jazz; how he tricked Lorne Michaels into a meeting; how he would "fix" SNL; Rick Moranis & SCTV; being a pre-interviewer on the Merv Griffin Show; writing spec Taxi's; ore-interviewing Orson Welles the day before he died; Whitney Houston; Ethel Merman; writing for Cheers and The Pat Sajak Show; Jerry Lewis; 60 Minutes then and now; Andy Rooney; Howie, a comic strip, cartoon, and sitcom stuck in development; Up & Down Guys; his podcast the Neurotic Vaccine; his new episode which which he considers his best

I only cried once during high school. No, it wasn't the first day when Mom dropped me off. And it wasn't when I saw my first report card, received my first demerit, or experienced my first detention. It wasn't even when a friend accidentally ran over my foot in the parking lot or when none of my friends stood up to a bully making fun of my hands. Nope. The one time I cried during my high school career was in a theology class. That day, our teacher rolled a television and VCR into the room (for the younger readers, google it!) and the lights were dimmed as we watched a movie called The Mission. Let me explain.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, we start by discussing the unpredictable nature of Toronto's weather and its amusing impact on the city's spring arrival. We explore the evolution of Formula One pit stops, highlighting the remarkable advancements in efficiency over the decades. This sets the stage for a conversation with our guest, Chris Collins, who shares his insights on balancing fame and wealth below the need for personal security. Next, we delve into the intricacies of the VCR formula—proposition, proof, protocol, and property. I share my experiences from recent workshops, emphasizing the importance of transforming ideas into intellectual property. We explore cultural differences between Canada and the U.S. in securing property rights, highlighting the entrepreneurial spirit needed to protect one's innovations. We then examine the role of AI in government efficiency, with Elon Musk's technologies revealing inefficiencies in civil services. The discussion covers the political and economic implications of misallocated funds and how the market's growing intolerance for waste pushes productivity and accountability to the forefront. Finally, we reflect on the transformative power of technological advancements, drawing parallels to historical innovations like the printing press. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS We discussed the VCR formula—proposition, proof, protocol, and property—designed to enhance communication skills and protect innovations. This formula is aimed at helping entrepreneurs turn their unique abilities into valuable assets. We touch on the unpredictable weather of Toronto and the humor associated with the arrival of spring were topics of discussion, offering a light-hearted start to the episode. Dan and I share insights on the evolution of Formula One pit stops, showcasing human innovation and efficiency over time. We examined the challenges faced by entrepreneurs in protecting their intellectual property and explored cultural contrasts between Canada and the U.S. regarding intellectual property rights. The episode delved into the implications of AI in improving government efficiency, highlighting how technologies reveal civil service inefficiencies and drive accountability. We reflected on the transformative power of historical innovations such as the printing press and electricity, drawing parallels to modern technological advancements. The conversation concluded with reflections on personal growth, including insights from notable figures like Thomas Edison and Peter Drucker, and a preview of future discussions on aging and life experiences. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Dan: That feels better. Dean: Welcome to Cloudlandia, yes. Dan: Yes indeed. Dean: Well, where in the world? Dan: are you? Dean: today, toronto. Oh, you're in Toronto. Okay, yeah, where are you? Yeah? Dan: where are you? Dean: I am in the courtyard at the Four Seasons Valhalla in my comfy white couch. In perfect, I would give it 73 degree weather right now. Dan: Yes, well, we're right at that crossover between middle winter and late winter. Dean: You never know what you're going to get. It could snow or it could be. You may need your bikini, your Speedo or something. Dan: I think spring in Toronto happens, I think somewhere around May 23rd, I think somewhere around. May 23rd, and it's the night when the city workers put all the leaves on the trees. Dean: You never know what you're going to get. Until then, right, it just might snow, and they're stealthy. Dan: They're stealthy and you know, I think they rehearse. You know, starting in February, march, april, they start rehearsing. You know how fast can we get all the leaves on the trees and they do it all in one night they do it and all. I mean they're faster than Santa Claus. I mean they're. Dean: Have you seen, Dan? There's a wonderful video on YouTube that is a comparison of a Formula One pit stop from the 1950s versus the 2013 Formula One in Melbourne, and it was so funny to show. Dan: It would be even faster today. Dean: It would be even faster today. Oh yeah, 57 seconds it took for the pit stop in the 50s and it was 2.7 seconds at Melbourne it was just amazing to see. Dan: Yeah, mark young talks about that because he's he's not formula one, but he's at the yeah, he's at the level below formula one right, every, uh, every minute counts, every second counts oh, yeah, yeah, and uh, yeah, he said they practice and practice and practice. You know it's, it's, if it can be measured. You know that there's always somebody who's going to do it faster. And yeah, yeah, it's really, really interesting what humans do. Dean: Really interesting what humans do. I read something interesting or saw a video and I've been looking into it. Basically, someone was saying you know, our brains are not equipped for omniscience, that we're not supposed to have omniscient knowledge of everything going on in the world all at once. where our brains are made to be in a local environment with 150 people around us, and that's what our brain is equipped for managing. But all this has been foisted on us, that we have this impending. No wonder our mental health is suffering in that we have this impending when you say our, who are you referring to? Society. I think you know that's what they're. Dan: Yeah, that's what they're saying like across the board. Dean: Who are they? Yes, that's a great question. Dan: You know I hear this, but I don't experience any of it. I don't feel foisted upon. I don't feel overwhelmed. Dean: You know what I? Dan: think it is. I think it is that people who feel foisted upon have a tendency to talk about it to a lot of other people. Dean: But people who don't feel foisted upon. Dan: Don't mention it to anybody. Dean: It's very interesting. Do you know Chris Collins? Do you know Chris Collins? Dan: He wrote the really great book collection called I Am Leader. Dean: It's really something. He's a new genius. He's a new Genius Network member. Dan: Oh, Chris, oh yeah, oh yeah, chris, yeah, does he have repair shops? His main business is auto Auto. Dean: Yeah, oh yeah, chris, yeah, he does. He have repair shops His main business is auto, auto, auto dealership. Dan: He does auto dealerships. Dean: Yeah, that's right. Dan: Yeah, chris was in. Chris was in the program way back with 10 times around the same time when you came 10 times. He was in for about two years oh okay, interesting. Yeah and yeah, he was at the last Genius you know, and he's got a big, monstrous book that costs about $300. Dean: Yes, I was just going to talk about that. Yeah. Dan: We got one, but I didn't have room in my bags, you know. Dean: I budget. Dan: You know how much. Dean: I'm going to take and how much I'm going to bring back, and that was just too, much so, yeah, so yeah, yeah. He's very bothered. Oh, is he? Okay, yeah, I don't know him, I just I saw him. Dan: I got that what he talked about was this massive conspiracy. You know that they are doing it to them or they're doing it to us interesting interesting I don't experience that. What I experience is mostly nobody knows who I am. Dean: That's the best place to be right. Dan: They only know of you. Somebody was saying a very famous person showed up at a clinic in Costa Rica and he had eight bodyguards, eight bodyguards and I said yes, why is that expensive? That must be really expensive, having all those bodyguards. I mean, probably the least thing that was costly for one is having is having himself transformed by medical miracles. But having the bodyguards was the real expense. So I had a thought and I talked to somebody about this yesterday. Actually, I said my goal is to be as wealthy and famous just to the point where I would need a bodyguard. But not need the bodyguard just below where I would need a bodyguard, but not need the bodyguard Just below, where I would need a bodyguard, and I think that would be an excellent level of fame and wealth. Not only do you not have a bodyguard, but you don't think you would ever need one. That's the big thing, yeah. Dean: I love that. Dan: That that's good yeah that's a good aspiration yeah, yeah, so far I've succeeded yes, so far you are on the uh. Dean: Yeah, on the cusp of 81 six weeks seven weeks to go yeah, getting close. That's so good. Yeah, yeah, this. How is the new book coming? Dan: Yeah, good, well, I've got several because I have a quarterly book. Dean: Yeah, I'm at the big casting, not hiring. Dan: Yeah, really good. Each of us is delivering now a chapter per week, so it's really coming along. Great, yeah, and so we'll. Our date is may 26th for the everything in um before their editing can start, so they will have our, our draft will be in on may 26th and then it's over to the publisher and you know there'll be back and forth. But Jeff and I are pretty, jeff Madoff and I are pretty complete writers, you know. So you know it doesn't need normal. You know kind of looking at spelling and grammar. Dean: Right, right, right. Is that how you? Are you writing as one voice or you're writing One voice? One voice, one voice. Dan: Yeah, but we're writing actually in the second person, singular voice, so we're writing to the reader. So we're talking about you this and you this, and you this and you this, and that's the best way to do it, because if you can maintain the same voice all the way through, that's really good. I mean, jeff, we have a different style, but since we're talking to the reader all the way through, it actually works really well so far, and then we'll have you know, there'll be some shuffling and rearranging at the end. Dean: That's what I wondered. Are you essentially writing your separate, are you writing alternate chapters or you're writing your thoughts about one chapter? Dan: We have four parts and the first three parts are the whole concept of businesses that have gone theatrical, that have gone theatrical and we use examples like Ralph Lauren, Four Seasons. Hotel Apple. You know who have done Starbucks, who have done a really great job, and Jeff is writing all that because he's done a lot of work on that. He's, you know, he's been a professor at one of the New York universities and he has whole classes on how small companies started them by using a theatrical approach. They differentiated themselves extraordinarily in the marketplace, and he goes through all these examples. Plus he talks about what it's like to be actually in theater, which he knows a great deal about because he's a playwright and a producer. The fourth part is on the four by four casting tool and that's got five sections to it and where I'm taking people, the reader, who is an entrepreneur, a successful, talented, ambitious entrepreneur who wants to transform their company into a theatrical-like enterprise with everybody playing unique roles. So, that's how I've done it, so he's got the bigger writing job than I do but, mine is more directive. This is what you can do with the knowledge in this book. So we're writing it separately, and we're going to let the editor at the publishing house sort out any what goes where. Dean: Put it all together. Dan: Yeah, and we're doing the design on it, so we're pretty steadily into design projects you know, producing a new book. So we've got my entire team my team's doing all the backstage arrangements. Jeff is interviewing a lot of really great people in the theater world and you know anything having to do with casting. So he's got about. You know probably to do with casting. So he's got about probably about 12 major, 12 major interviews that he'll pull quotes from and my team is doing all the setup and the recording for him so so. Jeff. Jeff showed up as Jeff and I showed up as a team. That's great. Oh, that's great, that's awesome yeah, yeah, in comes, but not without six others, right, right with your. Dean: You know, I had a friend who used to refer to that as your utility belt. Right that you show up and you've got strapped on behind you. Dan: You've got your design, got it writing got it video, got it your whole. Yeah, strapped on behind you, you've got your design Got it Right. Dean: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Dan: And capability crew. Yeah, and to a certain extent I'm role modeling the, the point of the book, you know, and the way we're going about this and and you know, and more and more so, I find probably every quarter my actual doing um of production and that gets less and less and I'm actually finding um, I'm actually finding my work with perplexity very useful because it's getting me better at prompting my team members yes yeah, with perplexity, if you don't give it the right prompt, you don't get the right outcome. You know, yeah, and more and more I'm noticing I'm getting better at giving really, really, really great prompts to my artists, to the writers who are working with me, the interviewers, everything so, um, yeah, so it's been very, very helpful. I I find uh, just in a year of perplexity, I've gotten much more uh precise about exactly what I want. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah, defining right. I mean that's pretty. Yeah, yeah, that's really great. And knowing that, a lot of it, so much of that prompting, that's the language that's been adopted for interfacing with AI, chat, gpt and perplexity. Dan: The prompts that you give are the things. Dean: But there's so much of that. That's true about team as well, right? Oh yeah, being a better AI prompter is a better team prompter. Yeah yeah, being a better AI prompter is a better team prompter. Dan: Yeah, yeah, and you know I have a book coming out Now that I'm talking to you about it it may be the next book that would start in June and it's called Technology Coaching Teamwork and it has like three upward arrows that are, uh, you know, in unison with each other. There are three and I said that I think in the 21st century all businesses really have three tracks to them. They have a technology track, they have a teamwork track and they have a coaching track in the middle and that um in the 20th century, we considered management to be the basis. You know, management is the basis for business but. I think management has actually been um superseded, um by um superseded by electronics, you know actually it's the electronics are now the management, the algorithms are now the management and then you have the people who are constantly, you know, creating new technology, and you have human teamwork that's creating new things, because it's ultimately humans that are knocking off everything you know right. And then in the middle is coaching, and coaching goes back and forth between the teamwork and the technology. Technology will always do a really shitty job of coaching yes, I bet that's true, and teams will always do a sort of shitty job of uh knowing how to use technology and there has to be an interface in the middle, that's a human interface and it's a coaching, because coaching takes in a lot of factors, not just action factors or planning factors, but it takes in aspirational factors. It takes in learning factors. It takes in, you know, all sorts of transformational factors and that's a, that's a mid role. Yeah. Dean: Yes, yeah. Dan: And if you look at what you do best, it's probably coaching. Dean: Yeah, I wonder. I mean that's kind of. Dan: Joe Polish. It was Joe Polish, where he probably does best. He's probably a great coach. Dean: Yeah, I think that's true. Yeah, I think that's true. I've really been getting a lot of insight around going through and defining the VCR formula. You know proposition, proof, protocol and property. That's a. I see the clarity that. You know. There's a different level of communication and intention between. Where my I really shine is between is propositions and proof, like getting something knowing, guessing. You know we were. I was going to talk today too about guessing and betting. I've been really thinking about that. That was a great exercise that we did in our workshop. But this idea that's really what this is is guessing. I seem to have this superpower for propositions, like knowing what would be the thing to do and then proving that. That's true. But then taking that proof and creating a protocol that can be packaged and become property is a. That's a different skill set altogether and it's not as much. It's not as much. My unique ability, my superpower zone, is taking, you know, making propositions and proving them. I'm a really good guesser. Dan: That's my strength yeah. Yeah, I think the what I'm doing because it's, um, I'm really thinking a lot about it based on the last, um, uh, free zone workshop, which I did on monday and, uh, you know, monday of the week before last in toronto, where you were yeah, and and then I did it on Thursday again and I reversed the whole day oh really I reversed the whole day. I started off with guessing and betting and then indecision versus bad decision. And then the afternoon I did the second company secret and it worked a lot better. The flow was a lot better. Company secret and it worked a lot better. The flow was a lot better. But the big thing is that people say well, how do I? Um, I I just don't know how I you know that. Um, I'm telling them and they're asking me. So I'm telling them every time you take your unique ability and help someone transform their DOS issues, you're actually creating perspective. Intellectual property. And they said, well, I don't see quite how that works. I don't see how that works, so I've been, you know, and I'm taking them seriously. They don't see how that works. So I said, well, the impact filter is actually the solution. Okay, because you do the DOS question with them. You know, if we were having this discussion a year from now and you were looking back over the year, what has to have happened for you to feel happy with your progress? Okay, and specifically, what dangers do you have that need to be eliminated, what opportunities do you have that need to be captured, and what strengths do you have that need to be maximized? And there's a lot of very interesting answers that are going to come out of that, and the answers actually their answers to your question actually are the raw material for creating intellectual property the reason being is that what they're saying is unique and how you're listening to it is unique because of your unique ability so the best thing is do it, do an impact filter on what your solution is. So the best solution is best result solution is this. Worst result solution is this. And then here are the five success criteria, the eight success criteria that we have to go through to achieve the best result and that is the basis for intellectual property. Dean: What you write in that thing. Dan: So that's where I'm going next, because I think if we can get a lot of people over that hump, you're going to see a lot more confidence about what they're creating as solutions and understanding that these solutions are property. Dean: Yes. Dan: That's what I'm saying, that's what I'm thinking. Dean: Yeah, that's your guessing and betting yeah yes I agree and I think that that uh you know, I mean, I've had that to me going through this exercise of thinking, through that vision, column you know that the ultimate outcome is property, and once you have that property, it becomes it's a capability. Dan: It's a capability. Now right, that's something that you have. If it's not property, it's an opportunity for somebody to steal something ah right exactly. Yeah, I just think there's an inhibition on the part of entrepreneurs that if they have a really neat solution but it's not named and packaged and protected, um, it isn't going to really do them any good because they're going to be afraid. Look, if I say this, I'm in a conference somewhere and I say this, somebody's going to steal it. Then they're going to use it, then I I can't stop them from doing that. So the way I'm going to stop people from stealing my creativity is not to tell people what I'm creating. Right, it's just, it's just going to be me in my basement. Dean: Yeah, I bet no. Dan: I bet the vast majority of creative entrepreneurs they're the only ones who know they're creative because they're afraid of sharing their creativity, because it's not distinct enough that they can name it and package it and project it, getting the government to give you a hand in doing that Right yeah. Yeah, and I don't know maybe it's just not a goal of theirs to have intellectual property. Maybe it's you know it's a goal of mine to have everything be intellectual property, but maybe it's just not the goal of a lot of other people. Dean: What do? Dan: you think. Dean: I think that once you start to understand what the practical you know value, the asset value of having intellectual property, I think that makes a big difference. I think that's where you're, I mean you're. It's interesting that you are certainly leading the way, you know. I found it fascinating when you mentioned that if you were, you know, were measured as a Canadian company, that it would be the ninth or something like that. Dan: Yeah, during a 12-month period 23 to 24,. Based on the research that the Globe and Mail Toronto paper did, that the biggest was one of the big banks. They had the most intellectual property and if our US patents counted in Canada because I think they were just, they were just counting Canadian government patents that we would have been number nine and we're. you know, we're a tiny little speck on the windshield, I mean we're not a big company, but what I notice when I look at Canada very little originality is coming out of Canada and, for example, the biggest Canadian company with patents during that 12-month period was TD Bank. Yeah, and they had 240. 240, I mean that might be how many Google send in in a week. You know that might be the number of patents. That wouldn't be necessarily a big week at Google or Amazon or any of the other big American, because Americans are really into Americans are really, really into property. That's why they want Greenland. Dean: And Panama. Dan: And Alberta. Dean: Panama, alberta and Greenland. Dan: And the Gulf of America, yeah, the Gulf of America and property. Dean: Even if it's not actual. They want titular property. Dan: Yes. Dean: Yeah, yeah. Dan: And I haven't seen any complaints from Mexico. I mean, I haven't seen any complaints. Maybe there have been complaints, but we just haven't seen them. No, no, from now on it's the Gulf of America, which I think is rather important, and when Google just switches, I mean, google hasn't been a very big Trump fan and yet they took it seriously. Yeah, now all the tech's official. It's interesting talking to people and they say what's happening? What's happening? We don't know what's happening. I say, well, it's like the end of a Monopoly game. One of the things you have to do when you end one Monopoly game is all the pieces have to go back in the box, like Scrabble. You play Scrabble, all the pieces go back in the box at the end of a game. And I said, this is the first time since the end of the Second World War that a game is ending and all the pieces are going back into the box, except when you get to the next step. It's a bigger box, it's a different game board, there's more pieces and different rules. So this is what's happening right now. It's a new game the old game is over, new game is starting and, um, if you just watch what donald trump's doing, you're getting an idea what the new game is. Yeah, I think you're right, and one of the new game is intellectual property. Intellectual property I think this is one of the new parts of the new game. And the other thing is it's all going to be one-to-one deals. I don't think there's going to be any more multi-party deals. You know, like the North American Free Trade Act, supposedly is the United States, canada and Mexico In Europe. If you look at it, it's Canada and Mexico, it's Mexico and the United States and it's the United States and Canada. These are separate deals. They're all separate deals. That's what I think is happening. States, Canada and these are separate deals. They're all separate deals. Oh, interesting, yeah, and that's what I think is happening. It's just one-to-one. No more multilateral stuff it's all one-to-one. For example, the US ambassador is in London this week and they're working out a deal between the UK and the United States, so no tariffs apply to British, british products oh interesting yeah and you'll see it like the European Union. I was saying the European Union wants to have a deal and I said European Union, where is the European Union? You know where is? That anyway, yeah yeah, I mean, if you look at the United Nations, there's no European Union. If you look at NATO, there's no European Union. If you look at the G20 of countries, there's no European Union. There's France, there's Germany. You know, there's countries we recognize. And I think the US is just saying if you don't have a national border and you don't have a capital, and you don't have a government, we don't think it exists. We just don't think it exists. And Trump often talks about that 28 acres on the east side of Manhattan. He says boy, boy. What we could do with that right, oh, what we could do with that. You know they should. Just, you know who can do that. Who can do? United Nations, switzerland, send it to Switzerland. You know that'd be a nice place for the send it to there, you know like that and it just shows you that that was all. All those institutions were really a result of the Second World War and the Cold War, which was just a continuation of the Second World War. So I think that's one of the really big things that's happening in the world right now. And the other thing I want to talk to you about is Doge. I think Doge is one of the most phenomenally big breakthroughs in world history. What's happening with Elon Musk and his team. Dean: Yeah, I know you've been really following that with great interest. Tell me what's the latest. Dan: It's the first time in human history that you can audit government, bureauc, audit government, bureaucratic government, the part of government. You don't see Millions and millions of people who are doing things but you don't know what they're doing. There's no way of checking what they're doing. There's no way for them. And it was proven because Musk, about four weeks ago, sent out a letter to every federal employee, said last week, tell me five things that you did. And the results were not good. Dean: Well, I think the same thing is happening when people are questioned about their at-home working accomplishments too. Yeah, but that's the Well, lamar Lark, you know. Dan: Lamar. I don't think you've ever met Lamar. He's in the number one Chicago Free Zone workshops, so we have two and a quarter and he's in the first one. And he has all sorts of interesting things. He's got Chick-fil-A franchises and other things like that, okay, and he created his own church, which is a very I have met Lamar yeah, which is a very American activity. Dean: It creates your own church, you know yes yes, yeah. Dan: That's why Americans are so religious is because America is the first country that turned religion into an entrepreneurial activity. Got yourself a hall. You could do it right there in the courtyard of the Valhalla. How many chairs could you? If you really pushed it, how many chairs could you get into the courtyard? Let's see One, two three, four, five, not like the chair you're sitting on. No, I'm kidding. Dean: I'm just envisioning it. I could probably get 50 chairs in here. Dan: You got yourself, you know and set it up right, Get a good tax description yeah, you got yourself a religion there. That's great. And you're kind of tending in that direction with the word Valhalla, that's exactly right. Dean: Yes, would you. Dan: I'd pay to spend an hour or two on Sunday with you. Dean: But here's the big question, Dan Would you be committed enough to tithe? Dan: Oh yes, oh yes. Dean: Then we'd really be on to something you know. We could just count on you for your tithe to the church. That would be. Dan: That would really get us on our feet, but anyway, I was telling this story about Lamar. So he and his wife have a friend, a woman, who works for the federal government in Chicago, and so they were just talking over dinner to the person and they said, well, what's your day work, what's your day you know when do you go into the? office. When do you go into the office? When do you go into the office? And she says, oh, I haven't been to the office since before COVID. No, I know we are the office. And so they said, well, how does your home day work? And she says, well, at 830, you got to. You got to check in at 830. You check in at 830, you go online and then you put your j in at 8.30. Dean: You check in at 8.30, you go online and then you put your jiggler on Jiggler, exactly I've heard about this and they said what's the jiggler? Dan: Well, the jiggler moves. Your mouse keeps checking into different. It keeps switching to different files, positions, yeah, yeah, files. And that's the only thing that they can record from the actual office is that you're busy moving from one file to the other. And he says, well, what are you doing while that's happening? She said, well, I do a lot of shopping, you know I go out shopping and we have you know, and they come back and it goes from. You know it'll stop because there's coffee time, so we'll stop for 10 minutes for coffee and then it'll stop for lunch and stop for afternoon coffee. And then I checked out and I always check in five minutes early and I always check five minutes late, that's amazing, isn't it? that's what that's what elon Elon Musk is discovering, because Elon Musk's AI can actually discover what they did, and then it's hard for the person to answer what were the five things you did last week? You know, and the truth is that I think I'm not saying that all civil servants are worthless. I'm not saying that at all. You have it right now. It's recorded here. Your mechanism is recording that. I'm not saying that all civil servants are worthless but I do think it's harder and harder for civil servants to prove their value, because you may have gone to five important meetings, but I bet those meetings didn't produce any result. It's hard for any civil servant and you can say what you did last week. I can say what I did last week, but you were basically just meeting with yourself. Yeah, that's I saw somebody and you produce something and you made a decision and something got created and that's easy to prove. But I don't think it's easy in the civil service to prove the value of what you did the greatest raw resource in America for taking money that's being spent one way taking that money away and spending on something else. I think this is the greatest source of financial transformation going forward, because about 15 states all of them Republican states have gotten in touch with Elon Musk and say whatever you're doing in Washington, we want to do here, and I just he believes, according to his comments, that every year there's $3 trillion that's being badly spent $3 trillion you know, I got my little finger up to my mouth. $3 trillion, you know, this is that's a lot of you know, I'm at the point where I think a million is still a big deal. You know, trillion is uh, yeah, uh. Dean: I saw that somebody had invented a uh algorithm reader. They detected an algorithm in the like a fingerprint in the jiggler software. Oh that, yeah, so that you can overlay this thing and it would be able to identify that that's a jiggler that's a jiggler. Dan: That's a jiggler yeah, you got to because behind the jiggler is the prompter. Dean: The jiggler busters. Dan: Yes, exactly, he was on. He was interviewed, he and six members of his Doge team, you know, and how they're talking about them being 19 and 20 year olds, about them being 19 and 20 year olds. These were part. These were powerful people who had stepped away from their companies and their jobs just for the chance to work with the Elon. One guy had five companies. He's from Houston, he had five companies and he's taken leave from his company for a year. Just to work on the doge project. Yeah, and so that guy was talking and he said you know what we discovered? The small business administration, he said, last year gave 300 million dollars in loans to children under 11 years old wow to their to that a person who had their social security number, their social insurance number. Right, and during that same year, we gave $300 million in loans to people who were over 120 years old. Dean: Wow. Dan: That's $600 million. That's $600 million, that's almost a billion. Anyway, that's happening over and over. They're just discovering these and those checks are arriving somewhere and somebody's cashing those checks, but it's not appropriate. So I think this is the biggest deal. I think this changes everything, and I've noticed that the Democratic Party is in a tailspin, and has been especially since they started the Doge project, because the people doing the jiggling and the people who where the checks are going to the run I bet 90% of them are Democrats the money's going to democratic organizations, since going to democratic individuals and they're going to be cash strapped. You know that they've been. This isn't last year, this goes back 80 years. This has been going on since the New Deal, when the Democrats really took over Washington. And I bet this I bet they can track all the checks that went back 80 years. Dean: I mean, this is that's really something, isn't it? I was just thinking about yeah, this kind of transparency is really like. I think, when you really get down to it, we're getting to a point where there's the market does not support inefficiency anymore. It's not baked in. If you have workers for instance, most of the time you have salaried workers your real expectation is that they're going to be productive. I don't know what the actual stats are, do you know? But let's say that they're going to be actually productive for 50% of the time. But you look at now just the ability to, especially on task-related things or AI type of things um, collins, chris no, chris johnson's um, um, oh yeah um uh, you know the the ai dialers there, of being able, there's zero. Dan: They were doing, um, you know they were doing. Maybe you know the dialers were doing. You know, because some of the sometimes the other, the person at the other end they answered and they'd have a you know five minute call or something like that. So in a day in a day, like they have an eight hour thing they might do you know. 50, 50 call outs 50 or 60 calls yeah, his. Ai does 25,000 calls a minute. Dean: Exactly that's. What I mean is that those things are just that everything is compressed. Now there's no, because it's taken out all the air, all the fluff around it. What humans come with. You're right what you said earlier about all the pieces going back in the box and we're totally reset. Yeah, I think we're definitely that you know yeah and the thing thing about this. Dan: What I found interesting is that the request coming in from the states that they moved the doge you know the process department of government efficiency that I. I think he's putting together a vast system that can be applied to any government you know, it could be, and, uh, and, but the all the requests came in from republican states, not from Democratic states, waste and abuse and waste and fraud. probably for the over last 80 years, has been the party in the United States which was most invested in the bureaucracy of the government you know. And yeah, I mean, do you know anybody who works for the government? I mean actually, I mean you may have met the person, but I mean, do you know anybody who works for the government? I mean actually, I mean you may have met the person but I mean, I don't know. Do you do, do you know anybody who works for the government? I don't believe, I do, really, and I do, and I don't either right, I don't I don't, I don't, neither you know I mean, I mean everybody I know is an entrepreneur everybody I know is entrepreneurial. And yeah, the people who aren't entrepreneurial are the families. You know they would be family connections of the entrepreneurs. I just don't know anybody who works for the government. You know, I've been 50 years and I can't say I know anybody who works for the government but, there's lots of them. Yeah, yeah so they don't they. They're not involved in entrepreneurial circles, that's for sure. Dean: It's Ontario Hydro or Ontario Power Generation. Is that the government? No, that's the government, then I do. I know one person. I know one person that works for the government. Dan: All right, Send him an email and say what are five things you did last week? Yeah, what? Dean: did you do last week? Dan: Oh my goodness, that's so funny, impress me. Dean: Yes. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: I think it's a stage in technological development, I think it's a state, just where it has to do with the ability to measure, and this has been a vast dark space government that you can't really, yeah, and in fairness to them, they couldn't measure themselves. In other words, that they didn't have the ability, even if they were honest and forthright and they were committed and they were productive, they themselves did not have the ability to measure their own activities until now. And I think, and I think now they will, and I think now they will, and, but but anyway, I just think this is a major, major event. This is this is equal to the printing press. You know this is equal to to electricity. You can measure what government does electricity. You can measure what government does In the history of human beings. This is a major breakthrough. That's amazing. Dean: So great Look around. You don't want a time to be alive. Dan: Yeah, I mean depending on where you work I guess that's absolutely true. Dean: I've been listening to, uh I was just listening, uh just started actually a podcast about uh, thomas edison, uh this is a really great podcast, one of my great, one of my great heroes. Yes, exactly, the podcast is called Founders. Dan: Founders yeah. Dean: Founders. Yeah, david Sunra, I think, is the guy's name and all he does is he reads biographies and then he gives his insights on the biographies. It's just a single voice podcast. It's not like guests or anything, it's just him breaking down his lessons and notes from reading certain reading these biographies and it's really well done. But he had what turned me on he did. I first heard a podcast he did about Albert Lasker, who was the guy, the great advertising guy, the man who sold America and yeah, so I've been listening through and very interesting. But the Thomas Edison thing I'm at the point where he was talking about his first things. He sold some telegraph patent that he had an idea that he had created for $40,000, which was like you know a huge amount of money back then and that allowed him to set up Menlo Park. And then at the time Menlo Park was kind of out in the middle of nowhere and you know they asked why would you set up out there? And no distractions. And he created a whole you know a whole environment of where people were undistracted and able to invent and what you know. If they get bored, what are they going to do? They're going to invent something, just creating this whole environment. Dan: Well, he wasn't distractible because he was largely deaf. He had childhood injury, yeah, so he wasn't distracted by other people talking because he couldn't really make out. So you know, he had to focus where he could focus. And yeah, there is actually in my hometown, which his hometown is called Milan, ohio. I grew up two miles. I grew up I wasn't born there, but when I was two years old, we moved to a farm there. It was two miles from Edison. His home is there. It's a museum. Dean: Milan. Dan: Ohio and that was 1830s, somewhere 1838, something like that. I'm not quite sure. But there's a business in Norwalk, Ohio, where we moved from the farm when I was 11 years old Ohio, where we moved from the farm when I was 11 years old, and there's a business in there that started off as a dynamo company. Dynamo was sort of like an electric generator. Dean: Yeah, and we had dynamo in Georgetown. Dan: on the river, yeah, and that business continues since the mid-1800s, that business continues, and everything like that. My sense is that Edison put everything together that constitutes the modern scientific technological laboratory. In other words that Menlo Park is the first time you've really put everything together. That includes, you know, the science, the technology, the experimentation the creation of patents, the packaging of the new ideas, getting investment from Wall Street and everything. He created the entire gateway for the modern technological corporation, I think. Dean: I think that's amazing, very nice. I like to look at the. I like to trace the timelines of something right, like when you realize it's very interesting when you think and you hear about the lore and you look at the accomplishments of someone like Thomas Edison or Leonardo da Vinci or anybody, you look at the total of what you know about what they were able to accomplish, but when you granularly get down to the timeline of it, you don't, like you realize how. I think I remember reading about da vinci. I think he spent like seven years doing just this one uh, one period of projects. That was uh, um. So he puts it in perspective right of a of the, the whole of a career, that it really breaks down to the, the individual, uh chapters, that that make it up, you know, yeah, and it's funny, I've written about somebody, Jim Collins the good to great author. I heard him. His kind of hero was Peter Drucker and he remembers going to Peter Drucker and he had a bookshelf with all of his books. I think he had like 90 books or something that he had written, Peter Drucker, and he had them. Jim Collins set them up on his bookshelf and he would move a piece of tape that shows his current age against the age that Peter Drucker was when he had written those things and he realized that at you know, 50 years old, something like you know, 75% of Peter Drucker's work was after that age and even into his 80s or whatever. Dan: Yeah, most of my work is after 70. I was just going to say yeah, exactly, I look at that. You look at all of the things and then at 70, yeah, yeah, the actual stuff I've created is really yeah, that's when I really started to produce a lot after 70. Dean: Mm-hmm. Dan: Yeah, a lot of R&D. I did a lot of R&D. Dean: Right. Dan: Exactly, yeah, yeah, yeah. And you know, my goal is that 80 to 90 will be much more productive than 70 to 80. Yeah, I was talking to someone today interesting, very interesting physical fitness guy here in Toronto and he's a really great chiropractor so he's working. So I have I'm making great progress with the structural repair of my left knee. But there's all sorts of functional stuff that has to come along with it and he's my main man for doing this. But he was talking, he's 50, and he said you know, my goal is that 60 to 70 is going to be my most active part of my life, you know, from mountain climbing to all these different really high endurance athletics and sports, and so we got talking and I just shared with him the idea that the real goal you should have or which covers a lot of other areas is that, if you're like my goal for 90, I'm just going on 81, my goal for 90 is that I'm more ambitious at 90 than I am at the present. Dean: And. Dan: I said that's what that almost seems impossible, impossible well, well it is if you're just looking at yourself as a single individual yeah but if you're looking at yourself as someone who has an expand team, it's actually very possible. Dean: Yeah, yeah yeah, you're mine are those potato chips no, it's a piece of cellophane wrapped around something. That was the word right Retired. And they've been retired for about five years or so and I hadn't seen them in a couple of years. But it's really interesting to, at 72, the uh, you know the, just the level you can tell just physically and everything mentally, everything about them. They're on the, the decline phase of the thing they're not ramping up. You know, like just physically they are, um, you know they're, they're big, um cruisers. You know they've been going on cruises now every every six weeks or so, but, um, but yeah, no, no, uh, no more golf, no more. Like you see, they're intentionally kind of winding things down, resigning to the yeah. Dan: Yeah, it's very interesting. I don't know if you caught it in the news. It was, I think, right at the end of January. But you know the name Daniel Kahneman. Dean: I know the name. Yeah, thinking fast and slow. Dan: Fast thinking slow yeah, he committed suicide in Switzerland. Dean: I did not know that. When was that he? Dan: was 90 years old, I think it was January 28th. Dean: And it was all planned out. Dan: It was all planned out and he went to Switzerland to do it, because they have the legal framework where you can do that and everything else. And I found it so interesting that I did a whole bunch of perplexity searches and I said, because he was very influential, I never read his book, because I read the first five or 10 pages and it just didn't seem that interesting to me and it seemed like he had. You know that he's famous for that book and he's famous for it, and it seemed to be that he's kind of like a one trick pony. You know, he's got a great book that really changed things. And then I started looking. I said, well, what else did he do besides that one book? And it's not too much. And he did that, you know, 40 years ago. It was sort of something he did 40 years ago. Dean: Wow. Dan: And I just said gee, I wonder if he, you know, he just hasn't been real productive. Wonder if he, you know, he just hasn't been real productive, not not starting in january, but he hadn't been real productive over the last 20 or 30 years and he did that. Dean: Uh, and anyway, you know, I don't know. I don't know that I've been living under a rock or whatever. I didn't even realize that this was a real thing. I have a good friend in Canada whose grandfather is tomorrow scheduled for assisted. It's a big thing in Canada. Dan: Canada is the most leading country in incidents of people being assisted in committing suicide. Dean: Yeah, and. Dan: I have my suspicions. It's a way for the government to cut checks to old people. You know like assist them to leave. You know I mean it's just. What a confusing set of emotions that must bring up for someone you love. Confusing and disturbing about his committing suicide and it's really a big topic, you know, because he was saying you can always get on top of whatever you're experiencing and get useful lessons from it, right? Dean: and I said. Dan: I said, well, you must have reached an empty week or something. You know I I don't know what, what happened I, you know I mean right and uh, cause I I'm finding um the experience of being 80, the experience of being 70 and 80, very, very fruitful for coming up with new thoughts and coming up with new ideas right, you know and what, what is still important when you're uh, you know, still important when you're. you know what is even more important and what is even more clear when you're 80. That wasn't clear when you were 50 or 60. I think that's a useful thought. You know that's a useful thought, yeah, but it's really interesting. I never find suicide is understandable. Dean: I know, yeah, I get it. I see that you think about that too. I've had that. I've had some other people, my cousin, years and years ago was the first person kind of close to me that had committed suicide, and you know. But you always think it's just like you, I can't imagine that like I. I can imagine, uh, just completely like disappearing or whatever you know starting off somewhere else, like complete, you know, reset, but not something that that final, you know. Dan: You know, I can understand just extreme, intolerable pain you know, I mean. I can, I can, I can totally get that. Dean: Yeah, yeah. Dan: Yeah, I mean, it's just you. You just can't go through another day of it. I I just totally understand that but, where it's more of a psychological emotional you get a, got yourself in a corner and that, uh then, um, you know, I don't really, um, I don't really comprehend what's going on there. You know, I I obviously something's going on, but I you know, I, I obviously something's going on, but I, just from, I've never had a suicidal thought. I mean, you know, I've had some low points, I've had some, but even on my low points I had something that was fun that day you know Right Right, right Right. Or I had an interesting thought. Yeah, right. Dean: Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well, I'm yeah, yeah, yeah yeah, yeah. Dan: Well, I'm glad we hit on that topic because I said, you may think I know that the person doing it has a completely logical reason for doing it. It's just not a logic that can be explained easily to other people yeah, when you're not in that spot. I get it, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah anyway this was a good one. This was a good one. Yeah, now okay, wait actually yeah, I'll be calling from chicago next week. Dean: Okay, perfect I'll be here, yeah, um, yeah, I want to. I'd love to, um, if we remember, and if we don't, that's fine too, but if we remember, you brought up something the I would love to see and maybe talk about the difference between uh, you know, between 60, 70, 80, your thoughts of those things. Yeah, you're getting to that point I'm 22 years behind you, so I'm just turning 59 right before you turn 81. Dan: So that'd be something I'll put some thought to it. I love it. Dean: Okay. Dan: Perfect, thanks, dan. All right, okay, thanks, bye.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, we reflect on how places, people, and experiences shape our perspectives. The conversation begins with casual observations, from warm weather making transitions easier to memorable encounters like “Spam Man,” a mysterious figure spotted at the Hazleton Hotel. We also explore the impact of changing landscapes, both physical and cultural. From real estate in Toronto to how cities evolve, we discuss how development can shape or diminish the character of a place. This leads to a broader conversation about timeless architecture, like Toronto's Harris Filtration Plant, and how thoughtful design contributes to a city's identity. Technology's role in daily life also comes up, especially how smartphones dominate attention. A simple observation of people walking through Yorkville reveals how deeply connected we are to our screens, often at the expense of real-world engagement. We contrast this with the idea that some things, like human connection and cooperation, remain unchanged even as technology advances. The discussion closes with thoughts on long-term impact—what lasts and fades over time. Whether it's historic buildings, enduring habits, or fundamental human behaviors, the conversation emphasizes that while trends come and go, specific principles and ways of thinking remain relevant across generations. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS In Phoenix, during a rooftop party, we witnessed a surprise appearance of a SpaceX rocket, which sparked our discussion on extraordinary events blending with everyday life. We explored the curious case of "Spam man," a local legend in Hazleton, whose mysterious persona intrigued us as much as any UFO sighting. We shared our fascination with the dynamic real estate landscape in Hazleton, discussing new constructions and their impact on scenic views. Our conversation touched on unique weather patterns at the beaches near the lake, emphasizing the influence of water temperatures on seasonal climate variations. We delved into the topic of warmer winters, reflecting on how both humans and nature adapt to milder temperatures, particularly during February 2024. Our discussion included insights from Morgan Housel's book, which inspired our reflections on nature's resilience and adaptation over millions of years. We highlighted local activities like windsurfing and kite skiing, noting the favorable wind conditions at the beaches, a rarity in Canada's cold-weather climate. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Dan: Mr Jackson. I hope you behaved when you were out of my sight. Dean: I did. I'll have to tell you something. I can't tell you how much I appreciate the arrangement of this warm weather. For me, it's made the transition much more palatable warm weather. Dan: for me it's made the transition much more palatable. Dean: I mean our backstage team is really getting good at this sort of thing, and you know when we were in. Dan: we were in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago and we had a rooftop party and right in the middle of the party we arranged for Elon Musk to send one of his rockets out. Dean: I saw that a satellite launch yeah. Dan: Yeah, can you imagine that guy and how busy he is? But just you know, just to handle our request he just ended up with, yeah, must be some money involved with that. Dean: Well, that's what happens, Dan. We have a positive attitude on the new budget. Dan: Yeah, and you think in terms of unique ability, collaboration, you know, breakthroughs free zone you know, all that stuff, it's all. Dean: it's the future. Dan: Yeah. So good Well he sent the rocket up and they're rescuing the astronauts today. Dean: Oh, is that right? How long has it been now since they've been? Dan: It's been a long time seven, eight months, I think, Uh-huh, yeah and Boeing couldn't get them down. Boeing sent them up, but they couldn't get them down. You know, which is only half the job, really. Dean: That was in the Seinfeld episode about taking the reservation and holding the reservation. Yeah. They can take the reservation. They just can't hold the reservation yeah. Dan: It's like back really the integral part. Back during the moonshot, they thought that the Russians were going to be first to the moon. Kennedy made his famous speech. You know we're going to put a man on and they thought the Russians, right off the bat, would beat him, because Kennedy said we'll bring him back safely and the Russians didn't include that in their prediction. That's funny. Dean: We had that. We're all abuzz with excitement over here at the Hazleton. There's a funny thing that happened. It started last summer that Chad Jenkins Krista Smith-Klein is that her name yeah, yeah. So we were sitting in the lobby one night at the Hazleton here and this guy came down from the residences into the lobby. It was talking to the concierge but he had this Einstein-like hair and blue spam t-shirts that's, you know, like the can spam thing on it and pink, pink shorts and he was, you know, talking to the concierge. And then he went. Then he went back upstairs and this left such an impression on us that we have been, you know, lovingly referring to him as Spam man since the summer, and we've been every time here on alert, on watch, because we have to meet and get to know Spam man, because there's got to be a story behind a guy like that in a place like this. And so this morning I had coffee with Chad and then Chad was going to get a massage and as he walked into the spa he saw Spamman and he met him and he took a picture, a selfie, with him and texted it. But I haven't that. His massage was at 10 o'clock, so all I have is the picture and the fact that he met Spamman, but I haven't that. His massage was at 10 o'clock, so all I have is the picture and the fact that he met Spam man, but I don't have the story yet. But it's just fascinating to me that this. I want to hear the story and know this guy now. I often wonder how funny that would appear to him. That made such an impression on us last summer that every time we've been at the Hazleton we've been sitting in the lobby on Spam man. Watch, so funny. I'll tell you the story tomorrow. I'll get to the bottom of it. Dan: It's almost like UFO watchers. They think they saw it once and they keep going back to the same place you know hoping that'll happen again, yeah. Dean: Is there a? Dan: spot. Is there a spot at the Hazleton? Dean: There is yeah. Dan: Oh, I didn't know that. Dean: So there's some eclectic people that live here, like seeing just the regulars or whatever that I see coming in and out of the of the residence because it shares. Dan: There's a lot, you know, yeah that's a that's pretty expensive real estate. Actually, the hazelton, yeah for sure, especially if you get the rooftop one, although they've destroyed I I think you were telling me they've destroyed the value of the rooftop because now they're building 40-story buildings to block off the view. Dean: I mean that's crazy. Right Right next door. Yeah, yeah, but there you go. How are things in the beaches as well? Dan: Yeah. You know it's interesting because we're so close to the lake it's cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter, you know. Dean: Oh, okay. Dan: You know, because controlled by water temperatures. Dean: Water temperatures. Dan: Yes, exactly, I mean even you know, even if it's cold, you know the water temperature is maybe 65, 66. Dean: Fahrenheit, you know it's not frigid. Dan: It's not frigid. Dean: They have wintertime plungers down here people who go in you know during the winter yeah, but this is that you and babs aren't members of the polar bear club that would not be us um but anyway, uh, they do a lot of uh windsurfing. Dan: There's at the far end of our beach going uh towards the city. They have really great wind conditions there. You see the kite skiers. They have kites and they go in the air. It's quite a known spot here. I mean, canada doesn't have too much of this because we're such a cold-weather country. There isn't the water, it's pretty cold even during the summertime yeah exactly yeah, but the lake doesn't freeze, that's oh, it does, it does yeah, yeah we've had, we've had winters, where it goes out, you know, goes out a quarter mile it'll be. Dean: I didn't realize that Wow. Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah, but not this winter. It never froze over this winter, but we have, you know, within the last two or three winters, we've had ice on the. We've had ice, you know, for part of the winter. Dean: It's funny to me, dan, to see this. Like you know, it's going gonna be 59 degrees today, so, yeah, it's funny to me to see people you know out wearing shorts and like, but it must be like a, you know, a heat wave. Compared to what? You had in the first half of march here, right, yeah, yeah, yeah yeah yeah, so that's good. Dan: Yeah, last February not this past month, but February of 2024, we had 10 days in February where it was over 70. Dean: And. Dan: I often wonder if the trees get pulled, the plants get pulled. Dean: It triggers them to like hey, oh my. Dan: God. But apparently temperature is just one of the factors that govern their behavior. The other one is the angle of the light. Dean: And that doesn't change the angle of the sunlight. Dan: Yeah, so they. You know I mean things work themselves out over millions of years. So you know there's, you know they probably have all sorts of indicators and you have 10 boxes to check and if only one of them is checked, that doesn't, it doesn't fool them. You know they have a lot of things that I sent you and I don't know if we ever discussed it or you picked it up after I recommended it was Morgan Housel, famous ever. Dean: Did you like that? Did you like that? Dan: book. I did, I loved. It was Morgan Housel famous ever. Did you like that? Did you like that book? Dean: I did, I loved it. I mean it was really like, and I think ever you know, very, very interesting to me because of what I've been doing, you know the last little while, as I described, reading back over you know 29 years of journals, picking random things and seeing so much of what, so much of what, the themes that go that time feels the last. You know 30 years has gone by so fast that I, when I'm reading in that journal, I can remember exactly like where I was and I can remember the time because I would date and place them each journal entry. So I know where I was when I'm writing them. But I thought that was a really, I thought it was a really interesting book. What stood out for you from? Dan: Yeah, I think the biggest thing is that really great things take a long time to create. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Because they have to be tested against all sorts of changing conditions and if they get stronger, it's like you know they're going to last for a long time. Dean: And. Dan: I'm struck by it because the book, the little book that I'm writing for the quarter, is called the Bill of Rights Economy and the Bill of Rights really started with the United States. It was December 15th 1791. So that's when, I think, washington was just inaugurated at that time as the first president. But, how durable they are, and you can read the newspaper every day of things going on in Washington and you can just check off the first 10 amendments. This is a Fifth Amendment issue. This is a second amendment you know and everything like that, and it's just how much they created such a durable framework for a country. They were about 3 million people at that time and now there are 300 and whatever probably upwards of 350 million. And basically, the country runs essentially according to those first 10 amendments and then the articles which say how the machinery of government actually operates. And it's by far the longest continuous governing system in the world. That's really interesting. But that's why you know I really like things that you know, that you know that have stood the test of time. I like having my life based on things that have stood the test of time. And then I've got, you know, I've got some really good habits which I've developed over the last 50 years of coaching. Got, you know, I've got some really good habits which I've developed over the last 50 years of coaching and you know they work. You know I don't fool around with things that work. Yeah Well, I want to bring in something. I really am more and more struck how there's a word that's used in the high technology field because I was just at Abundance 360. And it's the word disruption and it's seen as a good thing, and I don't see disruption as good. I don't really see it as a good thing. I see it as something that might happen as a result of a new thing, but I don't think the disruption is a good thing. Dean: Yeah, it feels like it's not. It seems like the opposite of collaboration. Yeah, it really is. It feels like the negative. You know the I forget who said it, but you know the two ways they have the biggest building. Dan: I really mean Chucky movie. Dean: Yeah, there was somebody said the two ways to have the biggest building in town, the tallest building is to build the tallest building or to tear down all the other buildings that are taller than yours, and that's what disruption feels like to see in the real estate industry is always one that is, you know, set up as the big fat cat ready for disruption. And people have tried and tried to disrupt the real estate industry and, you know, I came away from the first, the first abundance 360, realizing that, you know, perhaps the thing that same makes real estate possible is that you can't digitize the last hundred feet of a real estate transaction. You know, and I think that there are certain industries, certain things that we are, that there's a human element to things. Dan: That is very yeah, yeah, I mean, it's really interesting just to switch on to that subject. On the real, estate. If you take Silicon Valley, Hollywood and Wall Street, who are the richest people in the area Silicon? Dean: Valley. Dan: Hollywood and Wall Street. Who are the richest people in the area? Dean: Silicon Valley Hollywood and Wall Street. Dan: Who are the real money makers? Dean: Yeah, Wall Street. Dan: No, the real estate developers. Dean: Oh, I see, oh, the real estate developers. Oh yeah, yeah, that's true, right, that's true. Dan: I don't care what you've invented or what your activity is. I'll tell you the people who really make the money are the people who are into real estate. Dean: Yeah, you can't digitize it, that's for sure. Dan: Well, I think the answer is in the word. It's real. Dean: What was that site, dan, that you were talking about? That was is it real? Or is it Bach or whatever? Or is it Guy or whatever? What was? Or is it AI or Bach? Dan: Well, no, I was. Yeah, I was watching. It was a little, you know, it was on YouTube and it was Bach versus AI. Dean: So what they've? Dan: done. You know you can identify the. You know the building components that Bach uses to you know to write his music and then you know you can take it apart and you know you can say do a little bit of this, do a little bit of this, do a little bit of this. And then what they have? They play two pieces. They play an actual piece by Bach and then they play another piece which is Bach-like you know, and there were six of them. And there was a of them and there was a host on the show and he's a musician, and whether he was responding realistically or whether he was sort of faking it, he would say boy, I can't really tell that one, but I guessed on all six of them and I guessed I guessed right. Dean: I know there was just something about the real Bach and I think I think it was emotional more than you know that could be the mirror neurons that you know you can sense the transfer of emotion through that music, you know. Dan: Yeah, and I listen to Bach a lot I still get surprised by something he's got these amazing chord changes you know, and what he does. And my sense is, as we enter more and more into the AI world, our you know, our perceptions and our sensitivities are going to heighten to say is that the real deal or not? Dean: you know yeah sensitivities are going to heighten to say is that the real deal or not? You know, and yeah, that's what you know, jerry Spence, I think I mentioned. Dan: Jerry Spence about that that Jerry Spence said. Dean: our psychic tentacles are in the background measuring everything for authenticity, and they can detect the thin clank of the counterfeit. Yeah, and I think that's no matter what. You can always tell exactly. I mean, you can tell the things that are digitized. It's getting more and more realistic, though, in terms of the voice things for AI. I'm seeing more and more of those voice caller showing up in my news feed, and we were talking about Chris Johnson. Chris Johnson, yeah, yeah, chris Johnson. Dan: This is really good because he's really fine-tuned it to. First of all, it's a constantly changing voice. That's the one thing I noticed. The second version, first version, not so much, but I've heard two versions of the caller. And what I noticed is, almost every time she talks, there's a little bit of difference to the tone. There's a little bit, you know, and she's in a conversation. Dean: Is it mirroring kind of thing, Like is it adapting to the voice on the other end? Dan: Yeah, I think there's. I certainly think there's some of that. And that is part of what we check out as being legitimate or not, because you know that it wouldn't be the same, because there's meaning. You know meaning different meaning, different voice, if you're talking to an actual individual who's not you know, who's not real monotonic. But yeah, the big thing about this is that I think we get smarter. I was talking, we were on a trip to Israel and we were talking in this one kibbutz up near the Sea of Galilee and these people had been in and then they were forced out. In 2005, I think it was, the Israeli government decided to give the Gaza territory back to the Palestinians. But it was announced about six months before it happened and things changed right away. The danger kicked up. There was violence and you know, kicked up. And I was talking to them. You know how can you send your kids out? You know, just out on their own. And they said, oh, first thing that they learned. You know he said three, four or five years old. They can spot danger in people. You know, if they see someone, they can spot danger with it. And I said boy oh boy, you know, it just shows you the, under certain conditions, people's awareness and their alertness kicks up enormously. They can take things into account that you went here in Toronto, for example. You know, you know, you know that's wild. Dean: Yeah, this whole, I mean, I think in Toronto. Dan: The only thing you'd really notice is who's offering the biggest pizza at the lowest price. Dean: Oh, that's so funny. There's some qualitative element around that too. It's so funny. You think about the things that are. I definitely see this Cloudlandia-enhan. You know that's really what the main thing is, but you think about how much of what's going on. We're definitely living in Cloudlandia. I sat last night, dan, I was in the lobby and I was writing in my journal, and I just went outside for a little bit and I sat on one of the benches in the in front of the park. Oh yeah, in front of the hotel and it was a beautiful night. Dan: Like I mean temperature was? Dean: yeah, it was beautiful. So I'm sitting out there, you know, on a Saturday night in Yorkville and I'm looking at March. I'm just yeah, I'm just watching, and I left my phone. I'm making a real concerted effort to detach from my oxygen tank as much as I can. Right, and my call, that's what I've been calling my iPhone right, because we are definitely connected to it. And I just sat there without my phone and I was watching people, like head up, looking and observing, and I got to. I just thought to myself I'm going to count, I'm going to, I'm going to observe the next 50 people that walk by and I'm going to see how many of them are glued to their phone and how many have no visible phone in sight, and so do you. Dan: What was it? Nine out of 10? Dean: Yeah, it wasn't even that. Yeah, that's exactly what it was. It was 46, but it wasn't even 10. Yeah, it was real. That's exactly what it was. It was 46. Dan: It wasn't even 10%, it was 19. It wasn't even no, it was 19 out of 20. Dean: Yeah, I mean, isn't that something, dan? Like it was and I'm talking like some of them were just like, literally, you know, immersed in their phone, but their body was walking, yeah, and the others, but their body was walking. But it's interesting too. Dan: If you had encountered me. I think my phone is at home and I know it's not charged up. Dean: Yeah, it's really something, dan, that was an eye-opener to me. It's really something, dan, that was an eye-opener to me, and the interesting thing was that the four that weren't on the phone were couples, so there were two people, but of the individuals, it was 100% of. The individuals walking were attached to their phones. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And I think that's where we're at right now. Dan: No, yeah, I don't know, it's just that. Dean: No, I'm saying that's observation. Dan: It's like Well, that's where we are, in Yorkville, in front of Okay, right, right, right yeah. No, it's just that I find Yorkville is a peculiarly Are you saying it's an outlier? It's not so much of an outlier but it's probably the least connected group of people in Toronto would be in Yorkville because they'd be out for the. They don't live there. You know most don't live there, they're and they're somewhere. There's probably the highest level of strangers you know, on any given night in toronto would probably be in yorkville I think it's sort of outliers sort of situation. I mean, I mean, if you came to the beaches on a yeah last night, the vast majority of people would be chatting with each other and talking with each other. They would be on their phones. I think think it's just a. It's probably the most what I would call cosmopolitan part of Toronto, in other words it's the part of Toronto that has the least to do with Toronto. Dean: Okay. Dan: It's trying to be New York, yorkville is trying to be. Dean: New York. Dan: Yeah, it's the Toronto Life magazine version of Toronto. Dean: Yeah, you idealize the avatar of Toronto, right yeah? Dan: In Toronto Life. They always say Toronto is a world-class city and I said no. I said, london's a world-class city. Dean: New. Dan: York is a world-class city. Tokyo is a world-class city. You know how, you know they're a world class city. Dean: They don't have to call themselves a world class city. Dan: They don't call themselves a world class city. They just are If you say you're a world class city. It's proof that you're not a world class city. Dean: That's funny. Yeah, I'll tell you what I think. I've told you what really brought that home for me was at the Four Seasons in London at Trinity Square, and Qatar TV and all these Arab the Emirates TV, all these things, just to see how many other cultures there are in the world. I mean, london is definitely a global crossroads, for sure. Dan: Yeah yeah. And that's what makes something the center, and that is made up of a thousand different little non-reproducible vectors. You know just, you know, just, you know. It's just that's why I like London so much. I just like London. It's just a great wandering city. You just come out of the hotel, walk out in any direction. Guarantee you, in seven minutes you're lost you have the foggiest idea where you are and you're seeing something new that you'd never seen before. And it's 25, the year 1625. Dean: I remember you and I walking through London 10 years ago, wandering through for a long time and coming to one of these great bookstores. You know, yeah, but you're right, like the winding in some of the back streets, and that was a great time. Yeah, you can't really wander and wander and wander. Dan: Yeah, it was a city designed by cows on the way home, right, exactly. Yeah, you can't really wander and wander and wander. Dean: Yeah, it was a city designed by cows on the way home, Right exactly. Dan: Yeah, it's really interesting. You know, that brings up a subject why virtual reality hasn't taken off, and I've been thinking about that because the buzz, you know how long ago was it? You would say seven years ago, seven, eight years ago everything's going to be virtual reality. Would that be about right? Oh, yeah, yeah. Dean: That was when virtual reality was in the lead. Remember then the goggles, the Oculus, yeah, yeah, that was what, yeah, pre-covid, so probably seven years ago 17, 17. And it's kind of disappeared, hasn't it compared to you know? Dan: why it doesn't have enough variety in it. And this relates back to the beginning of our conversation today. How do you know whether it's fake or not and we were talking on the subject of London that on any block, what's on that block was created by 10,000 different people over 500 years and there's just a minute kind of uniqueness about so much of what goes on there when you have the virtual reality. Let's say they create a London scene, but it'll be maybe a team of five people who put it together. And it's got a sameness to it. It's got, you know, oh definitely. Dean: That's where you see in the architecture like I don't. You know, one of the things I always look forward to is on the journey from here to strategic coach. So tomorrow, when we ride down University through Queen's Park and the old University of Toronto and all those old buildings there that are just so beautiful Stone buildings the architecture is stunning. Nobody's building anything like that now. No, like none of the buildings that you see have any soul or are going to be remembered well and they're not designed. Dan: They're not really designed to last more than 50 years. I have a architect. Well, you know richard hamlin he says that those, the newest skyscrapers you see in Toronto, isn't designed to last more than 50 years. You know, and, and you know, it's all utilitarian, everything is utilitarian, but there's no emphasis on beauty, you know. There's no emphasis on attractiveness. There's a few but not many. Attractiveness there's a few but not many. And, as a matter of fact, my favorite building in Toronto is about six blocks further down the lake from us, right here. It's called the Harris Filtration Plant. Dean: Oh yeah, we've walked by there, right at the end of the building. Dan: Built in 19, I think they finished in 1936. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And it's just an amazing building. I mean it's on three levels, they have three different buildings and it goes up a hill and it's where the water. You know, at that time it was all the water in Toronto that came out of the lake and they have 17 different process. You know the steps. And you go in there and there's no humans in there, it's all machinery. You can just hear the buzz and that's the water being filtered. It's about a quarter of the city now comes through that building. But it's just an absolutely gorgeous building and they spared no cost on it. And the man who built it, harris, he was the city manager. They had a position back there. It was city manager and it was basically the bureaucrat who got things done, and he also built the bridge across the Down Valley on Bloor. Dean: Yeah, beautiful bridge Right. Dan: He built that bridge and he was uneducated. He had no education, had no training, but he was just a go-getter. He was also in charge of the water system and the transportation system. And you know he put in the first streetcars and everything like that, probably the greatest bureaucrat toronto ever had, you know in the history of toronto this is the finest what year is that building from? yeah, the filtration plant was started in 29 and it was finished in 36 and wow they yeah, they had to rip out a whole section. It was actually partially woods, partially, I think, you know they had everything there, but they decided that would be the best place to bring it in there. Dean: You know it's got a lot more than 100 years. Dan: Yeah, but it's the finest building it's it's rated as one of the top 10 government buildings in north america yeah, it's beautiful. Dean: And that bridge I mean that bridge in the Don Valley is beautiful too. Dan: Yeah, it was really interesting. He put the bridge in and the bridge was put in probably in the 30s too. I mean that was vital because the valley really kept one part of Toronto apart from the other part of Toronto. It was hard to get from one part of Toronto apart from the other part of Toronto. You know, it's hard to get from one part of Toronto to the next. And so they put that bridge in, and that was about in the 30s and then in the no, I think it was in the 20s, they put that in 1920, so 100 years. And in the 1950s they decided to put in their first subway system. So they had Yonge Street and so Yonge Street north, and then they had Buller and Danforth. So they budgeted that they were going to really have to retrofit the bridge. And when they got it and they took all the dimensions, he had already anticipated that they were going to put a subway in. So it was all correct. And so anyway, he saw he had 30 or 40 years that they were going to put up. They would have to put a subway in. So it was all correct and yeah and so anyway he saw I had 30 or 40 years that they were going to put up. They would have to put, they're going to put the subway and it had to go through the bridge and so so they didn't have to retrofit it at all. Yeah, pretty cool. Dean: What do you think we're doing now? That's going to be remembered in 100 years or it's going to be impacted in 100 years? Dan: Well, we're not going backwards with technology, so any technology we have today we'll have 100 years from now. So you know, I mean I think the you know. Well, you just asked a question that explains why I'm not in the stock market. Dean: Exactly. Warren Buffett can't predict what's going to happen. We can't even tell what's going to change in the next five years. Dan: I don't know what's going to happen next year. I don't know what's going to happen next year. Dean: Isn't it interesting? I think a lot of the things that we're at could see, see the path to improvement or expansion, like when the railroad came in. You know it's interesting that you could see that that was we. You know, part of it was, you know, filling the territory, connecting the territory with all the, with all this stuff, and you could see that happening. But even now, you know, this is why warren buffett, you know, again with the, probably one of the largest owners of railroad things in the states, him, yeah, and because that's not changed in 200, yeah, or whatever, 150 years anyway, yeah, yeah, yeah, most of the country probably, you know, 150 years at least. Yeah, and so all of that, all those things, and even in the first half of the 1900s, you know all the big change stuff, yeah, yeah. Dan: Yeah. Dean: So it's funny because it's like I can't even see what categories are the biggest. Dan: Well, I think they'll be more intangibles than tangibles. For example, I think all my tools work 100 years from now. Yeah, I think all my thinking tools work 100 years from now. Dean: Well, because our brains will still be the same in 100 years. Yeah, all that interaction, right, the human behavior stuff. Dan: yeah, yeah yeah I don't think human behavior, um I think it's really durable you know, and that it's very interesting, um, and there was a phrase being used at Abundance that was used about four or five times during the two days that we were becoming godlike, and I said, no, I don't think so. Dean: I guess are they saying in that we can do things because of technology, we can do things. Dan: And I said nah, it's just the next. It's just the next new thing. You know that we've created, but human nature is, you know, there's a scientist, Joe Henrich, and a really bright guy. He's written a book you might be interested in. It's called the Secret of Our Success. And he was just exploring why humans, of all the species on the planet, became the dominant species. And you wouldn't have predicted it. Because we're not very fast, we're not very strong, we don't climb particularly well, we don't swim particularly well, we can't fly and everything like that. So you know, compared with a lot of the other species. But he said that somewhere along the line he buys into the normal thing that we came from ape-like species before we were human. But he says at one point there was a crossover and that one ape was looking at another ape. And he says he does things differently than I. I do. If I can work out a deal with him, he can do this while I'm doing that and we're twice as well. Dean: I was calling that. Dan: I've been calling that the cooperation game but that's really and that's playing that and we're the only species that can continually invent new ways to do that, and I mean every most. You know higher level. And mammals anyway can cooperate. You know they cooperate with each other. They know a friend from anatomy and they know how to get together. But they don't know too much more at the end of their life than they knew at the beginning of their life. You know in other words. They pretty well had it down by the time they were one year old and they didn't invent new ways of cooperating really. But humans do this on a daily basis. Humans will invent new ways of cooperating from morning till night. And he says that's the reason we just have this infinite ability to cooperate in new ways. And he says that's the reason we just have this infinite ability to cooperate in new ways. And he says that's why we're the top species. The other thing is we're the only species that take care of other species. We're the only species that study and document other species. We're the only species that actually create new species. You know put this together with that and we get something. Yeah, yeah and so, so, so, anyway, and so that's where you begin the. You know if you're talking about sameness. What do we know 100 years from now? Dean: What we know over the 100 years is that humans will have found almost countless new ways to cooperate with each other yeah, I think that that's, and but the access to right, the access to, that's why I think these, the access to capabilities, as a, you know, commodity I'm not saying commodity in a, you know, I'm not trying to like lower the status of ability, but to emphasize the tradability of it. You know that it's something that is a known quantity you know yeah. Dan: But my sense is that the relative comparison, that one person, let's say you take 10 people. Let's take 100 people that the percentage of them that could cooperate with each other at high levels, I believe isn't any different in 2024 than it was in 1924. If you take 100 people. Some have very high levels to cooperate with each other and they do, and the vast majority of them very limited amount to cooperate with each other, but are you talking about. Dean: That comes down, then, to the ability to be versus capability. That they have the capability. Dan: Yeah, they have the capability, but they don't individually have the ability. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah, and I don't think the percentage changes. Dean: Yeah, that's why this whole, that's why we're I think you know, the environment that we're creating in FreeZone is an ecosystem of people who are, who get this. Dan: Yeah, well, I don't think they, yeah, I don't think they became collaborative because they were in free zone. I think they were collaborative, looking for a better place to do it. Dean: Yes, yeah, it's almost like it's almost so, just with the technologies. Now, the one thing that has improved so much is the ability to seamlessly integrate with other people, with other collaborators. Dan: Yeah, now you're talking about the piano, you're not talking about the musicians, that's exactly right, but I think there really was something to that right. It's a good distinction. Dean: It's a really good distinction that you've created. Yeah, I should say yesterday at lunch you and I were talking about that I don't know that we've talked about it on the podcast here the difference, the distinction that we've discovered between capability and ability. And so I was looking at, in that, the capability column of the VCR formula, vision, capability, reach that in the capability column I was realizing the distinction between the base of something and the example that I gave was if you have a piano or a certain piece of equipment or a computer or a camera or whatever it is. We have a piano, you have the capability to be a concert pianist, but without the ability to do it. You know that. You're that that's the difference, and I think that everybody has access to the capabilities and who, not how, brings us in to contact with the who's right, who are masters at the capabilities? Dan: Yeah, you're talking about in. You know the sort of society that we live in. Yes, Because you know there's you know there's, you know easily, probably 15% of the world that doesn't have access to electricity. Dean: Yes exactly. Dan: I mean, they don't have the capability, you know, they just don't have yeah, yeah and yeah, it's a very, very unequal world, but I think there's a real breakthrough thinking that you're doing here. The fact that there's capability says nothing about an individual's ability. Dean: Right, that's exactly it. Yeah, and I think this is a very important idea, but I'm not going to write a book on it. Oh, my goodness, this is example, a right, I had the capability, with the idea of the capability and ability. Yeah, yeah, I didn't have the ability. Yeah, I've heard, do you know, the comedian Ron White? Dan: Yeah, I have the capability to write a book and I have the ability to write a book, but I'm not going to do either. Dean: So he talked about getting arrested outside of a bar and he said I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability that's pretty funny, right. But yeah, this is really like it's exciting. It's exciting times right now. I mean it really is exciting times to even projecting for the next, the next 30 years. I think I see that the through line, you know, is that you know that a brunch at the four seasons is going to be an appealing thing 30 years from now, as it is now and was 30 years ago, or three line stuff, or yeah, or some such hotel in toronto yes exactly right. Dan: Right, it may not be. Yeah, I think the four seasons, I think is pretty durable. And the reason is they don't own any of their property. Dean: You know and I think that's. Dan: They have 130 hotels now. I'm quite friendly with the general manager of the Nashville Four Seasons because we're there every quarter Four Seasons because we're there every quarter and you know it's difficult being one of their managers. I think because you have two bosses, you have the Four. Seasons organization but you also have the investor, who owns the property, and so they don't own any of their own property. That's all owned by investors. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah. Dean: So go ahead. When was the previous? I know it's not the original, but when was the one on Yorkville here Yorkville and Avenue? When was that built? Was that in the 70s or the 60s? Dan: Well, it was a Hyatt. It was a Hyatt Hotel. Dean: Oh, it was, they took it over. Dan: Yeah, and it was a big jump for them and that was, you know, I think it was in the 60s, probably I don't know when they started exactly I'll have to look that up, but they were at a certain point they hit financial difficulties because there's been ups and downs in the economy and they overreach sometimes, and the big heavy load was the fact that they own the real estate. So they sold all the real estate and that bailed them out. Real estate and that bailed them out. And then from that point forward, they were just a system that you competed for. If you were deciding to build a luxury hotel, you had to compete to see if the Four Seasons would be interested in coming in and managing it. Okay, so they. It's a unique process. Basically, it's a unique process that they have. Dean: Yeah. Dan: It's got a huge brand value worldwide. You're a somebody as a city. If the Four Seasons come to your city, I think you're right. Ottawa used to have one. It doesn't have one now. Vancouver used to have one. It doesn't have one now. I think, calgary had one. Calgary doesn't Because now Vancouver used to have one, doesn't have one now I think Calgary had one. Calgary doesn't Because it was a Canadian hotel to start with. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And Belleville had one at one time. Dean: Oh, really yeah. Dan: I'm one of the few people who have stayed at the Belleville Four Seasons. Dean: Hotel the Belleville Four Seasons. Dan: Yeah, of all the people you know, dean dean, I may be the only person you know who stayed at the belleville four seasons now, what they did is they had a partnership with bell canada. Bell canada created the training center in belleville oh and uh, and they did a deal four seasons would go into it with them. So they took over a motel and they turned it into Four Seasons, so they used it as their training center. Okay, so you know, it was trainees serving trainees, as it turned out. Dean: I forget who I was talking to, but we were kind of saying it would be a really interesting experience to take over the top two floors of the hotel beside the Chicago Strategic Coach, there the Holiday Inn or whatever that is. Take over the top two floors and turn those into a because you've got enough traffic. That could be a neat experience, yeah. Dan: It wouldn't be us. Dean: Oh well, I need somebody. You know that could be a an interesting. I think if that was an option there would be. Dan: Probably work better for us to have a floor of one of the hotels. Dean: That's what I meant. Yeah, a floor of the the top two floors of the hotel there to get. Yeah, there's two of them. That's what I meant. Yeah, a floor of the top two floors of the hotel there to get. Dan: Yeah, there's two of them. There's two of them. Dean: Oh, yeah, yeah. Dan: There's the Sheraton, and what's Sinesta? Sinesta, right the. Dean: Sinesta is the one I'm thinking of. Dan: That's the closest one right, the one Scott Harry carries in the Right, right right. There you carries in them, right, yeah, well, it's an interesting, but it is what it is and we're, yeah, but we have almost one whole floor now and I mean those are that's a big building. It's got really a lot of square footage in the building. That's what. Is it cb re? Is it cb? You do know the nationwide. Dean: Oh yeah. Dan: Coldwood Banker. Oh yeah, yeah, coldwood Banker, that's who our landlord is. And they're good they're actually good, but they've gone through about three owners since we've been there. We've been there, 25 years, 26. This is our 26th year. Yeah, and generally speaking they've been good landlords that we've had. Yeah, it's well kept up. They have instant response when you have a maintenance problem and everything. I think they're really good. Dean: Yeah, well, I'm going to have to come and see it. Maybe when the fall happens, maybe between the good months, the fall or something, I might come and take a look. Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Dean: Well, I'm excited and take a look yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah Well. Dan: I've been there. Yeah, we have our workshop. We have our workshop tomorrow here and then we go to Chicago and we have another one on Thursday and then the second Chicago workshop for the quarter is in the first week of April. Oh, wow, yeah, yeah, and this is working out. We'll probably be a year away, maybe a year and a half away, from having a fourth date during the quarter. Oh, wow. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Do we? Dean: have any new people for FreeZone Small? Dan: Don't know Okay. Dean: No one is back. Dan: Yeah, yeah, I don't really know, I don't really know, I think we added 30 last year or so it's. The numbers are going up. Yes, that's great. Yeah, I think we're about 120 total right now. That's awesome. That's awesome. Yeah, yeah, it's fun, though. It's nice people. Dean: Yeah, it's nice to see it all. It's nice to see it all growing. Very cool, all right well, enjoy yourself. Yes, you too and I will see you. Tonight at five. That's right, all right, I'll be there. Dan: Thanks Dan. Dean: Okay.

Shop Talk looks at how far a million dollars will go in retirement by state. Money will go fast in Hawaii but last a lifetime in West Virginia. Caught My Eye looks at the FDA's crack down on VCR cleaner—or poppers—in the last month since RFK Jr. has joined the administration. Kennedy wrongly blamed the popular inhalant with causing the AIDS crisis in the 80's. Also, quitting plastic bottled water can help your health as microplastics are often consumed by users via bottles that have gotten warm or bent. John Raskob, who built the Empire State Building with GM stock, is our Business Birthday. We're all business. Except when we're not. Apple Podcasts: apple.co/1WwDBrC Spotify: spoti.fi/2pC19B1 iHeart Radio: bit.ly/4aza5LW YouTube Music: bit.ly/43T8Y81 Pandora: pdora.co/2pEfctj YouTube: bit.ly/1spAF5a Also follow Tim and John on: Facebook: www.facebook.com/focusgroupradio

Back in my day... "Back in my day, you had to connect to the internet through phone line and then listen to that crazy Internet sound." "Back in my day my high school had smoking doors for smoking between classes." "Back in my day... we rented a VCR to play rented videos." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoicesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Back in my day... "Back in my day, you had to connect to the internet through phone line and then listen to that crazy Internet sound." "Back in my day my high school had smoking doors for smoking between classes." "Back in my day... we rented a VCR to play rented videos." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Listener beware, you're in for...90s nostalgia? This week, Courtland and Brandon watch the sixth episode of Goosebumps: The Vanishing and discuss VCR troubleshooting, the origins of the word 'epic', and missing kids that literally don't matter. Linktree - https://linktr.ee/PrivateIslandBecome a Patron - Patron.com/privateislandLaugh with us on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/upallnightpodcast/Connect with fans on Discord - https://discord.gg/2RAp2afFind us on Bluesky - @upallnightpodcast.bsky.social

Welcome Natties to episode 77 “We are in Bleep City”! Join us as we dive into the YouTube algo punishing us, what's better carbonated or non carbonated drinks, Uncle Kyle's VCR collection, using the restroom as a construction worker, walking into a disturbing room used for something you won't believe, Kyle having a meltdown when not being allowed to go number 2 at these locations and so much more! Remember to please like, comment and subscribe! Are you a part of THE Natty Nation? What are you waiting for?#comedy #podcast #funnySocialsUncle Kyle/Pod: @thenaturalspodSweet Derek: @sweetderekproductions

Send us a textA controlling, manipulative producer locks his three co-hosts in a state of perpetual childhood by keeping them prisoner within an auditory prison of his own creation. On Episode 657 of Trick or Treat Radio we are joined by Marion for our first Patreon Takeover of 2025! Marion has chosen the films The Fall (2006) from director Tarsem Singh and Dogtooth (2009) from director Yorgos Lanthimos for us to discuss! We also introduce a new segment, talk about epic films— both cinematically and psychologically, and hear what will go down in history as the snake story. So grab your morphine pills, make sure not to step on the zombies in the yard, and strap on for the world's most dangerous podcast!Stuff we talk about: Takashi Miike, Audition, Marion, Patreon Takeover, The Seance Room, Ravenshadow's wallet, ditch the action sack, Seinfeld, RIP Gene Hackman, Doug Flutie, Hoosiers, RIP Michelle Trachtenberg, on this date in horror history, Nightmare on Elm St 3: Dream Warriors, Dario Argento, Bird With the Crystal Plumage, Better Off Dead, A French Off, upgrade the apparatus, Toxic Avenger, Rebel Without A Crew, All I Need To Know About Filmmaking I Learned From Toxic Avenger, Mark Torgl, Al Snow, I got a snek man, a milf snake, Plissken, The Fall, Tarsem Singh, The Cell, Alejandro Jodorowsky, David Fincher, Spike Jonze, Princess Bride for grown ups, Wizard of Oz, tragic characters, Lee Pace, kids as drug mules, fuck Harvey Weinstein, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Hobbit, Peter Jackson, Julia Roberts, Letterboxd, Yorgos Lanthimos, Dogtooth, Poor Things, The Killing of a Sacred Deer, brainwashed by a cult, Gestapo's Last Orgy, Plato's Allegory of the Cave, Platonism, getting knocked out with a VCR, Greek Films, deep in the heart of Texas, Plato Nash, Magic Mike, Steven Soderberg, Traffic, Presence, Unsane, depressed and suppressed, ye old keyboard licking, young dumb and full of longbum!Support us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/trickortreatradioJoin our Discord Community: discord.trickortreatradio.comSend Email/Voicemail: mailto:podcast@trickortreatradio.comVisit our website: http://trickortreatradio.comStart your own podcast: https://www.buzzsprout.com/?referrer_id=386Use our Amazon link: http://amzn.to/2CTdZzKFB Group: http://www.facebook.com/groups/trickortreatradioTwitter: http://twitter.com/TrickTreatRadioFacebook: http://facebook.com/TrickOrTreatRadioYouTube: http://youtube.com/TrickOrTreatRadioInstagram: http://instagram.com/TrickorTreatRadioSupport the show

In this episode Jef, Josh and Brian decide to keep riding the Werewolf train and pull Howling 2: Your Sister is a Werewolf off the VHS shelf at the studio. What better way to enjoy a sequel to one of the all time classic werewolf flicks than on videocassette with your buds?! Soon after the FM3 realized something was off, everything went dark - Is it the VCR? Could it be a bad duplication? Maybe the Forever Midnight crew is having a collective stroke and everything is hairy!? Whatever is happening, it doesn't matter if the moon is full or if you have your pockets filled with garlic, Your sister is a werewolf and there's nothing you can do about it except to sit back and enjoy this brand new episode of Forever Midnight! 

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, We take you through the fascinating evolution of media and communication technologies. We begin by tracing the journey of written communication from ancient Sumerian pictographs to Gutenberg's printing press. The narrative explores how each technological breakthrough transformed our ability to share information, from industrial-era steam presses to the digital revolution sparked by the first email in 1971. Our conversation delves into the parallels between historical technological adaptations and current innovations. We examine the story of a 1950s typesetter transitioning to digital technologies, drawing insights into how professionals navigate significant technological shifts. The discussion introduces the concept of "Casting, not Hiring," emphasizing the importance of finding meaningful experiences and team dynamics in a rapidly changing world. We explore the transformation of media consumption and advertising in the digital age. Traditional media platforms give way to digital giants like Facebook and Google, reflecting broader changes in how we create, distribute, and consume content. The conversation touches on audience dynamics, using examples like Joe Rogan's media presence and Netflix's market evolution to illustrate these shifts. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS In this episode, I explore the historical journey of media and communication, tracing its evolution from ancient scripts to modern digital technologies. I discuss the pivotal role of Gutenberg's printing press in revolutionizing media distribution and how it set the stage for the widespread use of newspapers and books. We delve into the transition from traditional typesetting to digital processes, drawing parallels between past innovations and current advancements in AI. The conversation highlights the importance of curiosity and effective communication in embracing new technologies, emphasizing the idea of "casting" for meaningful experiences rather than traditional hiring. We examine media consumption trends and the impact of big data on advertising, noting the shift from traditional platforms to digital giants like Facebook and Google. Our discussion includes an analysis of the historical impact of communication technologies, referencing figures like Edison and their influence on modern entrepreneurship. The episode concludes with a focus on the value of appreciation and growth, sharing insights on how recognizing value and excellence can lead to professional and personal breakthroughs. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan, and how are you? I am wonderful. Welcome to Cloudlandia, you are in the Chicago outpost. I am. Dan: I'm sitting in a very comfortable spot, noise-free. I just had. Have you ever done any IV where they pump you? Up with good stuff. Dean: I have yeah. Dan: Yeah, I just came from that, so I may be uncomfortably exuberant. Dean: Uncomfortably exuberant. That's a great word there, right there. Dan: Yeah, yeah, uncomfortable to you. Dean: That's the best. Dan: Yeah, yeah. So anyway, we have a good service. Dean: The only thing I miss about Chicago comfortable to you, that's the best, yeah, so anyway, we have a good service. The only thing I miss about Chicago. Dan is our Sunday dinners. Oh the Sunday roundtable. Dan: Yeah, it's a bit more informal now so we don't have a big gap. It's not like the Last Supper. Dean: Right, exactly. Dan: We have Mike Canix coming over and Stephen Paltrow. Dean: Okay, there you go. Dan: They'll be on straight carnivore tonight. Dean: Okay, good, I like everything about that. Dan: Yeah, it's a little bit of snow on the ground and snowing right now, but it's nice. Dean: Oh, that's awesome. Well it's winter here. It's like cool. Yeah, I almost had to wear pants yesterday, dan, it was that cold. Dan: I had to wear pants yesterday, Dan. Dean: It was that cold I had to wear my full-weight hoodie. But yeah, but it's sunny, it's nice. Dan: I was just in the hot tub before we got on the call the Chinese intelligence, who are listening to this phone call. They're trying to visualize what you just said. Dean: Yes, Well, I had a great conversation with Charlotte this morning and something happened. That is the first time I've done it. I literally I talked her ear off. I reached my daily limit of talk interaction. We were talking for about an hour. There's a limit. Yes, I pay $20 a month and I guess there's a limit of how long you can engage by advanced voice tech. Dan: I'd give her a raise. I'd give her a raise. Dean: So they were on her behalf demanding a raise. I'd give her a raise. So they were on her behalf demanding a raise from $20 a month to $200 a month, and I could talk to her all I want. I still think it's worth it. It really is. When you think about if we go through the personification again, if you think about what you're getting for 200 I mean, just the conversation I had with her this morning was worth more than 200, yeah, so you want to know what we were talking about. What were you talking? about well, I am such a big fan of this, the big change uh book that I got for you. That was oh yeah, by stuff like that. So I really have been thinking that the whole game has really been an evolution of our, of words, pictures, sound and the combination of words, pictures and sounds in videos, right, and if we take the big three the words and pictures and sound, that I, you know, we went all the way back to the very beginning and I told her I said, listen, what I'd love to do is I want to trace the evolution of each of these individually. I want to start from the beginning of how we let's just take text, you know, as an example for words, and so she's taking me all the way back to the ancient Sumerians and the invention of kind of the very first kind of visual depiction of words and language, and then all the way up to the hieroglyphics of Egyptians and then into what would now be what we know as the alphabet, with the Romans and Latin, Romans and Latin, and the way that they were distributed was through tablets and they would post posters and things to get things out there. And so I'll pause there and I'll tell you that the lens that I wanted to look at it through for her is to go back and find, just trace, the beginnings of the capability of it, right, the capability of text. So that meant we had to have language and we had to have the alphabet, and we had to have the tools, the mechanism to recreate these on tablets. And then the distribution of them. How were they distributed? The consumption of them, how were they received and popularized? And then how were they capitalized? Who turned business opportunities into? What did this new capability turn into business-wise? So, looking, those four, tracking those four things all the way through history, from the ancient Sumerians, all the way through, and so when we got to, you know, from the time the Romans created the thing, the first kind of commercialization was the scribe industry. That became a thing where people were employed as scribes to you know, to write things, things, and then it came into the monks. We haven't gone deep dive in these yet, we're kind of going through the surface level of them. But the scribes, you know, were the first kind of commercializing and distribution of the of the things. And then when Gutenberg came along, that sort of popularized and made it even more able to distribute things and on the back of that became newspapers and pamphlets and books. So those were the three primary things for hundreds of years. Until the 1800s we had steam presses which were large, just kind of mechanized, sped up Gutenberg presses, and then the roller presses which allowed to have long, continuous streams of printing, which that really led to the modern newspaper. You know we had almost a hundred years until things were digitized where the entire platform was built on that plateau of things. And then it turned into newspapers magazines were the dominant things and mail. Those were the big distribution elements for a hundred years and then, once it got digitized, we turned into email. The first email apparently was sent in 1971 or something, but it took 25 years for that to popularize to the level that everybody had email and it was the primary thing and that led to PDFs and eBooks and distribution on the internet. We talked about bloggers because, if you remember, in the early days of the internet the heroes were bloggers. Those were the sort of personalities pre-social media you know. And then she even used the words that once it became democratized with social media, that things like twitter and and you know those were big things. But she talked about Arianna Huffington and Perez Hilton and Matt Drudge as the kind of first real mainstream capitalizers of this digital kind of went full steam into only digital, when all the mainstream print media was still kind of holding on and and resisting the migration of free news coming through you know um, and then we get to the point now where all of that is completely available. You know medium and sub stack and you know email newsletters taking off as a thing, and then AI bringing into a situation where now the machines can create and distribute the content. And it's funny just that level. I was on a Zoom with Joe Stolte the other day and you know, with even your newsletter, the AI-assisted newsletter you think about those as things, that learning smart, personalized text, media consumption as a really enhanced experience. So I found that really that was the first conversation that I'd had with that kind of context. I'm visualizing, I want to like visualize a timeline of these benchmarks. You know along the way, and realize how long the spaces were between when things actually catalyzed, you know yeah, long in comparison to what? Dan: long in comparison to the last. Dean: You know where we are now that long in comparison to what? Long in comparison to the last. You know where we are now. That long in comparison to that. There was no ability to print words on paper until 1442 or 1555 or whatever. I think it's 1550. Dan: Yeah, so 1455. Dean: Somewhere around there. Somewhere around there, yeah that literally did not change for 400 years till now. You know, in the last 25 years we've gotten to where we can distribute it globally instantly to everybody, and that we've also got machines now that can actually create the content itself and distribute on on your behalf and so I think that's our ability to create that stuff. Like I, I wonder how long and how many hours of research power it would have taken to get this level of what I gained from my conversation with Charlotte. Dan: Well, you would have gotten a doctorate, you would have gotten a PhD. Dean: Yeah, and it would have taken years to study all of that and to go back and find it all you know, but it was very, I found it very all to serve this idea that I think, in all of those digitized four corners, that we have reached a, a pinnacle, where we're faced now going forward with a plateau that really it's going to be about the creative use of. No, I think that's things. Dan: Yeah, I think that's true. Yeah, just a little addition to charl's work the conversation that you had with Charlotte. One of the reasons why the Greeks have such influence Greek thinking on the world, you know they essentially created history. That was. Dean: You know that was. Dan: Thucydides. And you know, herodotus and Thucydides were two Greek historians and basically their histories basically really formed the whole ancient world. And then you had poetry. Homer was the great poet and. Plato and Aristotle and many others, many other Greek philosophers, but Greece was the first country that developed a really first-class. The Greeks developed a first-class alphabet. I think it may have pretty close to we have 26 letters. I'm not quite sure what they had, but it wasn't. I don't know if it was fewer or more, but maybe only by two or three letters they had, but it was really the alphabet. That is the breakthrough. For example, we have two artists that work for us. They're from Hong Kong and growing up they learned all the. They learned all the ideograms that are in Chinese you know, and you know, and it's years and years and years of study where the alphabet you know. A reasonably intelligent first grader, or maybe even earlier these days, but a six-year-old, can basically grasp the alphabet and be using that skillfully, you know, within their first year of grade school, within first grade and that's what the alphabet did and that's why, you know, the literacy really came in. But even then, when you know in Gutenberg today there weren't that many literate people, you know who could actually? Read, you know. So it wasn't so much the technology Well, the technology was crucial, but it wasn't so much why things. It's just that it took 400 years for the entire population to become literate. You know, and you know to have formal education to empower literacy. That took a long time because people were working manually and they didn't have need for reading. They had to become good at things. Fixated now for about the last eight months on british navy historical novel assault taking place around 1800 to 1800. You know, and you know the majority of sailors on the ships didn't read they, they didn't have right reading, you know but, they were very skillful. They knew the wind, they knew the waves, they yeah, you know, they had phenomenal teamwork and they were very skillful. They knew the wind, they knew the waves, they had phenomenal teamwork and they were very handy. They had a lot of hand skills and everything else, but it's been only recently that your progress in the world really depended upon reading. Dean: Literacy yeah. Dan: Yeah, you had to go forward. I remember that's one story. Just the Greeks. The Greeks that became very powerful, their philosophy still. I mean, every day in universities, or probably universities, there's discussions about what Plato said about this, what Aristotle said about this. So that's still. You know, the power of that over generations is really quite extraordinary. The other thing, if I want to add to that, my sister, who's 89, the man she married, who died about 10 years ago. When I met him, this was in the 1950s, he was a typesetter for a major newspaper in the. Cleveland area and I would go down there and you'd see he put together a whole page of it and you know, and he had to do it backwards, he had to put all the letters. He had this vast, you know, he had these, they were like wooden shelves that had, you know, were divided into, you know, into 28 different, 26 different spots, and he would just pick up the letters and put them. But he made the complete changeover, starting around the 1970s, 1975. He made a complete changeover to becoming digital. It started becoming digital even in the 1970s. And then he just kept progressing, layer after layer, until he was the production manager for the entire network of about five you know five municipal newspapers and everything like that yeah so his history sort of matches what you and charlotte talked about. Dean: Yeah, and I found that really an interesting like multi-track way to look at it, as the technology and then the capability that created for the creation of things, the distribution of those things and the capitalizing on those things, because that's kind of like the cascading layers that happen. And I think if we look at where we are with AI right now, we're at that level where it was available below the surface until two years ago and then now it's sort of widely available as a capability. But all the things that are going to really come, I wouldn't say it's widely available used right now. I heard somebody talk about that. If we think about, like, if ultimately AI is just going to be internet, you know it's like if we think about what internet was in 1996, that's becoming. It's almost like chat. Gpt is the AOL of of what made the internet popular, right as everybody got on. AOL and had access to email and kind of gated browsing. Dan: Yeah, the interesting thing that you know if I just take your example from this morning, it's because you're a good prompter that whole thing happened. The whole essential skill. You know, if you take all the technology, that's a technology, charlotte's technology, and that's there, it's waiting there. It's waiting there to be used. But unless you have a good prompter it won't produce what you produced this morning. Dean: I agree with you 100, and that's why it's all in the prompt prompting. Dan: That means knowing what you want. It's actually a visualization skill because, you visualize something you know like in, not exactly because you, how you did it is unique, but my sense is that you had a question in mind, or you were just curious about something, and then you were able to put it into words. This was strictly spoken, was it? Yeah, uh-huh, yeah, so you didn't type anything in for this. Dean: No, I did not. Dan: Because it's strictly on an audible level, right, exactly, yeah. Anything in for this? No, I did not. Strictly on an audible level, right, exactly yeah. But here's the thing that no one else in the world did what you did this morning, and the reason is because you were just interested in it you were just interested in something and you know, and it was in conversation form, so now tell me about this. Now tell me about this yeah well, what she? Dean: was saying was guiding my things. You know what? It's very similar, dan. It's like if we were to sit down at a piano and look at the piano. There's 88 keys of possibility there. Yeah, unless you know how to prompt the keys to make the noises. Dan: Do you know what I mean? It's just noise. Dean: I think that's really what it is, and I think that chat interactions or AI interactions are going to be the piano lessons of today. Right Like for kids to talk about essential skills. Dan: And the outcome is going to be the music and the outcome is going to be the music. Dean: That's right. That's right, yeah. Dan: I've done about. You know, with perplexity, probably last week I've done about 25, you know where I one. That was really interesting because it was related to the book that I'm writing Casting, not Hiring with Jeff and I was saying, you know, the big thing is that we're only talking, the book is only for a particular type of person, you know. Because, you know he has a wide range of people that he's giving them our small copy of Casting, not Hiring you know, our 60-page book and then he's interviewing them if they're willing to read it, which takes about an hour. If they're willing to read it, then he wants to know what they think about it. You know, but there's, like corporate people that he's talking to, there's academic people that he's talking to, and I said, you know, jeff, academic people that he's talking to. And I said, you know, jeff, there's only one reader for this. That's a successful, talented, ambitious entrepreneur who wants to grow. Who wants to grow, wants to make the growth experience really meaningful and purposeful for himself or herself, but also for the team members, for the members of the company that the entrepreneur owns. And so he said, yeah, well you know how big is that market and I said, well, let's. So I did a search and I had my question. I just looked at it just before I came on the call. I said I want you to, of all the companies incorporated in the United States, the total number of incorporated companies in the United States in 2023, because usually their number. You know that you go back about a year before the present year that you're just sending, because there's an enormous amount of data for that. Dean: And. Dan: I said what percentage of all the incorporated companies in the United States are privately owned? And it turns out it's 99% and 33 million, 33 million incorporated companies. And and then I put in another prompt okay, size of companies 1 to 10, 10 to 50, 50 to 150, 150 to 500, above 500, and 74 percent of them are 74 percent or one to ten. And then, and I said we're really talking basically about companies up to about 150 that's the reader. They have companies that are 150 and everything like that, and it's really interesting that this is the only person they said but there's this huge market of other. You know, jeff didn't say this, but other people said there's. So this should be a book for everybody. And I said, if it's a book for everybody, it's not interesting to anybody that's true, exactly. Dean: Well, that's so. Those numbers have kind of um grown, because I've always heard about you know know, 28 million, but I guess the most recent that would make sense 33 million. Dan: And it would be bigger today because we're you know, we're a full year and into the first month, so it would be bigger. The incorporations go on. And the other thing about what you're saying is you can be so specific, Like you can really put down all the interesting things about the reader you know, about the reader that you're looking for and you know so, while the capability that you're talking and I have some arguments with democratize you know the concept of democratize because there's a certain sense people are going to have equal capabilities. I think just the opposite is going to happen. The range from people with a little ability or no ability to extraordinary capability actually gets bigger and wider to extraordinary capability actually gets bigger and wider. And the reason is exactly what I just said to you that you're the only one in the world who's ever gotten that information laid out and has it back in a very short period of time. And it's strictly because what Dean Jackson was looking for. Dean: Yeah, that's exactly right. I was very curious about it. And I think that it's something. I think it's a unique perspective, especially when we overlay the other things. We only got we were talking about then sound. We only got we were talking about then sound. And it wasn't until the 1800s late 1800s that Edison created the phonograph, that we were able to capture sound and the evolution of that. Then it took another by 25 years later. It was the beginning of radio. That now we have the ability to capture sound, the ability to distribute sound through the radio, that it ushered in this golden era of radio as the distribution medium. And she talked about NBC and CBS and ABC, you know, as the monopolistic NBC was really the big giant. Dan: Yeah, they were the giant. Dean: I mean, they were the powerhouse of radio 1995 was the, or 1925, I think was when they were founded, and then the others were by 1927. Yeah, but that took off the radios in every household and all of that, you know, laid the. That created the mass audience yeah really right, yeah, there was. Dan: Uh. Really, there's a writer named tim wu wu and he's just. He's written about five books on just the extraordinary impact of the communication technologies, starting when you said sort of you know. First the telegraph and the telegraph with sound. That's really the telephones you have. Bell is in there. So, Morris and Bell and Edison. You have the combination. And then Edison also created the movie. I mean, he was the real. I mean, he's the person who created it that became famous for it yes. There were lots of people. He's famous for the light bulb, he's the person who became famous for the light bulb, but there were at least five or six working light bulbs before Edison. It's just that Edison was the first what I would call the modern entrepreneur, technology entrepreneur, and he really grasped where all this stuff was going, more than any other single innovator entrepreneur, and he understood the stock market and he understood how to raise funds and he understood how to market. Dean: You know, yeah, yeah. Dan: So you know I'm getting a lot of patents, so we got two more on Friday, so we're up to 54 patents now. And I was talking in the breakout group on Friday, I said we're really piling up the patents, and so somebody said well, how many are you going for? And I said I can tell you exactly I'm going for 1,068. Tell you exactly, I'm going for 1,068. Uh-huh, 1,068. I mean, where's that number come from? I said Edison had 1,067. Dean: Oh, there you go. Dan: That's the best, and I grew up two miles from his birthplace. So the farm that I grew up two miles away is where Edison was born, milan, ohio, and very famous, I mean he's just a roaring, big, major human being, historic human being in that area, and he's one of my five historic role models. I've got Euclid, I've got Shakespeare, I've got Bach, I've got Hamilton, james Madison and Edison. And I said Edison put all the pieces together that created the modern technological world. Dean: It's true, isn't it? Yeah? Dan: He's the first person to create a formal R&D lab. He had in Menlo, new Jersey. He created his famous lab and he had technicians and scientists and engineers there. And then you know, and then he understood the stock market and he understood you know big systems, how you put big electric systems together and everything like that, you know. The thing is that that's a history of entrepreneurism, the thing that you put together with Charlotte this morning. Dean: Yeah, that was my intention, Because it's always some individual who just decides to do something more with it. Dan: They kind of apply your VCR formula to something that already exists and they say what's the vision? Well, you have to have the vision, but you have to see where it hasn't gone to yet. I mean, that's basically what you have to. Vision is seeing where things have not yet gone to, but could, if you organize them differently? You take the capabilities and combined it with reach, then you. That's what the future really is. Vcr. Dean: Yeah, you know I've had a nice VCR advancement, chad, and I have been talking a lot about it. Chad Jenkins, chad Jenkins, I've been talking about the VCR formula and so I had some distinctions around vision, like what is vision? And I realized there's a progression that it takes like from an idea or a prediction. Is the first level that you got a vision that, hey, I think this could work, and then the next level of it is that you've got proof that idea does work and that opens the gate for you to create a protocol for predictable repeating of that result and that opens the gateway to a patent, to protection of that. Dan: So you predict, you prove you protocol or package and protect the 4P progression. I thought, know you know what. You know what it is. It's the ability to see, yeah, let's say, a reasonable time frame, not 100 years from now, but let's say 10 years from now. Yeah, that, if this were available, a lot of people would like to have this. Dean: Yes. Dan: That's basically what a vision is. That's what a vision is. If it was available to them and it was easy to use. They don't have to change their habits too much to use it 10 years from now and I think a lot of people not only would they love using it, they'd be willing to pay for it. Dean: Of course, yes, I agree, yeah, and so I thought that was very, that was a nice, I mean every drug dealer in the world knows how to do that. Dan: Yeah, I mean, you think about everything started out with an idea. I bet, if we did this, that would be oh, yeah, yeah, I bet, prove it. I bet, yeah, you know, steve jobs with itunes. He said yeah I got interested in music. But when I go into a store, you know, uh, and, and I hear a song I really like, or I hear a musician I really like, and I hear them singing a song, or her I, you know, I'd like to be able to just get that song, but they make it really difficult. You got to buy 11 other songs, or 10 other songs to get the one song you know and you know, and, and I'd like to have it. You know, I'd like to have it on a small machine. I don't want to. You know, I don't want to have a big record that comes home and then I have to have a lot of equipment and everything to put on it. And you know, and you know, I'd like to, I'd like to think of. You know, I'd like to have a technology. Dean: Yeah, I'd like to think of. Dan: You know, I'd like to have a technology Getting a call from yeah, I'd like to have a technology that, the moment I hear the sun, five minutes later I can have it. You know, Mm-hmm. Yes, I mean it's so I think it's imagine, there's a capability multiplied by imagination. You know that's kind of like what vision is. Dean: But you know, the interesting thing is that was true 25 years ago when Steve invented the iPod and the iTunes environment, but then over the next 25 years's taken another evolution. Right, it was still the ownership. Instead of owning the physical thing, you own the digital version of it and you download it onto your device. But now, when it got to the cloud and all the songs are available and you don't need to download them, it's like spotify said listen, we own all the songs, we got access to all of them. Why don't you just pay us nine dollars a month and you can have all the songs and just stream them? Yeah, and, and that's where we're at now, it's like. But I think that the next level, the thing we're at now with ai, is that ai is actually, specifically, that it's reached the generative ai point where it it can actually create songs. That's what's happening now. Dan: Yeah, it's clearly a productive capability that you're exploring here we're having a conversation about. When did you have this conversation with Charlotte? Just this morning, when I woke up this morning, Okay, this entire conversation that we're having would not have happened unless um no, you did what you did for an hour this morning right, that's exactly right, yeah now let me ask you a question here, and it goes to another technological realm and it's big data. It's big data, and so I keep reading about big data. You know big data, and I said and it's accumulating all the data. Okay, and so you have all the data. Okay, and so you have all the data. I remember having a conversation this was probably 10 years ago and the Chinese were developing what was called an intelligence capability, where they could gather information about what all the people in China were doing at any given moment. Okay, and then they could make predictions based on that. Nice, if wait a minute, so you got one point, you got 1.3 billion. Dean: You know however many Chinese there are they're being listened to, you know, and however many Chinese there are. Dan: They're being listened to, you know, and they're. Whatever they're doing, that's being read. And I said how many Chinese do you have to pay attention to what all the other Chinese are doing? I said they must have about 6 million people who, day in, day out, are just listening and they're accumulating massive amounts of data. Okay, and then I say, then what happens? Dean: then what? Dan: yeah, then what? Okay? Okay, uh, and I said so, what do you do with all this data? You know, I said it's overwhelming the amount of data you have. So what's happening with it and what it tells me is that there's no way for you to really comprehend what all that data means. Dean: Yeah, I agree. I mean there's no, but you can argue that's kind of what Facebook does with the algorithm right In a way, of being able to predict what you're likely to click on next. Dan: That's how they're at it, Well that I understand, but that's on the level, that's a commercial level, because really they're selling ads. I mean what Google and Facebook actually are high-level advertising platforms. Dean: Yes, that's exactly what they are. I mean, that's what they are. Dan: Yeah, I mean, and once you've said that, there isn't much else to say. Dean: Once you've said that, it's over. Dan: Well it is what it is and it's a bias, obviously, because it's just, you know it's, if they're spending money, not ads for Google and spending ads for Facebook, they aren't spending money for ads in the New York Times, or yeah. So all the newspaper advertising has gone away and all the magazine advertising has gone away, and probably all the advertising on television, because the number of people watching television is actually going down, you know. Well the actual, I mean if you're following social media or you're you know, you're on the, you're on your computer and you're looking at things. Well, your attention can only be on one thing at a time and if I'm spending you know I used to spend I would say when I stopped in 2018, I stopped watching television together, but I calculated that it was probably I was probably watching anywhere between 15 and 20 hours a week times 52. Okay, so that's. You know that's 800 to a thousand hours and I'm not doing that anymore, so for I got a thousand hours back. He's. I would say 800. I just evened it off at 800. I'd say I've just got 800 hours back. It's just gone into being more productive. I'm incredibly more productive in creating stuff. I have you as a witness. You know that it's going up in numbers. The amount of stuff that I'm creating. it's going up in numbers the amount of stuff that I'm creating. So you know, here's the thing. I don't think I'm unusual in this. I don't think I'm unique on the planet in doing what this is. I just think people are moving their attention away from something where everybody was paying attention to it and now fewer and fewer people are paying attention to it. It's like Joe Rogan, you know, I mean. Dean: Joe Rogan. Dan: The people are watching Joe Rogan. Who did they stop watching or listening and watching to? So that's the big thing. Where are people? Dean: going with their attention. Yeah, and you know I just heard a podcast talking about that. Streaming, you know, like from television. It's gone away from kind of linear television where you know they show one thing on one channel at one time and you have to be there at 8 pm to watch that one show. Watch that one show and you watch it along with ads, right? If you want to watch this happening now, you watch it and you consume the ads. Well, when streaming became available, you know, if you look at that convenience, that it was so much more dignified that we can watch whatever we want to watch when we want to watch it, and there's a price for that. Everybody has migrated towards the, towards that, and now the interesting thing is that the streamers are Wall Street redefined. How they value the, you know, monetize or attribute value to what they have. Because for a long time, netflix was rewarded for the ever-growing number of subscribers. Right, like getting more and more subscribers. It didn't matter to Wall Street that they were profitable or unprofitable. The only thing that they staked the value in was the growing number of subscribers, the growing number of subscribers, so for. So netflix would spend billions and billions of dollars on attracting creative right that would. That would get people to watch the. You know, come to netflix to see, because they only had original programs you could only get on Netflix and they overpaid for all of that content. So now. Wall Street a few years ago decided that hey, wait a minute. These guys should be like any other business. Dan: They should be profitable and so it always comes down to that, doesn't it it really? Dean: does so they said you know, now Netflix has to cut corners, pinch pennies. They have to make things. They can't afford to spend as much to make the content. If you look at the line items of where they were spending the most amount of money, it's acquiring yeah, content to do uh so that's where the peak era of who's the guy? Dan: who's the guy who runs Netflix? Dean: Sarandon Tom. Dan: Sarandon. Dean: I think, but in any event they. Dan: No, I was just wondering if he's one of the people who gave $50 million to Kamala Harris. Dean: Oh, yeah, probably. Dan: Yeah, I said he obviously doesn't know anything about returning or getting a profit All right, exactly. Dean: So the other, the thing that we're finding. Dan: What's Reid Hoffman? He's LinkedIn. Dean: Yeah, I think so, yeah, yeah, linkedin. Yeah yeah, yeah. Dan: But those people are all not giving a million dollars to Trump for his inauguration. Dean: The thing that streamers have landed on now is that they have free models you can watch, but now they have ad supported things where you can watch anything you want, but they insert ads that are unskippable ads and they're finding that is more profitable than the subscriber the subscription revenue. That on a per user kind of thing. They make more money on people watching and viewing the unskippable ads. So it's kind of funny that everything has come full circle back to basic cable, where you are. They're all bundling now so you can get because people were resisting that you had to buy netflix and you had to buy hbo and paramount and hulu and all these things, nbc and cbs and all of it so now they're bundling them together for one subscription and having ad supported views. So the big winner out of all of it is that we've won the right to, and have demanded the right to, watch whatever we want to watch, whenever we want to watch it. We're not going to sit on, you know. We're not going to wait until 9pm to watch this and wait a week to get the next episode. We want all the episodes available right now and we'll choose when and what we watch and for how long we watch it. If I want to watch the whole series in one weekend, that's up to me yeah, you know it's an interesting thing. Dan: Uh, here and this relates to the whole story you told the whole historical story, going back to the sumerians. But one of the things I really notice is that the moment a new capability appears and you can utilize it, it's no longer wondrous. You've just included that in your existing capability, I can now do this. You've just included that in your existing capability. I can now do this. It's really interesting the moment you get a capability that just goes into the stack of capabilities that you already have. So it's not really a breakthrough because it doesn't feel any more unusual than all the capabilities you had. So today this is kind of a you know you were. You started the podcast here saying I just did something that I've never done before with Charlotte you know, and then people said who's this Charlotte that Dean talks about? Well, dean actually created this capability called Charlotte. He actually did that, but now it's just normal. Now, what else can Charlotte do? Dean: I'm going to do this. Dan: But a week from now you may have done this four or five times or four or five more things. These sort of deep searches, that you did, and now it just becomes part of Dean Jackson's talent and capability stack. Dean: Yeah, yeah, in the of the VCR formula, the sea of capability, that all this capability starts out with one person who has taken it's almost like Always starts with one person. Yeah, and it's a curiosity. Dan: It's a curiosity thing You're alert to. You know, in our four by four casting tool, the first quadrant is called performance, how you show up. And I've got four qualities. One you're alert. Second thing is that you're curious. Number three is that you're responsive. And number four you're resourceful. And I would say you just knocked off all four this morning with this search, this conversation with Charlotte. You just knocked off all four. That's the reason why you're doing it. So the key to the future in profiting, but utilizing and benefiting from this technology is you have? To be alert, you have to be curious, you have to be, you have to be responsive and you have to be resourceful. Dean: Yeah, that's great. Dan: Yeah, yeah, we're living, and then you get to do and then you get to do things faster, easier, cheaper and bigger yes, this is great, dan. Dean: We're really living in the best of times we're just talking, dean yeah, we're already in it, but it's endless. Dan: We're into an area of just extraordinary, idiosyncratic creativity. Dean: This is it that now we have. Everyone has access to every capability that you could. Dan: No, they only have access to the capability that they're looking for. Oh, boy yes. No, they don't have access to every capability. They just have access to the next capability they're looking for. Dean: Right, this is mind-blowing. Dan: Yeah, yeah, yeah, this is great, but it is similar. This was better than the IV. Dean: Your exuberance is showing. Dan: Or maybe before you have an hour conversation with Dean, you get an IV. Dean: Yeah, exactly, you have an hour conversation with dean, you get an iv. Yeah, exactly, did you imagine it's a triple play of an iv yeah, with a conversation with charlotte, followed by a conversation with dan sullivan. Dan: I will try the iv next week yeah, and then eat a great piece of steak. And then eat a great piece of steak that's right Followed by a Rib eye is great. I think rib eye is my favorite. Dean: Yeah, me too by far yeah. Dan: Well. I love it yeah, this is great conversation. Dean: I agree, Dan this is Things are heating up. I'm going to upgrade Charlotte and give her a raise 10X, a 10 times raise. Dan: Tell her about that. You know talk to her and say you know, not only do I think you're more valuable, but Catchy TP thinks you're more valuable, Charlotte, and we're raising your monthly to 200. Dean: That's right. A 10 times raise. Dan: Yeah, who gets that? Mm-hmm? Okay, and you think about it. Dean: It's just so valuable. All right, dan, thanks, bye, bye.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, Dan shares his journey from recovering in snowy Toronto to basking in the Arizona sunshine at Canyon Ranch. While battling a cold and back spasm in Canada, He found unexpected humor in a limousine driver discovering our heated driveway before making my way to the warmth of Tucson. At Canyon Ranch, I read historical British Navy novels and attended Richard Rossi's conference, where conversations sparked insights about technology's role in our world. The discussions centered on how companies like Google and Apple influence geographic naming conventions and how AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude work to match human capabilities rather than surpass them. We explored the relationship between technology and daily life, from electric vehicles to meal delivery services. These conversations highlighted how technological advances aim to streamline our routines while acknowledging the challenge of replicating genuine human experiences. The experience reinforced that technology offers convenience and efficiency but cannot replace authentic human connections and experiences. This balance became clear through examples like distinguishing between Bach's original compositions and AI-generated music, reminding us of technology's role as a tool rather than a replacement for human interaction. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS In the episode, Dan shares his journey from Toronto's cold to Arizona's warmth, highlighting his recovery from a cold and back spasm, and experiences attending a conference and relaxing at Canyon Ranch. We discuss the impact of technology on geographic naming conventions, mentioning how companies like Google and Apple influence changes such as the renaming of geographic locations. The conversation explores the idea that technology is striving to match human intelligence, with examples including AI tools like ChatGPT and Claude, and the future potential of seamless digital interactions. I reflect on the progression of vision and technology, discussing how initial ideas develop into intellectual property and the role of technology in enhancing human capabilities. We explore resistance to change with technological advancements, using examples like the shift from gasoline to electric vehicles and how people adapt technology to maintain comfort. The episode examines the distinction between authentic human experiences and artificial replication, emphasizing the irreplaceable value of genuine human connections and interactions. We share personal anecdotes about how technology has replaced routine tasks, discussing the convenience of services like grocery delivery and automated car washes, and pondering future technological advancements. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Mr Jackson, I hope you're well, I am. Dan: I'm much better than I was last weekend. I was, yeah, out of it. I mean, really I had like a cold and my back was in spasm. It was not good. So I'm a nice recovery week and I'm on the mend. How was your adventures in Arizona? Are you still in Arizona? Dean: now. No, I got back around 11 o'clock last night to Toronto. That has about a foot of snow. Dan: I saw that. Dean: Yeah, and it's still snowing, it's still coming down. So we really had nothing for November, december, january, but February seems to be the winter. It's really snowing, I mean it's continuous, it's not heavy snow, but it's just constant, and I kind of like it. And we got home last night and the limousine driver who driveway and he said, oh, I hope we can get up to your driveway and he, he hadn't uh, he didn't have previous he didn't have previous experience. He says oh my golly, you have heated driveways. And I said, yeah, uh, of course you know we've got to be good to our got to be, good to our limousine drivers. Dan: You know we have to you know, set a standard for driver friendliness and anyway, so Did he tell you, listen, if you wanted to really be good, you'd buy the house behind you so we could keep the driveway going all the way through. Dean: Yeah, somebody else did and they fixed it up, so I think that's out of the future. That's out of the. You know that's not going to happen. You can't add that to the compound, right? Yeah, so anyway, regarding Arizona, it was great. We were there for two and a half weeks so we had Richard Rossi's conference which was terrific, yeah, terrific. Richard does such a great job with this right. Dan: I mean, it's something that he's really doing it out of his own passionate curiosity himself. I think that's a good thing when you can make your own thing. I think that's a good thing when you can make your own. Dean: Then we did a week at Canyon Ranch in Tucson, which was really terrific and beautiful. I mean just gorgeous weather every day 75-ish. Got up to 80 a little bit, but absolutely clear. Not a cloud in the sky. For a week Didn't see a cloud in the night sky in Tucson. Dan: I was going to ask what's a day in the life at Canyon Ranch for you. Dean: I'll have a massage scheduled. You know you can go to 50 different things, but I don't. And you know, I read a lot while. I'm there I go for walks and know, did some gym work? and and then, yeah, just to take it really easy, you know I'm reading just a terrific set of British Navy stories from the novels. These are historic historically. They're all during the Napoleonic War, when Britain War, when Great Britain was fighting the French, and it follows. First of all, there's about 20 authors who write these terrific books, but the one I'm reading right now, andrew Wareham is his name and he follows a sea captain from when he becomes a midshipman. He becomes a midshipman. That's your first step in being an officer is a midshipman. But they start at nine and 10 years old. So they have nine and 10 year old boys on board ship, you know, and they lose a lot of them. You know because they're in. You know they're in action during the sea battles and you know they and they're foolish. You know 10, who who thinks? who thinks about danger when you're 10 years old, you know, but Trails him and he's about 25 now and he's a captain. He's a captain. So in 15 years he's become a captain and just terrific, just extraordinarily well-written books, but it's just about this one person. And then he goes up in terms of skill and responsibility and importance and he becomes rich doing it. Because if you captured a French ship, then you might be. Yeah, except for the gold. The gold had to go to the government. To the government. Dan: OK. Dean: You know the British government, but outside of that you could. You auctioned it off and the captain got a set share, and then everybody right down to the lowest seaman. So I went through about three of those in a week. Three, three now, wow yeah, and that was it. And then I came back and we had our free zone, and which worked out really worked out, really well. And you know you had arranged for a. Dan: I heard, you had arranged for a satellite launch while you were having the reception. Dean: Yeah, the rocket rocket, you know. I mean mean the rocket maker is very busy these days rearranging the government, you know. And uh so yeah, I thought it was kind of him to just take a little bit of time out and send a rocket up during our reception. I thought, you know, you know kind of a nice touch, you know, and yeah, it went really well and the, you know it's mostly parties. You know kind of a nice touch, you know, and yeah, it went really well and the you know it's mostly parties. You know our summit I mean if you, if you take this, if you take the two parties and put them together, they're equal to the amount of time we're doing in the conference and then the conference has lots of breaks, so yeah, I think it was more partying actually it's print seven, that's yeah, I mean that's the great uh seven print enjoy life and have a good time, you know right, right, right and then we uh took a day, and then we moved over to joe, which was joe yeah it's genius. Yeah, joe is such a great and the new offices look really good. Dan: I was just going to say I saw Richard Miller told me about the big 110-inch televisions or screens on the thing. That makes a big difference. Dean: Well, the big thing he can comfortably put 100 people in now. Yeah. Because, he's knocked out walls. Dan: Yeah, I zoomed in a little bit on Friday and, yeah, looks like a nice turnout too. It looks like that group's really growing. Dean: Yeah, it seems, I guess about 40, you know about 40 people. Yeah, and some not there, so it's probably total numbers is a bit higher. And yeah, and yeah, and yeah. We had one very impressive speaker. The senior editor for Epoch Times was there. Dan: Epoch Times. I saw that yeah. Dean: Yeah, in the afternoon and I didn't really know the background to this story. You know the background to the public. Yeah, and I had lunch sitting next to him, a very interesting person, you know, and he's very connected to a lot of people in the new administration Trump administration so he was talking about all the different things that he was doing. Dan: And I saw that Robert Kennedy was confirmed since last we spoke for the yeah and he's good friends with him. Dean: The editor is good friends with him. Dan: Yeah. Dean: And the next one is the FBI director, and he's good friends with him, so anyway, yeah, and Jeff Hayes was there and Jeff was just. I mean because Jeff had a major you know he had a major role in getting Robert Kennedy to the point where he could be and but I'm enjoying the. For the first time in US history, the government is being audited, mr Musk. Dan: I knew I saw it was very interesting. I saw something that there was somebody posted up a video from the 90s when Clinton and Gore launched a. There was something it was called rego, I think, but reinventing government operations or something, and it was mirroring all the things that they're saying about Doge, about the finding inefficiency and finding looking out all those things. So it was really interesting. They were showing the parallels of what was actually, you know, in 90, you know mid nineties, when Clinton and Gore were in yeah, yeah. Dean: Well, they didn't have the. I mean, it would have been an impossible task in the 1990s, but not so today, because of the guy, because they could just go in and they can identify every single check. That's written, the complete history, you know, and everything. They couldn't do that back in the 90s, you know Right. And probably they weren't the right party to be doing it either. Dan: So, anyway. Dean: no, I find it very intriguing and you can tell by the response of the Democrats that there's some stuff there. Dan: There's some there. Dean: There's some there there I think that I was just reading that. So far that you know they're they're, they're estimating that it's at least a trillion of found money. Dan: In other words, that when they go through, they'll find a trillion is a big, you know. Dean: I find that an impressive amount of money actually. Dan: Yeah, I find that an impressive amount of money. Yeah, that's exactly right, yeah yeah, yeah. Dean: So yeah, it's a big change. I think you know, I, I think that a lot of people who hate trump are probably wishing that he had actually won in 2020 you know, had to live with kovid for you know two and a half, three years, because nobody, almost no government, that was in charge. When COVID two years, I guess two and a half years of COVID. They've just been thrown out all around the world. Whoever the government was got thrown out, and so if Trump had won in 2020, he'd be out now and they'd probably be the Democrats and everything like that and they probably wouldn't have Elon Musk taking a look at government spending. Dan: What's the buzz in Canada now with their impending 51st? Yeah, it's nothing. Dean: We're in limbo. We're just in limbo because you know, the government isn't sitting and they're in the middle of a leadership race to replace Trudeau, and that won't happen until March 9th. Dan: Governor Trudeau Did you hear Donald Trump Government Trudeau. Dean: The state of Canada. Dan: Yeah, Trudeau keeps calling him Governor Trudeau. It's so disrespectful it's ridiculous. Dean: Yeah, the Gulf of America and the state of Canada. That's big news, since the last time we spoke right. Dan: We've had big changes. We had Governor. Trudeau and the Gulf of America. It's officially changed on the Google Maps now. Dean: Yeah, apple too. Apple changed over to the Gulf of America, and so did Chevron. In its annual report it talked about all of its deep water drilling in the Gulf of America. Yeah, it's interesting how things get named, anyway, I don't know. There wasn't any active government that called it the Gulf of Mexico. It was just the first map makers, whoever they were, yeah. They just said well, yeah, we call this the Gulf of Mexico and it's a done deal, deal. And so my sense is you know, if the you know if Google changes the name. That's an important support for the change. Dan: Yeah, yeah, absolutely, I mean, it's so funny. I wonder how long now it'll take for the street names to change to. Dean: Well, they're changing, you know and they're, yeah, and they're changing the military bases. You know they had all these military bases in the. Us that were named after people who you know were deemed racist or deemed, you know, not proper that this person's name should be. So one administration changes them, but the next administration comes back and changes them all back to the original and Mount McKinley I always liked Mount McKinley and then they changed to Mount Denali. Oh, is that right I didn't know that, and now it's changed back to Mount McKinley. Okay, so Mount McKinley is the tallest North American mountain tallest mountain in. North America. So anyway, it's really good. I've been toying with the book title. Dan: It's not the book. Dean: I'm writing right now, but the title of the book is Technology is Trying Very Hard to Keep Up with Us, okay, Technology is trying really hard to keep up. Yeah, because people, I think, have bought into it that we're the ones who are trying to keep up with technology. Dan: Right. Dean: And I think it creates a lot of stress. I think we're trying to keep up with something that we don't understand, and I think that's a very stressful, I think that's a very stressful attitude. And I just tested it out at Genius Network. And I just said what would you think about this? That technology is trying very hard to keep up with us. And they said, wow, wow. What do you mean? Well, you know, because I said first of all it's inferior. I said first of all it's inferior. Technology is inferior because the objective of so many of the researchers in technology is that we'll now have technology that's as smart as humans. So, right off the bat, the premise of that is that technology isn't as smart as humans. Okay, so why would we be trying to be keeping up with something that's not as smart as us? That's true, yeah, but just from a standpoint. I think, probably, that you wouldn't be able to measure what's happening one way or the other. One way or the other, you really wouldn't be able to measure them, you know. I mean, if you take an individual human being, just one person, and you look at that person's brain, that brain is the most complex in the world. The human brain has more connections than anything else in the world. So in the universe not in the world, but in the universe it's the most complex, that's just one individual and then humans can communicate with each other. So it's you know. Say you have 10 human brains, that's 10 times the most complex thing in the world and they're doing all sorts of things. So my sense is that's the superior thing that you know, the human brain and individual human is superior. So I think the makers of technology are trying to keep up with what the human brain is doing, but it's really hard. Dan: it's really hard yeah, this is I mean. Yeah, I wonder. I just upgraded my chat gT membership. Now I just upgraded to the $200, $200, $200 a month. Dean: Yeah, and apparently they're feeding you, dean, they're dating his. First it's $2. First it's free. Dan: That's how they get you. Dean: Dan, that's $20 a month. Now it's $200. Right, and you're deeper and deeper into it. Then they're going to say it's $500 a month, yeah, and then you're into the thousands. Dan: And that's how they get you. That's what they do, that's how they get you yeah. Dean: You can't back out of it. You can't back out of GPT. Yeah, once you're in, you're in. Dan: So I need gpt. Yeah, my cheer hand, you're in, so I need the. So now, from what I understand, I got it and then I've been, you know, recovering here the last uh, couple of weeks or I was on my, had my event and and recovery here, so I haven't really spent the time to go deep in it. But from what I understand now they can do projects for you Like it. Can you know, I just did some test things Like can you, you know, see what massage times are available at Hand and Stone for me for today, and it goes to the website and logs it can book for you if you wanted it, you know. So I really I see now like the way forward, it's really just a world of truly just being able to articulate what you want is a big thing and you know you had 25 years of just practicing. What do you want, you know, in your daily practice. Dean: Journaling You're journaling. Dan: Yeah, and now we're truly like I think this is one step closer to just being able to like articulate what you want and it can happen. I mean, I see it now on, you know, with the combination of the things that are doing, like Claude. A lot of people are using Claude for, like creating websites and apps and you know, functional things and then using. Now, I think, with ChatGPT, combined with those capabilities, that's really what the $200 a month, one kind of gets you is the ability for you to set it on a task and then come back. It'll still work on it while not. It felt like before, for $20 a month, charlotte would do whatever you wanted her to do right in real time while you're there, but you couldn't assign it a task that is going to be done while you're not there. So, man, it's pretty amazing times what we're coming into here being a visionary is a big thing. Dean: Yeah, my, I'm just. You know, I'm really. I just work with one, one tool and see, how much? I can get out of it and you know, perplexity is doing a good job of giving me alternative copy copy ideas, and the thing is that I've got so many thinking tools of my own that I've created over my last that the tools I think are really custom designed for how I go about things, okay, and and so see for me to kind of learn this new stuff in the time that I would be learning something new I'd be creating three or four new. I'd be creating three or four new tools yeah which are useful in the program. So there's an immediate payoff in the program and then they have IP value as we're discovering they have. IP value, so I'm not seeing the return on investment yet. I mean, I have team members who can do the programs and they're investigating them all the time and they're getting better. So I can just chat with, I can just send them a fast filter or something like that. That's a tool, fast filter, and then they go and they execute it and I haven't spent any time learning it and so I'm really interested in listening to you, because you're I would suspect that you're making advances every day, right, probably something new every day. Dan: I'm starting to see I don't know whether I've shared with you the we're kind of putting some legs on the VCR formula, kind of putting some. You're digging a little deeper into how to really define those what vision, what capabilities, what reach, how to think about them. And what I looked at with vision is thinking of it as a progression from the levels of vision that you can have. So you can start out with the ability to create a hypothesis or have an idea about something. I think that if you did this, that would be a good thing, right, this is what you, we should do, or this is where I think we should go with this. That's one level. Then, from that, then the next level up is that you have proven. That is right, that's a good idea, right. So you've set up an experiment, you've taken some action on that idea. You've gotten some feedback that, yeah, that's good. It's almost like applying the scientific method in a way. Right, you create a hypothesis, you set up an experiment, you do it Now. Once you've got proof, then the next level up is to create a protocol for that. You could repeat the result that you were able to get one time. And once you've got that protocol, now you've got something that can be packaged and protected. Ip is the crown jewel of the vision column. Everything should be progressing to that peak of having IP. And once you have a piece of IP, once you have a protocol, an algorithm, a recipe you know engineer, whatever the thing is. Now it moves into your capability column that you have it now as something that you can package as a result for someone Right. So it's been. It's a really interesting thing. You can package as a result for someone right, so it's a really interesting thing. I think that progression of kind of you know feels in line with the make it up, make it real, make it recur kind of progression as well. Dean: Yeah. Now here's a question and it's kind of related to this. Technology is trying really hard to keep up that I started the podcast with this morning. If you looked at yourself, are you using technology so that you can be different or are you using technology so that you can be the same? That's a good question. Dan: I think I'm using technology so that, well, I don't know how to think about that. I would say am I using technology so that I can be different? I can't think of an example to say either way. I mean I'm using technology in many cases to do what I would do if I could count on me to do it. You know, I think that's a thing that you know technology is able to do the things that I would do. And I take technology as you know, I have a broad definition of technology. Right, like a shovel would be a technology too. Right, any kind of tool to do what you would do in an enhanced kind of way, like if your thing is you're trying to dig a swimming pool, you know you do it by hand, scoop out all the dirt. But somebody realized, hey, if we make a shovel that is similar but bigger, it could scoop that out. And then if we make a, a backhoe, that can you know, do that's a thing so it's doing? I think the answer is probably all technology is to do the same faster and bigger yeah, I just just wonder that the most dominant force in people's life is really their habits, and what I feel is there's a set of habits that work. Dean: you know, you like them and they work. And secondly, you like doing them, you like doing them but you're being asked to change. You know, there's sort of this message, message, a narrative you're going to have to change and you're going to have to change. And I'm wondering if, at a certain stage, people reach a point where they say, okay, I'll use technology, but not to change the way you want me to change, but to stay the way I am. Dan: That's interesting but to stay the way I am. That's interesting. Yeah, I mean, there's probably good arguments for both sides, right? I think technology ultimately in its bestest to be able to replace your time and effort on doing something to make it easier to do what you need to do. I think about Excel, for instance, using Excel spreadsheets as a way of being able to sort and organize and compute data back like to the earliest technologies you know. Dean: Yeah, well, I just feel that you know. I mean, first of all, very few people are. I would start with myself by saying that I've probably got a massive habit system. You know, that's basically repeats who I am every day, like 90 and it's comfortable. You know it's comfortable you know, and I do it, and therefore, if I am asked to be more productive or I'm asked to be creative, I will only use those technologies that allow me to be productive in a way that my daily habits can stay the same. I don't really want to be disrupted. Right, yeah, I can see this, you know, with. One of the problems with EVs is that people are really used to going to the gas station. They've got a whole routine and it isn't just pumping gas, they go in, you know, they go in, they buy some things, you know, and everything like that, and it's really a short period of time. I mean, if you wanted to fill up your car, you know, and I was used to it because we had a, you know, in our trip we had a Beamer, we had the big Beamer. They have a X7 now. Dan: The X5 was always. Dean: Now they have an X7. And, the thing you know, we had it for two and a half weeks, so about three or four days before we left. We just topped it up, you know, we just I put enough gas in that would get us back to the airport you know, when we did it and you know it was like four minutes. You know it's like four minutes, yeah, where you know if you're I mean if you do your charging up overnight, there's no problem to it. You know, if you're I mean if you do your charging up overnight, there's no problem to it, you know there's no problem charging up, but if you're out on a trip and you're getting short on you know, on power, then it's a lot, you know where is it? Dean: Yeah, yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: I find that same thing Like so I, you know net. I have a charger at my house for my Tesla. And so I just plug it in and I never. I don't miss. Well, I never went to the. I never went to the gas station. Anyway, I would have Courtney. You know my assistant would always go. That was one of the things that she would do. But I think about, you know, the things that Courtney would do 10 years ago, like getting gas in my car, taking to the car wash all of that stuff, going to the grocery store, going to restaurants to pick up stuff or to take things to the mail, all of the things that were. You know. A lot of that is now replaced with technology, in that there's no need to, I don't need to go to the gas station. My car is always charged and always ready. We have there's a there's this big now push of these super convenient car wash things. So for $32 a month you join this. For $32 a month you have unlimited car washes and there's one right on the way to or the way home from, honeycomb, the breakfast place that I go to every day. So I can just literally swing in. You don't even, you don't get out of your car, you just drive through. It's got the. It recognizes your barcode thing. You drive right through and off you go, and so I always have a super clean car. I use Instacart for the grocery delivery and Uber Eats and Seamless and, like you think, 10 years ago one of the things that we had Courtney do was go to. It's funny you say this right, but technology keeping up with us, this would fit in that category that there was no delivery service for food aside from pizza and Chinese food. That's what you could get delivered at your house or office, right. So we had Courtney go to every restaurant, like all of our favorite restaurants. She went to every restaurant and got the takeout menu, two copies of it, one. So we had a binder, one at the house and one at the office that had the menus of every restaurant and now, all of a sudden, every restaurant was delivery, because we would place the order and then Courtney would go and get it and bring it. Dean: You know. Dan: And so that's what technology kind of replaced 90% of what Courtney was doing. You know, it's really interesting to to think. You know, pretty simple, have the, remember on Star Trek they had the replicators where they would you know? Just you tell the thing what you want and it would make the food. Dean: We're not that far off probably from that. Well, where do you see that? I don't see that at all. Dan: No, I'm saying on in you're seeing now I don't know if you've ever seen these robotic kitchens that are kitchen robots that you know can make anything that you want, and I think it's very interesting that you look at. Ai will be able to assess your inventory in your fridge and your robots will keep the ingredients stocked and your AI robot chef will be able to make whatever you want. I mean basically anything. Any packaged protocol, like for recipes or anything that you know how to do, is now eligible for someone else to do it, you know, and someone else being a technology, a robot, to be able to do it, you know, and someone else being a technology, a robot, to be able to do it. But there's no, you still have to be able to. There's still the human element of things. I had a really interesting experience just yesterday is I send out, you know, three emails a week to our subscribers, you know, to all my on my list of entrepreneurs, and you know the emails, for several years, have been derivative of my podcasts. Right, like so they. I would talk the podcast and then we would get those transcribed and then I had a writer who would take the transcript and identify you know two or three or four key points that we talked about in the podcast and create emails. You know three to 500 word emails based on those in my voice and I use air quotes in my voice because it really was my words Cause I spoke them on the podcast but she was, you know, compiling and putting them all together and they you know, I've had. I've got a lot of them and we've been, you know, since COVID, kind of in syndication with them, where they're on a three-year rotation, kind of thing, you know. So I haven't had to write new emails, but occasionally I will intersperse them in. And so the other day, yesterday, I sent out an email that I wrote 100% and it was describing the advantages of time travel and I was talking about how, in lead generation situations, you know, I mean, if I could say to people, let's say, you own a real estate company and we had the ability to time travel and we could go back two years from today and we're going to leave at midnight, but before we leave you can go to the MLS and you can print off a list of every house that sold in the last two years. So we can beam back two years armed with a list of every person that sold their house in the last two years and all you would need to do over that period of time is just concentrate on building a relationship with those people, because that's what you're looking for Right, on building a relationship with those people, because that's what you're looking for, right. And so I told that whole story and then said, you know, since and it reminds me, dan, of your it's certainty and uncertainty, right, like if you had certainty that these are the people that are going to sell their house, that you would be, you would have a different approach to your engagement with them, but it wouldn't change the fact that, as valuable as you think this list is, armed with this list of everybody that's going to sell their house, that sold their house in the last two years, you'd still have to go through the last two years in real time, and the people who sold their house, you know, teen months later, were you still had to wait 18 months for them to mature. And I thought, you know, I said that the thing that, since we can't time travel backwards, the best thing we could do is plant a time capsule and start generating leads of people who are going to sell their house in the next 100 weeks. And if you had that level of certainty around it, that would be a big thing, right? So I wrote that email and I talked about the thing. But I've gotten five or six replies to the emails saying I read a lot of your emails. In my opinion, this is the best one that you've written, or what an amazing insight, or this really resonated with me, but it was something that has like 100% of me in it, as opposed to written as a derivative of something I said. So it's not, I think, that human element. I don't know whether it's the energy or whatever. Dean: Yeah, it's kind of interesting there. I think what I'm going to say relates to what you're saying, right? Dan: now. Dean: There was just a YouTube. It was YouTube and it was. Can you tell if it's Bach or not? Dan: So what they did is they had an actual recording of Bach. Dean: Who wrote it, you know? And then they did an AI version of like Bach. And then they did an AI version of like Bach. And then they asked you to listen to both and say which one was Bach and which one was the AI. And there were six of the six. They gave six samples and I got it right six times in a row. Dan: Oh, wow. Dean: And what I was saying is that there's something that the human being has added which is not. It's actually is, and there's a big difference between is and kind of like, and it seems to me that's what you're saying here. Dan: Yeah. Dean: That there's something. It's kind of like Dean Jackson or is. Dean Jackson, and my sense is I think the gulf between those two is permanent. I agree 100%. Dan: That's the, you know. There's Jerry Spence, the attorney. He wrote a great book called how to Argue and Win Every Time. Dean: And one of the things that he said is when we're communicating. Dan: One of the things that he said is when we're communicating, one of the things that the receiver, what we're doing as the receiver of communication, is, we have all these invisible psychic tentacles that are out measuring and testing and looking for authenticity of it, and they can detect what he calls the thin clank of the counterfeit. Yes, and that's an interesting thing, right? What was it to you in Is it Bach that made you able to pick it out? Can you discern what the difference was. Dean: I think it was an emotional thing that basically I was moved by the back one, and I was just intrigued by the other one that's interesting right one of them was one of them was emotional, but the other one was. You know, I was me saying is it? You know, I, I don, I don't think so, I don't think it is when. With the first one, it didn't take long. There was just, you know, it was maybe five or six bars and I said, yeah, I think that's Bach, it's the twinkle in the eye, right. Dan: That's kind of the thing that is. Yeah, I get it. I think we're onto something with that. Dean: Yeah, and. I think it's uniqueness. In other words, here's my feeling is that humans develop new capabilities to deal with technology. I think that our brains are actually transforming as we're surrounded more and more with technology. And it has to do with what's valuable and what's not valuable and anything that's tech, we immediately say, oh, that doesn't really have any value because it's cheap, it's really cheap in other words, it was the technology was created to lower the cost of something. I mean that's really you know, I mean if it were, I mean mean, if it does what it's supposed to do, it lowers the cost, and there's various costs. There's cost of concentration, there's the cost of time, there's the cost of energy, there's the cost of money and everything else. And so technology will lower the cost in those areas and doing it in those areas and doing it. But what I find is that what we really treasure in life, the things that have a higher cost, that have a higher cost, it takes more of our effort takes more of our time. It takes you know more of our money, and in person you know. In person is always going to cost more than automatic or digital. So, my sense is, as time goes along, we adjust our you know the cost benefit analysis of the experience. Dan: Okay. Dean: And think about the six who wrote back to you on it. How much their cost was it really cost them to listen to the real thing? Okay because, first of all, they were listening and they were moved. They couldn't be doing something else when they were being moved by your message. Okay, and then they took time out. They took time out to actually construct a response to you. So the cost I mean we use cost as a bad word you know there's a high cost, or anything right yeah, but it's actually investment, the investment that the things where we're required to invest more are actually more valuable. Dan: I agree with you, yeah, yeah. So I think that's part of this, that's part of this balance, then, with the technologies, using the technology. I mean, you know, how do you get that? Dean: Yeah, that level about things that we're fully engaged with, that are more valuable than things that are just done for us in an instant. I don't have the answer to that, it's just an observation. Dan: No, I don't either. You're right, but the fact is that a lot of these things are, you know, no matter what the advancements happen in technology, in some of these ways, it's the fact is that life moves at the speed of reality, right, which is, you know, 60 seconds per minute. You know, I mean, that's really the, that's really the thing, and that those our attention is engaged for 100 of those minutes that we have, and when it's engaged in something, it's not engaged in something else, and when I think what that's what you're saying, is that you've gotten the authentic, like core, you know, full engagement. And it's an interesting thing that I think what AI is doing for bulk things, for people is it's allowing them to not have to pay attention to things they don't have to. It's really it allows everybody to get the cliff notes or something. They don't have to read Hamlet, they don't have to read Macbeth, they can scan the cliff notes of something. They don't have to read Hamlet, they don't have to read Macbeth, they can scan the cliff notes of Macbeth. But that's not the same experience of seeing. Dean: No, there's something about engagement, I think, the word we'll use as our segue word, namely to pick it up next time. Dan: I think it is. Dean: There's a real pleasure of being fully engaged. Dan: I think that's something that is cause this is an interesting thing. I'm gonna throw a couple of things out that we can marinate on for next time, because we're just having this conversation about Michelelin star restaurant experiences that I? Dean: I've always been fascinated by that the young chef who turned down uh three-star rating no he said I don't want to be rated, I don't want to have a michelin. Well, and people, people say well, of course you want a Michelin rating. He says no, he says it does weird things with what I'm supposed to be and what a restaurant is supposed to be. And he said I noticed the type of customers that came in were different type of customers. So he said I don't want to be listed anymore as Michelin. That's interesting. Dan: But it's fascinating. That is an only. It's a one-off original experience provided by a group of passionate people. You know doing something only in the moment. There's no leverage. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And I thought about the same thing like a, you know, like a performance of live theater in a live in an environment is a one-off, original experience and I think that's why people who love theater and love doing theater actors, I I mean, who love performing in theaters because of that authentic and immediate back that your engagement really brings, that's very live live and in person live exactly. Dean: Yeah, it's interesting, but my sense is that just to. Yeah, exactly, you're being pressured to to change the sameness. You'll look for a technology that frees up the time again so that you can enjoy your sameness. Dan: I don't know if I'm getting that across really. No, I understand, but it's a bit like it's a bit. Dean: It's a bit like a gyroscope. You want to stay on the true path when you're flying and therefore, you need more and more technology. I was noticing we came back in the 787, which is a marvelous airplane. For all of Boeing's troubles, the 787 is not one of them, and you know, it's just that. So we took off, you know, we flew from Phoenix to Toronto and just as we got near the, within about 30 minutes of landing in Toronto, there was just a little bump and the pilot immediately came out and says you know, we were in a little bit of a turbulence zone, but it won't last. In about a minute we'll be out of it and then, a minute later, there was no turbulence, it was just about a minute. And it wasn't real turbulence, it was just a little you know that. I noticed it and they have a really unique technology that they've introduced that can transform turbulence into smoothness. You know that's what I'm interpreting that they do, but for the whole flight, you know, I didn't even remember us taking off and when we landed I said, did we land? Yeah, and she said yeah, bev says we landed, and I said, wow, yeah, it's just really remarkable. But there's millions and millions of little tech bots that are adjusting it so that the sameness you like, which is namely not turbulence, is maintained. And I think that we do this on a personal level. I think we do this on an individual level. We have a smooth flight, we have an experience of what a smooth flight is for us and if there's any interruption of that, we want something that takes away the interruption so we can get back to the feeling that it's a smooth flight. Dan: Yeah agreed. Well, I think we're onto something here. Dean: I think we are yeah, okay. Dan:Changing to stay the same. Dean: Changing to stay the same yeah all righty. Dan: Constantly changing, to stay the same, that's a good book title right there? 0:48:32 - Dean: Oh yeah, all right there. Oh yeah, all righty, I like that Okay. Thanks, Dan. Dan: Okay now next week, I know you're gone next week we're on our way to Nashville for our upgrade, our lube job, whatever. Uh-huh, so two weeks, okay two weeks. Okay, bye. 0:48:52 - Dean: Thanks, Dan Bye.

In this episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, we explore how government assets could reshape public spending and economic growth. The discussion stems from Thomas Sowell's analysis of U.S. government land value. It extends to real-world examples of public-private partnerships, including Toronto's LCBO real estate deals and Chicago's parking meter agreement with a Saudi entity. Dan and I delve into the relationship between constitutional rights and entrepreneurship, drawing from my upcoming book. The American Bill of Rights creates unique conditions that foster business innovation and self-initiative, offering an interesting contrast to Canada's legal framework. This comparison opens up a broader discussion about judicial appointments and the role of government in supporting individual potential. The conversation shifts to the transformative impact of AI on content creation and decision-making. I share my experience with tools like Perplexity and Notebook LM, which are changing how we gather information and refine our writing. Integrating AI into daily workflows highlights the significant changes we can expect over the next quarter century. Looking ahead, We reflect on future podcast topics and the lessons learned from blending traditional insights with AI capabilities. This combination offers new perspectives on personal development and professional growth, suggesting exciting possibilities for how we'll work and create in the years ahead. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS We delve into the market value of U.S. government-owned land, discussing Thomas Sowell's article and the potential benefits of selling such land to alleviate government spending. Our conversation covers various government and private sector interactions, including Toronto's LCBO real estate deal and Chicago's parking meter agreement with a Saudi-owned company. We explore Macquarie's business model in Australia, focusing on their ownership of airports and toll roads, and consider the efficiency of underutilized government buildings in Washington D.C. The Bill of Rights plays a crucial role in fostering entrepreneurship in the U.S., and I discuss insights from my upcoming book on how these constitutional liberties encourage self-initiative and capitalism. We compare the judicial appointment processes in the U.S. and Canada, highlighting the differences in how each country's legal system impacts entrepreneurship and individual freedoms. The importance of creating patentable processes and legal ownership of capabilities is discussed, along with the idea that true leadership involves developing new capabilities. Our collaborative book project "Casting, Not Hiring" is structured like a theatrical play, with a focus on the innovative 4x4 casting tool, drawing parallels between theater and entrepreneurship. AI's transformative power in creative processes is highlighted, with tools like Perplexity and Notebook LM enhancing convenience and refining writing techniques. We reflect on the long-term impact of AI on writing and creativity, and consider its implications for future podcast episodes and personal and professional growth. Our discussion on constitutional rights touches on how they shape the future of entrepreneurship, drawing contrasts between the U.S. and Canadian approaches to law and governance. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan. Dan: Yes indeed. I beat you by 10 seconds. Dean: I beat you by 10 seconds. Dan: Yeah, yeah. Dean: Well, there you go. That's a good way to end the year, right there. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Not that it's a contest. Dan: I was looking at an interesting article this morning from yesterday's Wall Street Journal by Thomas Sowell. I don't know if you know Thomas Sowell. No, yeah, he's probably the foremost conservative thinker in the United States. Okay, I think he's 90-ish, sort of around 90. He's been a professor at many universities and started off in his teenage years as a Marxist, as a lot of teenagers do, and before they learn how to count and and before they learn math the moment you learn math, you can't be a Marxist anymore and and anyway he writes and he just said how much all the land that the US government owns in the 50 states is equal to 1.4 trillion dollars. If you put a market value on it, it's 1.4 trillion dollars. I bet that's true wow and the problem is it costs them about that much money to maintain it, most of it for no reason at all. And he was just suggesting that, if Elon and Vivek are looking for a place to get some money and also stop spending, start with the property that the US government owns and sell it off. Dean: That's interesting I'm often Two things. Dan: Two things they get money coming in, yeah. And the other thing is they don't spend money maintaining it. Yeah, but it's 20, 25% of the land area of the US is actually owned, I guess owned, controlled by the US government. And you know there was a neat trick that was done here in Toronto and I don't think you'd be aware of it but the LCBO, liquor Control Board of Ontario. So in Ontario all the liquor is controlled by the government. The government is actually the LCBO is the largest importer of alcoholic beverages in the world. Dean: Wow. Dan: Nobody controls the amount of liquor well, and I. I just wonder if that's one of the reasons why you moved to Florida to get away from the government. Dean: Control of liquor they're a single payer, a single pay system. Dan: I just wondered if yeah, I just wondered if that on your list of besides nicer weather. Dean: I thought maybe you know being in control of your own liquor. I always found it funny that you could. You know you can buy alcohol and beer in 7-Eleven. Dan: I always thought that was interesting right. Dean: Just pick up a little traveler to go, you know when you're getting your gas and that six-pack yeah. Dan: So, anyway, they had their headquarters, which was right down on Lakeshore, down in the, I would say, sort of Jarvis area, if you think of Jarvis and Lakeshore, down in the I would say sort of Jarvis area, if you think. Dean: Jarvis and. Dan: Lakeshore and maybe a little bit further west. But they took up a whole block there and they traded with a developer and what they did they said you can have our block with the building on it. You have to preserve part of it because it's a historical building. I mean, you can gut it and you can, you know, build, but yeah, there's a facade that we want you to keep because it's historic and and what we want you to do is and this developer already had a block adjacent to the LCBO property and they said we want a new headquarters, so we'll give you the block If you and your skyscraper it's a huge skyscraper. We want this much space in it for free. And they made a trade and the developer went for it. Dean: And I bet. Dan: That's an interesting kind of deal. That's an interesting kind of deal where government yeah, yeah and, but somebody was telling me it was really funny. I'm trying to think where it was. Where were we, where were we? I'm just trying to think where we weren't in. We weren't in Toronto, it'll come to me. We were in Chicago. So Chicago, the parking meters are all owned by Saudi Arabia. Dean: Right. Dan: Yeah, or a company that's owned by Saudi Arabia. Let me think One of the many princes and they paid the city of Chicago flat check. They paid him $1.5 billion for all the parking meters in Chicago and Chicago, you know, has been in financial trouble forever. So one and a half billion, one and a half billion dollars, but they make 400 million a year for the next 50 years. Oh, wow. Dean: Yeah, that's pretty wild. Dan: I think that was a bad deal, I think that was a bad deal. Yeah, that's amazing, you got to know your math. Dean: Well, I know there's a company in Australia called Macquarie and they own airports and toll roads primarily, ports and toll roads primarily. And that's really that's what it is right is they have long-term government contracts where they uh, you know they own the assets and the government leases them from them, or they get the right, they build the, they build the toll road and they get the money for the toll. They can operate it as a for-profit venture. Really kind of interesting. Dan: It brings up an interesting scenario which I think that Trump is thinking about, plus Elon and Vivek is thinking about plus Elon and Vivek, that so many of the buildings in Washington DC the government buildings, except for the one percent of workers who actually show up for work every day are virtually, are virtually empty, and so so there's some, it's almost like they need a VCR audit. Dean: So it's almost like they need a VCR audit. I mean, that's really what it is. All these things are underutilized capabilities and capacity, you know that's really that's sort of a big thing. Dan: But I think it occurred to me that bureaucracy period. It occurred to me that bureaucracy period this would be corporate bureaucracy, government bureaucracy. Those are the two big ones. But then many other kinds of organizations that are long-term organizations, that have become like big foundations, are probably just pure bureaucracy. You know, harvard University is probably just a big bureaucracy. They have an endowment of $60 billion, their endowment, and they have to spend 5% of that every year. That's the requirement under charity laws that you have to spend 5% of that every year. That's the requirement under charity laws that you have to spend 5% and on that basis every Harvard student probably the entire university wouldn't have to charge anything. Dean: That's interesting. I had a friend, a neighbor, who did something similarly put his um, I put sold the company and put, I think, 50 million dollars in. I think it was called the charitable remainder trust where the, the 50 million went into the trust and he as the uh, whatever you know administrator or whoever the the beneficiary gets of the trust is gets five percent a year of uh yeah, of the um the trust and that's his retirement income. I guess I understand. Dan: I understand income. I don't understand retirement income right exactly well for him it is kind of retirement income. Dean: He just plays golf. Exactly Well, for him it is kind of retirement. Yeah yeah, he just plays golf, yeah. Dan: Yeah, he's sort of in the departure lounge. He's on the way to the departure lounge. I think the moment you retire or think about retirement, the parts go back to the universe, I think that's actually I'm, I'm, it's partially. Dean: Uh, he does angel investing, uh, so that's yeah, so he's still probably probably on boards yeah, but I don't consider that? Dan: yeah, I don't really consider that. On entrepreneurism no you know, I don't think you're creating anything new, right? Yeah, it's very interesting. I'm writing, I just am outlining this morning my book for the quarter. So the book I'm just finishing, which is called Growing Great Leadership, will go to the press February 1st. Dean: Nice. Dan: So we're just putting the finishing touches on. We've got two sections and then some you know artwork packaging to do and then it probably goes off to the printer around the 20th of January. It takes about five weeks for them to turn it around. But the next one is very interesting. It's called the Bill of Rights Economy. So this relates and refers to the US Constitution. And in the first paragraph of the Constitution. It says that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, so it's supreme over everything in the United States. It's supreme over the presidency, it's supreme over Congress, it's supreme over the Supreme Court, and so that strikes me as a big deal, would you say? I'd say yes, yeah, yeah, and. But the real heart of the Constitution, what really gives it teeth, are the first 10 amendments, and which are called the Bill of Rights, so it's one through 10. First one speech, second one guns. And then they have commerce and things related to your legal rights. And what I've done is I've looked into it and I've looked at those first 10 amendments, and it strikes me that the reason why the US is an entrepreneurial country is specifically because of those first 10 amendments, that it gives a maximum amount of freedom to self-initiative, to people who want to go out and do something on their own, start something and everything else. First 10 amendments so what. I'm doing is I'm analyzing five freedoms and advantages that are given to entrepreneurs from each of the 10. There will be 50 advantages. So that's what my next book is about, and my sense is that those entrepreneurs who are not clear-minded about capitalism would have to do one of two things if they read the next book. They'll either have to get rid of their socialist thoughts or they'll have to stop being an entrepreneur. Dean: That's interesting. You know this whole. I love things like that when you're anchoring them to you know historical things. Dan: I don't know if I can name. I don't know if I can. Well, you can name the first one. It's the right of speech and assembly. Dean: Yeah speech, and then the second is to bear arms Gun ownership, gun ownership yeah. Yeah. Dan: And it goes on. I'll have to get the list out and go down there, but that's what holds the country together and you know it's a very brief document. It's about 5,000 words the entire document. It starts to finish about 5,000 words and you could easily read it in an hour. You could read the whole Constitution in an hour. Dean: It's a pocket companion. Yeah, yeah. Dan: I've seen them like little things that you put in your pocket and one of the things that strikes me about it is that in 1787, that's when it was adapted, and then it took two years to really form the government. 1789 is when washington, the he was elected in 1788 and the election he's sworn in as president 1789. If you typed it out with the original document, typed it out in you know typewriter paper and you know single space, it would be 23 pages, 23 pages. And today, if you were to type it out, it would be 27 pages. They've added four pages 200. Yeah, so in 235 years to 237 years it's pretty tight, yeah, and so and that's what keeps the country, the way the country is constantly growing and you know maximum amount of variety and you know all sorts of new things can happen is that they have this very, very simple supreme law right at the center, and there's no other country on the planet that has that that's a. Dean: That's pretty. Uh, what's the closest? I guess? What's the? I mean Canada must have. Dan: Canada's has been utterly taken away from that? Yeah, but that can be overridden at any time by the Supreme Court of Canada who by the way, is appointed by the prime minister. So you know, in the United States the Supreme Court justice is nominated yeah. No dominated, nominated by the president but approved by the Senate. So the other two branches have the say. So here it's the prime minister. The prime minister does it, and I was noticing the current Supreme Court Justice Wagner said that he doesn't see that there's much need anymore to be publishing what Canadian laws were before 1959. Dean: Oh really. Dan: Yeah, and that's the difference between Canada and the United States, because everything, almost every Supreme Court justice, they're going right back to the beginning and say what was the intent here of the people who put the Constitution together? Yeah, and that is the radical difference between the two parties in the. United States. So anyway, just tell you what I've been up to on my Christmas vacation. Dean: Oh, that's so funny. Well, we've been having some adventures over here. I came up with a subtitle for my Imagine If you Applied Yourself book and it was based on, you had said last time we talked right Like we were talking about this idea of your driving question and you thought I did. I don't know, yeah yeah you brought it, you said sort of how far can I go? Dan: yeah, well, that's not my driving question, that's no, no question, no yeah somebody else brought up the whole issue of driving question. You mentioned somebody yeah chad, chad did yeah, jenkins chad, jenkins chad jenkins right right right, yeah, uh. Dean: So it reminded me as soon as I got off. I had the words come uh. How far could you go if you did what you know? That could be the subtitle. Imagine if you applied yourself that's. Dan: That's kind of interesting how far could you? Maximize, if you maximize what you already know yeah I mean, that's really what holds. Dean: I think what holds people back more than not knowing what to do is not doing what they know to do. That that's I think, the, that's the uh, I think that's the driving thing. Dan: So they're held in play. They're held in place. You mean by? Dean: yeah, I think that's it that they're in about maybe I'm only looking at it through where do you see that anywhere in your life? Dan: I see everywhere in my life that I see it everywhere in my life, that's the whole thing, in my life. Dean: Right Is that that executive function? That's the definition of executive function disability, let's call it. You know, as Russell Barkley would say, that that's the thing is knowing, knowing what to do and just not not doing it. You know, not being able to do it. Dan: Yeah. And to the extent that you can solve that, well, that's I think that's the how far you can go here's a question Is there part of what you know that always moves you forward? Dean: Yeah, I guess there always is. Yeah, well then, you're not held, then you're not held. Dan: You just have to focus on what part of what you know is important. Dean: Yes, exactly, I think that's definitely right. Yeah, I thought that was an interesting. Dan: For example, I am absolutely convinced that for the foreseeable future, that if you a, a dollar is made in the united states and spent in canada, things are good. Dean: Things are good I think you're absolutely right, especially in the direction it's going right now. Dan: Yeah, it's up 10 cents in the last three months. 10 cents, one-tenth of a dollar. Dean: You know 10 cents. Dan: So it was $1.34 on October 1st and it's $1.44 right now. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And I don't see it changing as a matter of fact fact. You should see the literature up here. Since trump said maybe canada is just the 51st state, you should see this is the high topic of discussion in canada right now how is it? Dean: would we be? Dan: would we be better off? I mean there there's an a large percentage something like 15, 15% would prefer it. But you know he's Shark Tank person, kevin O'Leary, canadian. Dean: He's from Alberta. Dan: And he said that what they should do is just create a common economy, not politically so Canada is still really, really political. Not politically just economically, Politically. Well, it is already. I mean, to a certain extent it's crossed an enormous amount of trade, but still you have to stop at the border. Here there would be no stopping at the border and that if you were an American, you could just move to Canada and if you were a Canadian you could just move. Dean: Kind of like the EU was the thought of the European Union. Dan: Yeah, but that didn't really work because they all hated each other. Dean: They all hated each other. Dan: They've been nonstop at war for the last 3,000 years, and they speak different languages, but the US I mean. When Americans come for their strategic coach program, they come up here and they say it's just like the States and I said not quite, not quite. I said it's about on the clock. It's about the clock. It's about an hour off. You name the topic, Canadians will have a different point of view on whatever the topic is. But I'm not saying this is going to happen. I'm just saying that Trump, just saying one thing, has ignited a firestorm of discussion. And why is it that we're lagging so badly? And, of course, it looks now like as soon as Parliament comes back after the break, which is not until, think, the 25th of January, there will be a vote of confidence that the liberals lose, and then the governor general will say you have to form a new government, therefore we have to have an election. So probably we're looking middle of March, maybe middle of March. End of March there'll be a new government new prime minister and Harvard will have a new professor. Dean: Ah, there you go, I saw, that that's what happens. Dan: That's what happens to real bad liberal prime ministers. They become professors at Harvard or bad mayors in Toronto, david. Dean: Miller, he was the mayor here. Dan: I think he's a professor at Harvard. And there was one of the premiers, the liberal premier of Ontario. He's at Harvard. Oh wow, wow, wow. Anyway, yeah, or he'll go to Davos and he'll sit on the World Oversight Board. Dean: Oh boy, I just saw Peter Zion was talking about the Canadian, the lady who just quit. Dan: And I don't understand him at all, because I think she's an idiot. Dean: Okay, that's interesting because he was basically saying she may be the smartest person in Canada. Dan: I think she's an idiot. Okay, and she's the finance minister. So all the trouble we're in, at least some of it, has to be laid at her door. Interesting. Dean: Is Pierre Polyev still the frontrunner? Dan: Oh yeah, He'll be the prime minister, yeah. Dean: Smart guy. Dan: I was in personal conversation with him for a breakfast about six years ago Very smart. Oh wow, very smart. Dean: Yeah, seems sharp from Alberta. Dan: He's French. He's French speaking, but he's an orphan from an English family. Or it might have been a French mother. He's an orphan, but he was adopted into a French speaking family. So to be Alberta and be French speaking, that's kind of a unique combination. Yeah, very interesting. Yeah, but it's a hard country to hold together and, uh, you know, peter zion and many different podcasts just said that it's very, very hard to keep the country together. It takes all the strength of the federal government just to keep things unified. Dean: Well, because everybody wants to leave. Yeah, exactly, everybody looks at. I mean you really have, you've got the Maritimes in Quebec, ontario, the West, and then BC, the Prairies and then BC. Dan: So there's five and they don't have that much to do with each other. Each of them has more to do with the states that are south of them, quebec has enormous trade with New York. Ontario has trade with New York, with Pennsylvania, with Ohio, with Michigan, all the Great Lakes states, every one of them. Their trade is much more with the US that's south of them, and Alberta would be the most, because they trade all the way down to the Gulf of Mexico, because their pipelines go all the way down to have you ever been to Nunavut or Yukon? Dean: Have you ever been? Dan: Dan to Nunavut or Yukon I haven't been to. I've been to Great Slave Lake, which is in the what used to be called the Northwest Territories, and on the east I've been to Frobisher Bay, which is in the eastern part, you know of the territories way up. Dean: Labrador Closer to. Dan: Greenland it up closer, closer to greenland. That's, yeah, actually closer closer to greenland, yeah, well, that's where you were born. Right, you were born up there, newfoundland right, newfoundland, yeah well this is above newfoundland. This would be above newfoundland, yeah yeah that's. That's what we used to call eskimo territory. Yeah, that's what we used to call Eskimo territory. That's so funny. Dean: That's funny, yeah, yeah, yeah. So, shifting gears. We've been having some interesting conversations about VCR this week and it's particularly trying to get a you know how, defining vision. And, of course, for somebody listening for the first time, we're talking about the VCR formula vision plus capability multiplied by reach. And so part of this thing is going through the process of identifying your VCR assets, right CR assets as currency, software or sheet music, where, if you think like we're going down the path of thinking about vision as a capability that people have or a trait that you might, that's, I think, when people start talking about the VCR formula, they're thinking about vision as a aptitude or a trait or a ability that somebody has, the ability to see things that other people don't see, and that may be true. There is some element of some people are more visionary than others, but that doesn't fully account for what the asset of a vision is, and I think that the vision, an asset, a vision as an asset, is something that can amplify an outcome. So I think about somebody might be musical and they might have perfect pitch and they may be able to carry a tune and hum some interesting chord progressions, but the pinnacle asset of vision in a musical context would be a copywritten sheet music that is transferable to someone else. So it's kind of like the evolution is taking your vision. So it's kind of like the evolution is taking your vision. But you know, the apex asset of a vision would be a patentable process that you patent. That you have as both an acknowledgement that it's yours, it's property, and as protection for anybody else. You know it locks in its uniqueness, you know. Dan: Yeah, yeah, I mean, the greatest capability is property of some sort. I mean in other words, that you have a legal monopoly to it. You don't nobody's got a legal monopoly division and nobody's got a legal monopoly to reach but they do have a legal. Uh, so I I go for the middle one, I go for the c the book I'm writing right now, the book I'm just finishing, which is called growing great leadership is that anyone who develops a new capability is actually the leader. Okay, papa, and the reason and what I've said is that you can be a leader just by always increasing your own personal capability. The moment that you look at something and then you set a goal for being able to do something, either new, or doing something better. Other people observe you and also you start getting different results with a new capability and that's observed by other people. They say, hey, let's pay attention to what he's doing In my book I said any human being is capable of doing that. It's not leading other people. It's creating a capability that leads other people, that gives them a sense of direction. It gives them a sense of confidence gives them a sense of purpose. So I always focus on the capability. One of the things is we're starting in January, it'll be next week we're starting quarterly 4x4 casting tools, the one we did in the last FreeZone. And so the whole program says in the first month of each quarter, so January, april and then July and then October. If you do your 4x4 that month and then type it up and post it to a common site, so we'll have a common site where everybody's 4x4, you get $250. You get $250. And you get it at the next payday at the end of the quarter. So you get the money right away. And you get it at the next payday at the end of the quarter. So you get the money right away and it's not mandatory but um, if you don't do it. It will be noticed, so explain that again. Dean: So, well, they get the cheat today, they, they get the forms. So this is the entire everybody everybody in the company, the entire team. Dan: Yes, Including myself. Including myself. Okay, and so we're starting a new quarter on Wednesday. Back to work on the 7th. On the 6th we're back to work, and then on the 7th we have a company meeting where we said we're announcing this program. And they've all done the form, so they did it in September. And they fill in the form. You know how your performance, what your performance looks like, what your results look like being a hero, and you're aware that you drive other people crazy in this way and you're watching yourself so you don't drive other people crazy. And then you fill that in. There are 16 boxes. You fill it in. It's custom designed just to what you're doing. And then there's a writable PDF. You type it up and then you post it to a site. On the 31st of January, we look at all the posted 4x4s and everybody who posted gets $250. Dean: Okay, okay, wow. Dan: Very interesting, then we're going to watch what happens as a result of this and the thing I say is that I think we're creating a super simple structure and process for a company becoming more creative and productive, which the only activity is required is that you update this every quarter. Dean: Yes. Dan: And then we'll watch to see who updates it every quarter and then we'll see what other structures do we need, what other tools do we need to? If this has got momentum, how do we increase the momentum and everything? So we're starting. I mean we've got all the structures of the company are under management. So, uh, everybody is doing their four pi four within the context of their job description that's really interesting, wow. Dean: And so that way, in its own way kind of that awareness will build its own momentum you Well we'll see. Hopefully that would be the hypothesis. Dan: I'll report it. I had a great, great podcast it was Stephen Crine three weeks ago and he said this is an amazing idea because he says you make it voluntary but you get rewarded. Dean: And if you don't want to take part. Dan: you're sending a message, yeah. Dean: Yeah, that's true. Yeah, that's amazing. Dan: I can't wait to see the outcome of that. Yeah, yeah, and the reason we're doing this is just my take on technology. As technology becomes overwhelming, becomes pervasive and everything else, the way humans conduct themselves has to get absolutely simple. We have to be utterly simple in how we focus our own individual role. And we have to be utterly simple in the way that we design our teamwork, because technology will infinitely complicate your life if you've got a complicated management or leadership structure. Dean: And I think that that ultimate I mean I still think about the you know what you drew on the tablet there in our free zone workshop of the network versus the pyramid. The pyramid's gone. The borders are you know the borders are gone. Dan: It's really just this fluid connection. I still think they exist in massive form, but I think their usefulness has declined. I wrote a little. I wrote a. I got a little file on my computer of Dan quotes. Dean: And the quote is. Dan: I don't think that civil servants are useless, but I think it's becoming more and more difficult for them to prove their worth. Dean: No, I mean. Dan: Yeah, no, their work I mean there's stuff that has to be done or society falls apart, and I got a feeling that there's civil servants very anonymous, invisible civil servants who are doing their job every day and it allows the system to work, but it's very hard for them to prove that they're really valuable. I think it's harder and harder for a government worker to accept if they're street level, I mean if they're police, if they're firemen if they're ambulance drivers, it's very easy to prove their value. But, if you're more than three stories up, I think it gets really hard to prove your value. I wonder in that same vein, I just get this last thing. Somebody said well, how would you change government? I said the best way to do it is go to any government building, count the number of stories, go halfway up and fire everybody above halfway. Dean: Oh man, that's funny, that's funny. Dan: I think the closer to the ground they're probably more useful. Dean: Yeah, yeah, you wonder. I mean they're so it's funny when you said that about proving their worth, you always have this. What came to my mind is how people have a hard time arguing for the value of the arts in schools or in society as a public thing. Dan: You mean art taking place and artistic activities and that the arts, as in. Dean: Yeah, as in. You know art and music and plays. And you know, yeah, it's one of those did you ever partake in those I mean? You know, I guess, to the extent in school we were exposed to music and to, you know, theater, I did not participate in theater I participated in theater. Dan: I liked theater and of course the book. You've gotten a small book Casting, not Hiring. Dean: Yeah. Dan: And Jeff and I are deep into the process now. So we have a final deadline of May 26 for Casting, not Hiring it's going really well. Deadline of May 26 for Casting Not Hiring it's going really well and we worked out a real teamwork that he's writing the whole theater, part of it and I'm writing the whole entrepreneurial. I just finished a chapter in one week last week. And it's right on the four by four. So you got um entrepreneurism as theater, as the one major topic in the book and the four by four casting tool as the other part of the book, so it's two things. So I'm focusing on my part and he's focusing on my part, and then uh, process for this here compared to how you're doing your regular books. Dean: You say you wrote a chapter. What's your process for that? Dan: Well, first of all, I laid out the whole structure. The first thing I do is I just arbitrarily lay out a structure for the book and, strangely enough, we're actually using the structure of a play as the structure of the book. So okay, it has three parts, so it's got three acts and each act has. Each part has excuse me, I have to walk into another room. I'm actually probably even visualize this, and I'm walking into our pantry here and this is in the basement and I just got a nice Fiji water sitting right in front of me. Absolutely cold. There, you go, it's been waiting for six months for me to do this? Dean: Yes. Dan: And what I do. I just do the structure and so I just put names. I just put names into it and then we go back and forth. Jeff and I go back and forth, but we agree that it's going to have three parts and 12 chapters. It'll have an introduction, introduction, and it'll have a conclusion. So there'll be 14 parts and it'll have, you know, probably be all told, 160 to 200 pages, and then 200 pages and um, and then um. We identify what, how the parts are different to each other. So the first part is basically why theater and entrepreneurism resemble each other. Okay, and jeff has vast knowledge because for 50 years he's been doing both. He's been doing both of them, and I'm just focusing on the 4x4. So the first 4x4 is, and you can download the tool in the book. So it'll be illustrated in the book and you can download it and do it. And first of all we just start with the owner of the company and I have one whole chapter and that explains what the owner of the company is going to be and the whole thing about the 454. The owner has to do it twice, has to do it first, fill it all in and then share it with everybody in the company and said this is my commitment to my role in the company, okay. And then the next chapter, with everybody in the company and said this is my commitment to my role in the company, okay. And then the next chapter is everybody in the company doing it. And then the third chapter is about how, the more the people do their forebite for the more, the more ownership they take over their role in the company and the more ownership they take over their part in the company and the more ownership they take over their part in teamwork OK, and then the fourth part is suddenly, as you do these things, you're more and more like a theater company. The more you use the four by four, the more you're like a theater company. And that loops back to the beginning of the book, what Jeff's writing. So anyway, very interesting. Yeah, fortunately, we had the experience of creating the small book. So we created the small book, which was about 70 pages, and we used that to get the contract with the publisher. They read the whole book and rather than sending in a page of ideas about a book and trying to sell it on that basis, I said just write a book and give them a book. It's a small book that's going to become a big book. Right, that's how I did it. Oh, I like it. You know, about those small books. Dean: I do indeed know about those small books. I do indeed know about those small books. Yes, I think that's funny. So are you your part? Are you talking it? Are you interviewing? Dan: No, writing writing. Dean: So you're actually writing. So you're actually writing. Yeah, and I've had a tremendous breakthrough. Dan: I've had a tremendous breakthrough on this, and so I started with Chapter 10 because I wanted to get the heart of the idea. Is that what it does the application of the 4x4 to an entire company. And of course, we're launching this project to see if what we're saying is true. And so I end up with a fast filter. This is the best result, worst result. And then here are the five success factors. Okay, then I look at the success factors, I write them out, I take three of them and I do a triple play on them, on the three success factors, which gives me three pink boxes and three green boxes, and then I come back with that material and then I start the chapter applying that material to the outline for the chapter. And then I get finished that task filter and I add a lot of copy to it. And then I have a layout of the actual book. I have a page layout, so in that process I'll produce about two full pages Of copy. Dean: I take it. Dan: And I pop it in. I've done that five times this week and I have ten pages of copy and I said we're good enough. We're good enough, now, let's go to another chapter. So that's how I'm doing it and and uh, yeah, so I've got a real process because I'm I'm doing it independently with another member of the team and he's. Jeff has his own ways of writing his books. You, you know, I mean, he's a writer, he writes, plays, he writes, you know he writes and everything like that. So we don't want to have any argument about technique or you know, any conflict of technique. I'm going to do mine. Dean: He's going to do mine, Right right. Dan: And then we're looking for a software program that will take all the copy and sort of create a common style, taking his style and my style and creating a common style well, that might be charlotte I mean really no, that's what that, that's what the uh, that's what I think it would be. Dean: Exactly that is is if you said to Charlotte, take these two. I'm going to upload two different things and I'd like you to combine one cohesive writing style to these. Dan: Oh good, yeah, that would be something. Dean: Yeah, I think that would be something yeah, I think that would be, uh, that would be amazing, and because you already, as long as you're both writing in in you know, second person second person, personal, or whatever your, your preferred style is right, like that's the thing. I think that would be, I think that would be very good, it would be good, I'd be happy because he writes intelligently and I write intelligently. Dan: Is she for hire? Do you have her freelancing at all? Dean: Dan, I had the funniest interaction with her. I was saying I'm going to create an avatar for her and I was asking her. I said you know, charlotte, I think I'm going to create an avatar for you and I'm wondering you know, what color hair do you think would look good for you? Oh, that's interesting. Look good for you, it's. Oh, that's interesting. Dan: I think maybe a a warm brown or a vibrant auburn oh yeah, vibrant auburn. Yeah, this is great and I thought you know I? I said no, I suspected she'd go towards red. Dean: Yeah, exactly, and I thought you know that's uh. Then I was chatting with a friend, uh yesterday about I was going through this process and, uh, you know, we said I think that she would have like an asymmetric bob hairstyle kind of thing, and we just looked up the thing and it's Sharon Osbourne is the look of what I believe Charlotte has is she's she's like a Sharon Osbourne type of, uh of look and I think that's that's so funny, you know what was uh the the handler for James Bond back when he? was shot in. Dan: Connery Moneypenny, right Moneypenny yeah. Look up the actress Moneypenny. I suspect you're on the same track if you look at the original Moneypenny. Dean: Okay. Dan: Of course she had a South London voice too. Dean: Yeah, isn't that funny, moneypenny. Let's see her. Yes. Dan: I think you're right. That's exactly right. Very funny right? Oh, I think this is great. I think, this is, I think, there's. It would be very, very interesting if you asked a hundred men. You know the question that you're, you know the conversation you're having with Charlotte, the thing. Dean: Yeah. Dan: It'd be interesting to see if there was a style that came out, a look that dominated. Yeah, men came out. Dean: Yeah, I think it is. Dan: Ever since I was a kid, I've been fascinated with redheads. Okay yeah, real redheads, not dyed redheads, but someone who's an? Actual redhead. And I'll just stop and watch them. Just stop and stop and watch them. When I was a little kid I said look, look look and there aren't a lot of them. There aren't a lot of them. You know, they're very rare and it's mostly Northern Europe. That's right. Dean: That's so funny. Scottish yes, that's right, that's so funny. Dan: Scottish yes, irish have it. Dean: That's right. As you remember, I was married to a redhead for a long time. Yeah, super smart. But that's funny, though, having this persona visual for Charlotte as a redhead yeah. Braintap a really interesting topic. I was talking to. Dan: It was just a discussion in one of the parties about AI and I said the more interesting topic to me is not what, not so much what the machine is thinking or how the machine goes about thinking. What really interests me is that if you have frequent interaction with a congenial machine in other words, a useful congenial machine how does your thinking change and what have you noticed so far? Dean: Well, I think that having this visual will help that for me. I've said like I still haven't, I still don't. Dan: Materialized very completely. You haven't materialized. Dean: Yeah, I haven't exactly in my mind Like if that was, if Moneypenny was sitting three feet from me at all times, she would just be part of my daily conversation part of my wondering conversation. Right part of my wondering and now that, uh, now that she's got access to real-time info like if they're up to date, now they can search the internet right. So that was the latest upgrade. That it wasn't. It's not just limited to 2023 or whatever. The most updated version, they've got access to everything now. Um, so, to be able to, you know, I asked her during the holidays or whatever. I asked her is, uh, you know, the day after I asked this is is honey open today in Winter Haven? And she was, you know, able to look it up and see it looks like they're open and that was yeah, so just this kind of thing. I think anything I could search if I were to ask her. You know, hey, what time is such and such movie playing in that studio movie grill today? That would be helpful, right, like to be able to just integrate it into my day-to-day. It would be very good. Dan: The biggest thing I know is that I almost have what I would say a trained reaction to any historical event, or even if it's current, you know it's in the news, or that I immediately go to perplexity and said tell me 10 crucial facts about this. And you know, three seconds later it tells me that 10. And more and more I don't go to Google at all. That's one thing. I just stopped going to Google at all because they'll send me articles on the topic, and now you've created work for me. Perplexity saves me work. Google makes me work. But the interesting thing is I've got a file it's about 300 little articles now that have just come from me asking the question, but they all start with the word 10 or the number 10, 10 facts about interesting and that before I respond you know, intellectually or emotionally to something I read, I get 10 facts about this and then kind of make up my mind, and of course you can play with the prompt. You can say tell me 10 reasons why this might not be true, or tell me 10 things that are telling us this is probably going to be true. So it's all in the prompt and you know the prompt is the prompt and the answer is the answer yeah and everything. But it allows me to think. And the other thing I'm starting with this book, I'm starting to use Notebook LM. Dean: Yeah. Dan: So this chapter I got to have Alex Varley. He's a Brit and he was with us here in Toronto for about five years and now he's back in Britain, he's part of our British team and he's got a looser schedule right now. So I say by the end, by May, I want to find five different AI programs that I find useful for my writing. So he's going to take every one of my chapters and then put it into Notebook LM and it comes back as a conversation between two people and I just sit there and I listen to it and I'll note whether they really got the essence of what I was trying to get across or needs a little more. So I'll go back then, and from listening as I call it, you know, google is just terrible at naming things. I mean, they're just uh terrible and I would call it eavesdropping, lm eavesdropping that they're taking your writing and they're talking about it. You're eavesdropping. They're taking your writing and they're talking about it. Dean: You're eavesdropping on what they're saying about your writing. What a great test to see, almost like pre-readers or whatever to see. Dan: It's like the best possible focus group that you can possibly get. Dean: I like that yeah. Very good. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: But, it's just interesting how I'm, you know, but I've just focused on one thing with AI, I just make my writing faster, easier and better. That's all. I want the AAM to do, because writing is just a very central activity for me. Dean: Yeah, and that's not going anywhere. I mean, it's still gonna be. Uh, that's the next 25 years that was. You can make some very firm predictions on this one that's what, uh, I think next, Dan, that would be a good. As we're moving into 2025, I would love to do maybe a prediction episode for the next 25 years reflection and projection. Dan: You take the week of my 100th birthday, which is 19 and a half years now, I could pretty well tell you 80% what I'm doing the week on my 100th birthday. I can't wait that would be a good topic. Dean: I was just going to say let's lock this in, because you'll be celebrating is Charlotte listening? Dan: is Charlotte listening now? No, she's not, but she should be say let's lock this in because you'll be celebrating charlotte. Is charlotte listening? Is charlotte listening now? Dean: no, she's not, but she should be oh no, give her a. Dan: Just say next week, charlotte remind me. Oh yeah, no I'll remember. Dean: I'll remember because it's okay, it's my actual this week and this is my, this is the next few days for me is really thinking this through, because I I like, um, I've had some really good insights. Uh, just thinking that way uh yeah, so there you go. Good, well, it's all, that was a fast hour. Dan: That was a fast it really was. Dean: I was going to bring that up, but uh, but uh yeah we had other interesting topics, but for sure we'll do it next week yeah, good okay, dan okay I'll talk to you. Bye.

Today's poem is Our Bodies by Michael Bazzett. The Slowdown is your daily poetry ritual. In this episode, guest host Maggie Smith writes… “I grew up pre-Internet, pre-cell phones. For most of my childhood we didn't have cable TV or a VCR. If I had free time, I was riding my bike, playing outside, or reading a book. We call it “free range” now—the idea that children don't need to be constantly supervised and entertained. There's something about being left to your own devices, and having to be resourceful. Free time is an incomparable gift. It's time to dream, time to imagine your way out of your own boredom, time to invent games or build things with your own two hands.” Celebrate the power of poems with a gift to The Slowdown today. Every donation makes a difference: https://tinyurl.com/rjm4synp

Did you know that adding a simple Code Interpreter took o3 from 9.2% to 32% on FrontierMath? The Latent Space crew is hosting a hack night Feb 11th in San Francisco focused on CodeGen use cases, co-hosted with E2B and Edge AGI; watch E2B's new workshop and RSVP here!We're happy to announce that today's guest Samuel Colvin will be teaching his very first Pydantic AI workshop at the newly announced AI Engineer NYC Workshops day on Feb 22! 25 tickets left.If you're a Python developer, it's very likely that you've heard of Pydantic. Every month, it's downloaded >300,000,000 times, making it one of the top 25 PyPi packages. OpenAI uses it in its SDK for structured outputs, it's at the core of FastAPI, and if you've followed our AI Engineer Summit conference, Jason Liu of Instructor has given two great talks about it: “Pydantic is all you need” and “Pydantic is STILL all you need”. Now, Samuel Colvin has raised $17M from Sequoia to turn Pydantic from an open source project to a full stack AI engineer platform with Logfire, their observability platform, and PydanticAI, their new agent framework.Logfire: bringing OTEL to AIOpenTelemetry recently merged Semantic Conventions for LLM workloads which provides standard definitions to track performance like gen_ai.server.time_per_output_token. In Sam's view at least 80% of new apps being built today have some sort of LLM usage in them, and just like web observability platform got replaced by cloud-first ones in the 2010s, Logfire wants to do the same for AI-first apps. If you're interested in the technical details, Logfire migrated away from Clickhouse to Datafusion for their backend. We spent some time on the importance of picking open source tools you understand and that you can actually contribute to upstream, rather than the more popular ones; listen in ~43:19 for that part.Agents are the killer app for graphsPydantic AI is their attempt at taking a lot of the learnings that LangChain and the other early LLM frameworks had, and putting Python best practices into it. At an API level, it's very similar to the other libraries: you can call LLMs, create agents, do function calling, do evals, etc.They define an “Agent” as a container with a system prompt, tools, structured result, and an LLM. Under the hood, each Agent is now a graph of function calls that can orchestrate multi-step LLM interactions. You can start simple, then move toward fully dynamic graph-based control flow if needed.“We were compelled enough by graphs once we got them right that our agent implementation [...] is now actually a graph under the hood.”Why Graphs?* More natural for complex or multi-step AI workflows.* Easy to visualize and debug with mermaid diagrams.* Potential for distributed runs, or “waiting days” between steps in certain flows.In parallel, you see folks like Emil Eifrem of Neo4j talk about GraphRAG as another place where graphs fit really well in the AI stack, so it might be time for more people to take them seriously.Full Video EpisodeLike and subscribe!Chapters* 00:00:00 Introductions* 00:00:24 Origins of Pydantic* 00:05:28 Pydantic's AI moment * 00:08:05 Why build a new agents framework?* 00:10:17 Overview of Pydantic AI* 00:12:33 Becoming a believer in graphs* 00:24:02 God Model vs Compound AI Systems* 00:28:13 Why not build an LLM gateway?* 00:31:39 Programmatic testing vs live evals* 00:35:51 Using OpenTelemetry for AI traces* 00:43:19 Why they don't use Clickhouse* 00:48:34 Competing in the observability space* 00:50:41 Licensing decisions for Pydantic and LogFire* 00:51:48 Building Pydantic.run* 00:55:24 Marimo and the future of Jupyter notebooks* 00:57:44 London's AI sceneShow Notes* Sam Colvin* Pydantic* Pydantic AI* Logfire* Pydantic.run* Zod* E2B* Arize* Langsmith* Marimo* Prefect* GLA (Google Generative Language API)* OpenTelemetry* Jason Liu* Sebastian Ramirez* Bogomil Balkansky* Hood Chatham* Jeremy Howard* Andrew LambTranscriptAlessio [00:00:03]: Hey, everyone. Welcome to the Latent Space podcast. This is Alessio, partner and CTO at Decibel Partners, and I'm joined by my co-host Swyx, founder of Smol AI.Swyx [00:00:12]: Good morning. And today we're very excited to have Sam Colvin join us from Pydantic AI. Welcome. Sam, I heard that Pydantic is all we need. Is that true?Samuel [00:00:24]: I would say you might need Pydantic AI and Logfire as well, but it gets you a long way, that's for sure.Swyx [00:00:29]: Pydantic almost basically needs no introduction. It's almost 300 million downloads in December. And obviously, in the previous podcasts and discussions we've had with Jason Liu, he's been a big fan and promoter of Pydantic and AI.Samuel [00:00:45]: Yeah, it's weird because obviously I didn't create Pydantic originally for uses in AI, it predates LLMs. But it's like we've been lucky that it's been picked up by that community and used so widely.Swyx [00:00:58]: Actually, maybe we'll hear it. Right from you, what is Pydantic and maybe a little bit of the origin story?Samuel [00:01:04]: The best name for it, which is not quite right, is a validation library. And we get some tension around that name because it doesn't just do validation, it will do coercion by default. We now have strict mode, so you can disable that coercion. But by default, if you say you want an integer field and you get in a string of 1, 2, 3, it will convert it to 123 and a bunch of other sensible conversions. And as you can imagine, the semantics around it. Exactly when you convert and when you don't, it's complicated, but because of that, it's more than just validation. Back in 2017, when I first started it, the different thing it was doing was using type hints to define your schema. That was controversial at the time. It was genuinely disapproved of by some people. I think the success of Pydantic and libraries like FastAPI that build on top of it means that today that's no longer controversial in Python. And indeed, lots of other people have copied that route, but yeah, it's a data validation library. It uses type hints for the for the most part and obviously does all the other stuff you want, like serialization on top of that. But yeah, that's the core.Alessio [00:02:06]: Do you have any fun stories on how JSON schemas ended up being kind of like the structure output standard for LLMs? And were you involved in any of these discussions? Because I know OpenAI was, you know, one of the early adopters. So did they reach out to you? Was there kind of like a structure output console in open source that people were talking about or was it just a random?Samuel [00:02:26]: No, very much not. So I originally. Didn't implement JSON schema inside Pydantic and then Sebastian, Sebastian Ramirez, FastAPI came along and like the first I ever heard of him was over a weekend. I got like 50 emails from him or 50 like emails as he was committing to Pydantic, adding JSON schema long pre version one. So the reason it was added was for OpenAPI, which is obviously closely akin to JSON schema. And then, yeah, I don't know why it was JSON that got picked up and used by OpenAI. It was obviously very convenient for us. That's because it meant that not only can you do the validation, but because Pydantic will generate you the JSON schema, it will it kind of can be one source of source of truth for structured outputs and tools.Swyx [00:03:09]: Before we dive in further on the on the AI side of things, something I'm mildly curious about, obviously, there's Zod in JavaScript land. Every now and then there is a new sort of in vogue validation library that that takes over for quite a few years and then maybe like some something else comes along. Is Pydantic? Is it done like the core Pydantic?Samuel [00:03:30]: I've just come off a call where we were redesigning some of the internal bits. There will be a v3 at some point, which will not break people's code half as much as v2 as in v2 was the was the massive rewrite into Rust, but also fixing all the stuff that was broken back from like version zero point something that we didn't fix in v1 because it was a side project. We have plans to move some of the basically store the data in Rust types after validation. Not completely. So we're still working to design the Pythonic version of it, in order for it to be able to convert into Python types. So then if you were doing like validation and then serialization, you would never have to go via a Python type we reckon that can give us somewhere between three and five times another three to five times speed up. That's probably the biggest thing. Also, like changing how easy it is to basically extend Pydantic and define how particular types, like for example, NumPy arrays are validated and serialized. But there's also stuff going on. And for example, Jitter, the JSON library in Rust that does the JSON parsing, has SIMD implementation at the moment only for AMD64. So we can add that. We need to go and add SIMD for other instruction sets. So there's a bunch more we can do on performance. I don't think we're going to go and revolutionize Pydantic, but it's going to continue to get faster, continue, hopefully, to allow people to do more advanced things. We might add a binary format like CBOR for serialization for when you'll just want to put the data into a database and probably load it again from Pydantic. So there are some things that will come along, but for the most part, it should just get faster and cleaner.Alessio [00:05:04]: From a focus perspective, I guess, as a founder too, how did you think about the AI interest rising? And then how do you kind of prioritize, okay, this is worth going into more, and we'll talk about Pydantic AI and all of that. What was maybe your early experience with LLAMP, and when did you figure out, okay, this is something we should take seriously and focus more resources on it?Samuel [00:05:28]: I'll answer that, but I'll answer what I think is a kind of parallel question, which is Pydantic's weird, because Pydantic existed, obviously, before I was starting a company. I was working on it in my spare time, and then beginning of 22, I started working on the rewrite in Rust. And I worked on it full-time for a year and a half, and then once we started the company, people came and joined. And it was a weird project, because that would never go away. You can't get signed off inside a startup. Like, we're going to go off and three engineers are going to work full-on for a year in Python and Rust, writing like 30,000 lines of Rust just to release open-source-free Python library. The result of that has been excellent for us as a company, right? As in, it's made us remain entirely relevant. And it's like, Pydantic is not just used in the SDKs of all of the AI libraries, but I can't say which one, but one of the big foundational model companies, when they upgraded from Pydantic v1 to v2, their number one internal model... The metric of performance is time to first token. That went down by 20%. So you think about all of the actual AI going on inside, and yet at least 20% of the CPU, or at least the latency inside requests was actually Pydantic, which shows like how widely it's used. So we've benefited from doing that work, although it didn't, it would have never have made financial sense in most companies. In answer to your question about like, how do we prioritize AI, I mean, the honest truth is we've spent a lot of the last year and a half building. Good general purpose observability inside LogFire and making Pydantic good for general purpose use cases. And the AI has kind of come to us. Like we just, not that we want to get away from it, but like the appetite, uh, both in Pydantic and in LogFire to go and build with AI is enormous because it kind of makes sense, right? Like if you're starting a new greenfield project in Python today, what's the chance that you're using GenAI 80%, let's say, globally, obviously it's like a hundred percent in California, but even worldwide, it's probably 80%. Yeah. And so everyone needs that stuff. And there's so much yet to be figured out so much like space to do things better in the ecosystem in a way that like to go and implement a database that's better than Postgres is a like Sisyphean task. Whereas building, uh, tools that are better for GenAI than some of the stuff that's about now is not very difficult. Putting the actual models themselves to one side.Alessio [00:07:40]: And then at the same time, then you released Pydantic AI recently, which is, uh, um, you know, agent framework and early on, I would say everybody like, you know, Langchain and like, uh, Pydantic kind of like a first class support, a lot of these frameworks, we're trying to use you to be better. What was the decision behind we should do our own framework? Were there any design decisions that you disagree with any workloads that you think people didn't support? Well,Samuel [00:08:05]: it wasn't so much like design and workflow, although I think there were some, some things we've done differently. Yeah. I think looking in general at the ecosystem of agent frameworks, the engineering quality is far below that of the rest of the Python ecosystem. There's a bunch of stuff that we have learned how to do over the last 20 years of building Python libraries and writing Python code that seems to be abandoned by people when they build agent frameworks. Now I can kind of respect that, particularly in the very first agent frameworks, like Langchain, where they were literally figuring out how to go and do this stuff. It's completely understandable that you would like basically skip some stuff.Samuel [00:08:42]: I'm shocked by the like quality of some of the agent frameworks that have come out recently from like well-respected names, which it just seems to be opportunism and I have little time for that, but like the early ones, like I think they were just figuring out how to do stuff and just as lots of people have learned from Pydantic, we were able to learn a bit from them. I think from like the gap we saw and the thing we were frustrated by was the production readiness. And that means things like type checking, even if type checking makes it hard. Like Pydantic AI, I will put my hand up now and say it has a lot of generics and you need to, it's probably easier to use it if you've written a bit of Rust and you really understand generics, but like, and that is, we're not claiming that that makes it the easiest thing to use in all cases, we think it makes it good for production applications in big systems where type checking is a no-brainer in Python. But there are also a bunch of stuff we've learned from maintaining Pydantic over the years that we've gone and done. So every single example in Pydantic AI's documentation is run on Python. As part of tests and every single print output within an example is checked during tests. So it will always be up to date. And then a bunch of things that, like I say, are standard best practice within the rest of the Python ecosystem, but I'm not followed surprisingly by some AI libraries like coverage, linting, type checking, et cetera, et cetera, where I think these are no-brainers, but like weirdly they're not followed by some of the other libraries.Alessio [00:10:04]: And can you just give an overview of the framework itself? I think there's kind of like the. LLM calling frameworks, there are the multi-agent frameworks, there's the workflow frameworks, like what does Pydantic AI do?Samuel [00:10:17]: I glaze over a bit when I hear all of the different sorts of frameworks, but I like, and I will tell you when I built Pydantic, when I built Logfire and when I built Pydantic AI, my methodology is not to go and like research and review all of the other things. I kind of work out what I want and I go and build it and then feedback comes and we adjust. So the fundamental building block of Pydantic AI is agents. The exact definition of agents and how you want to define them. is obviously ambiguous and our things are probably sort of agent-lit, not that we would want to go and rename them to agent-lit, but like the point is you probably build them together to build something and most people will call an agent. So an agent in our case has, you know, things like a prompt, like system prompt and some tools and a structured return type if you want it, that covers the vast majority of cases. There are situations where you want to go further and the most complex workflows where you want graphs and I resisted graphs for quite a while. I was sort of of the opinion you didn't need them and you could use standard like Python flow control to do all of that stuff. I had a few arguments with people, but I basically came around to, yeah, I can totally see why graphs are useful. But then we have the problem that by default, they're not type safe because if you have a like add edge method where you give the names of two different edges, there's no type checking, right? Even if you go and do some, I'm not, not all the graph libraries are AI specific. So there's a, there's a graph library called, but it allows, it does like a basic runtime type checking. Ironically using Pydantic to try and make up for the fact that like fundamentally that graphs are not typed type safe. Well, I like Pydantic, but it did, that's not a real solution to have to go and run the code to see if it's safe. There's a reason that starting type checking is so powerful. And so we kind of, from a lot of iteration eventually came up with a system of using normally data classes to define nodes where you return the next node you want to call and where we're able to go and introspect the return type of a node to basically build the graph. And so the graph is. Yeah. Inherently type safe. And once we got that right, I, I wasn't, I'm incredibly excited about graphs. I think there's like masses of use cases for them, both in gen AI and other development, but also software's all going to have interact with gen AI, right? It's going to be like web. There's no longer be like a web department in a company is that there's just like all the developers are building for web building with databases. The same is going to be true for gen AI.Alessio [00:12:33]: Yeah. I see on your docs, you call an agent, a container that contains a system prompt function. Tools, structure, result, dependency type model, and then model settings. Are the graphs in your mind, different agents? Are they different prompts for the same agent? What are like the structures in your mind?Samuel [00:12:52]: So we were compelled enough by graphs once we got them right, that we actually merged the PR this morning. That means our agent implementation without changing its API at all is now actually a graph under the hood as it is built using our graph library. So graphs are basically a lower level tool that allow you to build these complex workflows. Our agents are technically one of the many graphs you could go and build. And we just happened to build that one for you because it's a very common, commonplace one. But obviously there are cases where you need more complex workflows where the current agent assumptions don't work. And that's where you can then go and use graphs to build more complex things.Swyx [00:13:29]: You said you were cynical about graphs. What changed your mind specifically?Samuel [00:13:33]: I guess people kept giving me examples of things that they wanted to use graphs for. And my like, yeah, but you could do that in standard flow control in Python became a like less and less compelling argument to me because I've maintained those systems that end up with like spaghetti code. And I could see the appeal of this like structured way of defining the workflow of my code. And it's really neat that like just from your code, just from your type hints, you can get out a mermaid diagram that defines exactly what can go and happen.Swyx [00:14:00]: Right. Yeah. You do have very neat implementation of sort of inferring the graph from type hints, I guess. Yeah. Is what I would call it. Yeah. I think the question always is I have gone back and forth. I used to work at Temporal where we would actually spend a lot of time complaining about graph based workflow solutions like AWS step functions. And we would actually say that we were better because you could use normal control flow that you already knew and worked with. Yours, I guess, is like a little bit of a nice compromise. Like it looks like normal Pythonic code. But you just have to keep in mind what the type hints actually mean. And that's what we do with the quote unquote magic that the graph construction does.Samuel [00:14:42]: Yeah, exactly. And if you look at the internal logic of actually running a graph, it's incredibly simple. It's basically call a node, get a node back, call that node, get a node back, call that node. If you get an end, you're done. We will add in soon support for, well, basically storage so that you can store the state between each node that's run. And then the idea is you can then distribute the graph and run it across computers. And also, I mean, the other weird, the other bit that's really valuable is across time. Because it's all very well if you look at like lots of the graph examples that like Claude will give you. If it gives you an example, it gives you this lovely enormous mermaid chart of like the workflow, for example, managing returns if you're an e-commerce company. But what you realize is some of those lines are literally one function calls another function. And some of those lines are wait six days for the customer to print their like piece of paper and put it in the post. And if you're writing like your demo. Project or your like proof of concept, that's fine because you can just say, and now we call this function. But when you're building when you're in real in real life, that doesn't work. And now how do we manage that concept to basically be able to start somewhere else in the in our code? Well, this graph implementation makes it incredibly easy because you just pass the node that is the start point for carrying on the graph and it continues to run. So it's things like that where I was like, yeah, I can just imagine how things I've done in the past would be fundamentally easier to understand if we had done them with graphs.Swyx [00:16:07]: You say imagine, but like right now, this pedantic AI actually resume, you know, six days later, like you said, or is this just like a theoretical thing we can go someday?Samuel [00:16:16]: I think it's basically Q&A. So there's an AI that's asking the user a question and effectively you then call the CLI again to continue the conversation. And it basically instantiates the node and calls the graph with that node again. Now, we don't have the logic yet for effectively storing state in the database between individual nodes that we're going to add soon. But like the rest of it is basically there.Swyx [00:16:37]: It does make me think that not only are you competing with Langchain now and obviously Instructor, and now you're going into sort of the more like orchestrated things like Airflow, Prefect, Daxter, those guys.Samuel [00:16:52]: Yeah, I mean, we're good friends with the Prefect guys and Temporal have the same investors as us. And I'm sure that my investor Bogomol would not be too happy if I was like, oh, yeah, by the way, as well as trying to take on Datadog. We're also going off and trying to take on Temporal and everyone else doing that. Obviously, we're not doing all of the infrastructure of deploying that right yet, at least. We're, you know, we're just building a Python library. And like what's crazy about our graph implementation is, sure, there's a bit of magic in like introspecting the return type, you know, extracting things from unions, stuff like that. But like the actual calls, as I say, is literally call a function and get back a thing and call that. It's like incredibly simple and therefore easy to maintain. The question is, how useful is it? Well, I don't know yet. I think we have to go and find out. We have a whole. We've had a slew of people joining our Slack over the last few days and saying, tell me how good Pydantic AI is. How good is Pydantic AI versus Langchain? And I refuse to answer. That's your job to go and find that out. Not mine. We built a thing. I'm compelled by it, but I'm obviously biased. The ecosystem will work out what the useful tools are.Swyx [00:17:52]: Bogomol was my board member when I was at Temporal. And I think I think just generally also having been a workflow engine investor and participant in this space, it's a big space. Like everyone needs different functions. I think the one thing that I would say like yours, you know, as a library, you don't have that much control of it over the infrastructure. I do like the idea that each new agents or whatever or unit of work, whatever you call that should spin up in this sort of isolated boundaries. Whereas yours, I think around everything runs in the same process. But you ideally want to sort of spin out its own little container of things.Samuel [00:18:30]: I agree with you a hundred percent. And we will. It would work now. Right. As in theory, you're just like as long as you can serialize the calls to the next node, you just have to all of the different containers basically have to have the same the same code. I mean, I'm super excited about Cloudflare workers running Python and being able to install dependencies. And if Cloudflare could only give me my invitation to the private beta of that, we would be exploring that right now because I'm super excited about that as a like compute level for some of this stuff where exactly what you're saying, basically. You can run everything as an individual. Like worker function and distribute it. And it's resilient to failure, et cetera, et cetera.Swyx [00:19:08]: And it spins up like a thousand instances simultaneously. You know, you want it to be sort of truly serverless at once. Actually, I know we have some Cloudflare friends who are listening, so hopefully they'll get in front of the line. Especially.Samuel [00:19:19]: I was in Cloudflare's office last week shouting at them about other things that frustrate me. I have a love-hate relationship with Cloudflare. Their tech is awesome. But because I use it the whole time, I then get frustrated. So, yeah, I'm sure I will. I will. I will get there soon.Swyx [00:19:32]: There's a side tangent on Cloudflare. Is Python supported at full? I actually wasn't fully aware of what the status of that thing is.Samuel [00:19:39]: Yeah. So Pyodide, which is Python running inside the browser in scripting, is supported now by Cloudflare. They basically, they're having some struggles working out how to manage, ironically, dependencies that have binaries, in particular, Pydantic. Because these workers where you can have thousands of them on a given metal machine, you don't want to have a difference. You basically want to be able to have a share. Shared memory for all the different Pydantic installations, effectively. That's the thing they work out. They're working out. But Hood, who's my friend, who is the primary maintainer of Pyodide, works for Cloudflare. And that's basically what he's doing, is working out how to get Python running on Cloudflare's network.Swyx [00:20:19]: I mean, the nice thing is that your binary is really written in Rust, right? Yeah. Which also compiles the WebAssembly. Yeah. So maybe there's a way that you'd build... You have just a different build of Pydantic and that ships with whatever your distro for Cloudflare workers is.Samuel [00:20:36]: Yes, that's exactly what... So Pyodide has builds for Pydantic Core and for things like NumPy and basically all of the popular binary libraries. Yeah. It's just basic. And you're doing exactly that, right? You're using Rust to compile the WebAssembly and then you're calling that shared library from Python. And it's unbelievably complicated, but it works. Okay.Swyx [00:20:57]: Staying on graphs a little bit more, and then I wanted to go to some of the other features that you have in Pydantic AI. I see in your docs, there are sort of four levels of agents. There's single agents, there's agent delegation, programmatic agent handoff. That seems to be what OpenAI swarms would be like. And then the last one, graph-based control flow. Would you say that those are sort of the mental hierarchy of how these things go?Samuel [00:21:21]: Yeah, roughly. Okay.Swyx [00:21:22]: You had some expression around OpenAI swarms. Well.Samuel [00:21:25]: And indeed, OpenAI have got in touch with me and basically, maybe I'm not supposed to say this, but basically said that Pydantic AI looks like what swarms would become if it was production ready. So, yeah. I mean, like, yeah, which makes sense. Awesome. Yeah. I mean, in fact, it was specifically saying, how can we give people the same feeling that they were getting from swarms that led us to go and implement graphs? Because my, like, just call the next agent with Python code was not a satisfactory answer to people. So it was like, okay, we've got to go and have a better answer for that. It's not like, let us to get to graphs. Yeah.Swyx [00:21:56]: I mean, it's a minimal viable graph in some sense. What are the shapes of graphs that people should know? So the way that I would phrase this is I think Anthropic did a very good public service and also kind of surprisingly influential blog post, I would say, when they wrote Building Effective Agents. We actually have the authors coming to speak at my conference in New York, which I think you're giving a workshop at. Yeah.Samuel [00:22:24]: I'm trying to work it out. But yes, I think so.Swyx [00:22:26]: Tell me if you're not. yeah, I mean, like, that was the first, I think, authoritative view of, like, what kinds of graphs exist in agents and let's give each of them a name so that everyone is on the same page. So I'm just kind of curious if you have community names or top five patterns of graphs.Samuel [00:22:44]: I don't have top five patterns of graphs. I would love to see what people are building with them. But like, it's been it's only been a couple of weeks. And of course, there's a point is that. Because they're relatively unopinionated about what you can go and do with them. They don't suit them. Like, you can go and do lots of lots of things with them, but they don't have the structure to go and have like specific names as much as perhaps like some other systems do. I think what our agents are, which have a name and I can't remember what it is, but this basically system of like, decide what tool to call, go back to the center, decide what tool to call, go back to the center and then exit. One form of graph, which, as I say, like our agents are effectively one implementation of a graph, which is why under the hood they are now using graphs. And it'll be interesting to see over the next few years whether we end up with these like predefined graph names or graph structures or whether it's just like, yep, I built a graph or whether graphs just turn out not to match people's mental image of what they want and die away. We'll see.Swyx [00:23:38]: I think there is always appeal. Every developer eventually gets graph religion and goes, oh, yeah, everything's a graph. And then they probably over rotate and go go too far into graphs. And then they have to learn a whole bunch of DSLs. And then they're like, actually, I didn't need that. I need this. And they scale back a little bit.Samuel [00:23:55]: I'm at the beginning of that process. I'm currently a graph maximalist, although I haven't actually put any into production yet. But yeah.Swyx [00:24:02]: This has a lot of philosophical connections with other work coming out of UC Berkeley on compounding AI systems. I don't know if you know of or care. This is the Gartner world of things where they need some kind of industry terminology to sell it to enterprises. I don't know if you know about any of that.Samuel [00:24:24]: I haven't. I probably should. I should probably do it because I should probably get better at selling to enterprises. But no, no, I don't. Not right now.Swyx [00:24:29]: This is really the argument is that instead of putting everything in one model, you have more control and more maybe observability to if you break everything out into composing little models and changing them together. And obviously, then you need an orchestration framework to do that. Yeah.Samuel [00:24:47]: And it makes complete sense. And one of the things we've seen with agents is they work well when they work well. But when they. Even if you have the observability through log five that you can see what was going on, if you don't have a nice hook point to say, hang on, this is all gone wrong. You have a relatively blunt instrument of basically erroring when you exceed some kind of limit. But like what you need to be able to do is effectively iterate through these runs so that you can have your own control flow where you're like, OK, we've gone too far. And that's where one of the neat things about our graph implementation is you can basically call next in a loop rather than just running the full graph. And therefore, you have this opportunity to to break out of it. But yeah, basically, it's the same point, which is like if you have two bigger unit of work to some extent, whether or not it involves gen AI. But obviously, it's particularly problematic in gen AI. You only find out afterwards when you've spent quite a lot of time and or money when it's gone off and done done the wrong thing.Swyx [00:25:39]: Oh, drop on this. We're not going to resolve this here, but I'll drop this and then we can move on to the next thing. This is the common way that we we developers talk about this. And then the machine learning researchers look at us. And laugh and say, that's cute. And then they just train a bigger model and they wipe us out in the next training run. So I think there's a certain amount of we are fighting the bitter lesson here. We're fighting AGI. And, you know, when AGI arrives, this will all go away. Obviously, on Latent Space, we don't really discuss that because I think AGI is kind of this hand wavy concept that isn't super relevant. But I think we have to respect that. For example, you could do a chain of thoughts with graphs and you could manually orchestrate a nice little graph that does like. Reflect, think about if you need more, more inference time, compute, you know, that's the hot term now. And then think again and, you know, scale that up. Or you could train Strawberry and DeepSeq R1. Right.Samuel [00:26:32]: I saw someone saying recently, oh, they were really optimistic about agents because models are getting faster exponentially. And I like took a certain amount of self-control not to describe that it wasn't exponential. But my main point was. If models are getting faster as quickly as you say they are, then we don't need agents and we don't really need any of these abstraction layers. We can just give our model and, you know, access to the Internet, cross our fingers and hope for the best. Agents, agent frameworks, graphs, all of this stuff is basically making up for the fact that right now the models are not that clever. In the same way that if you're running a customer service business and you have loads of people sitting answering telephones, the less well trained they are, the less that you trust them, the more that you need to give them a script to go through. Whereas, you know, so if you're running a bank and you have lots of customer service people who you don't trust that much, then you tell them exactly what to say. If you're doing high net worth banking, you just employ people who you think are going to be charming to other rich people and set them off to go and have coffee with people. Right. And the same is true of models. The more intelligent they are, the less we need to tell them, like structure what they go and do and constrain the routes in which they take.Swyx [00:27:42]: Yeah. Yeah. Agree with that. So I'm happy to move on. So the other parts of Pydantic AI that are worth commenting on, and this is like my last rant, I promise. So obviously, every framework needs to do its sort of model adapter layer, which is, oh, you can easily swap from OpenAI to Cloud to Grok. You also have, which I didn't know about, Google GLA, which I didn't really know about until I saw this in your docs, which is generative language API. I assume that's AI Studio? Yes.Samuel [00:28:13]: Google don't have good names for it. So Vertex is very clear. That seems to be the API that like some of the things use, although it returns 503 about 20% of the time. So... Vertex? No. Vertex, fine. But the... Oh, oh. GLA. Yeah. Yeah.Swyx [00:28:28]: I agree with that.Samuel [00:28:29]: So we have, again, another example of like, well, I think we go the extra mile in terms of engineering is we run on every commit, at least commit to main, we run tests against the live models. Not lots of tests, but like a handful of them. Oh, okay. And we had a point last week where, yeah, GLA is a little bit better. GLA1 was failing every single run. One of their tests would fail. And we, I think we might even have commented out that one at the moment. So like all of the models fail more often than you might expect, but like that one seems to be particularly likely to fail. But Vertex is the same API, but much more reliable.Swyx [00:29:01]: My rant here is that, you know, versions of this appear in Langchain and every single framework has to have its own little thing, a version of that. I would put to you, and then, you know, this is, this can be agree to disagree. This is not needed in Pydantic AI. I would much rather you adopt a layer like Lite LLM or what's the other one in JavaScript port key. And that's their job. They focus on that one thing and they, they normalize APIs for you. All new models are automatically added and you don't have to duplicate this inside of your framework. So for example, if I wanted to use deep seek, I'm out of luck because Pydantic AI doesn't have deep seek yet.Samuel [00:29:38]: Yeah, it does.Swyx [00:29:39]: Oh, it does. Okay. I'm sorry. But you know what I mean? Should this live in your code or should it live in a layer that's kind of your API gateway that's a defined piece of infrastructure that people have?Samuel [00:29:49]: And I think if a company who are well known, who are respected by everyone had come along and done this at the right time, maybe we should have done it a year and a half ago and said, we're going to be the universal AI layer. That would have been a credible thing to do. I've heard varying reports of Lite LLM is the truth. And it didn't seem to have exactly the type safety that we needed. Also, as I understand it, and again, I haven't looked into it in great detail. Part of their business model is proxying the request through their, through their own system to do the generalization. That would be an enormous put off to an awful lot of people. Honestly, the truth is I don't think it is that much work unifying the model. I get where you're coming from. I kind of see your point. I think the truth is that everyone is centralizing around open AIs. Open AI's API is the one to do. So DeepSeq support that. Grok with OK support that. Ollama also does it. I mean, if there is that library right now, it's more or less the open AI SDK. And it's very high quality. It's well type checked. It uses Pydantic. So I'm biased. But I mean, I think it's pretty well respected anyway.Swyx [00:30:57]: There's different ways to do this. Because also, it's not just about normalizing the APIs. You have to do secret management and all that stuff.Samuel [00:31:05]: Yeah. And there's also. There's Vertex and Bedrock, which to one extent or another, effectively, they host multiple models, but they don't unify the API. But they do unify the auth, as I understand it. Although we're halfway through doing Bedrock. So I don't know about it that well. But they're kind of weird hybrids because they support multiple models. But like I say, the auth is centralized.Swyx [00:31:28]: Yeah, I'm surprised they don't unify the API. That seems like something that I would do. You know, we can discuss all this all day. There's a lot of APIs. I agree.Samuel [00:31:36]: It would be nice if there was a universal one that we didn't have to go and build.Alessio [00:31:39]: And I guess the other side of, you know, routing model and picking models like evals. How do you actually figure out which one you should be using? I know you have one. First of all, you have very good support for mocking in unit tests, which is something that a lot of other frameworks don't do. So, you know, my favorite Ruby library is VCR because it just, you know, it just lets me store the HTTP requests and replay them. That part I'll kind of skip. I think you are busy like this test model. We're like just through Python. You try and figure out what the model might respond without actually calling the model. And then you have the function model where people can kind of customize outputs. Any other fun stories maybe from there? Or is it just what you see is what you get, so to speak?Samuel [00:32:18]: On those two, I think what you see is what you get. On the evals, I think watch this space. I think it's something that like, again, I was somewhat cynical about for some time. Still have my cynicism about some of the well, it's unfortunate that so many different things are called evals. It would be nice if we could agree. What they are and what they're not. But look, I think it's a really important space. I think it's something that we're going to be working on soon, both in Pydantic AI and in LogFire to try and support better because it's like it's an unsolved problem.Alessio [00:32:45]: Yeah, you do say in your doc that anyone who claims to know for sure exactly how your eval should be defined can safely be ignored.Samuel [00:32:52]: We'll delete that sentence when we tell people how to do their evals.Alessio [00:32:56]: Exactly. I was like, we need we need a snapshot of this today. And so let's talk about eval. So there's kind of like the vibe. Yeah. So you have evals, which is what you do when you're building. Right. Because you cannot really like test it that many times to get statistical significance. And then there's the production eval. So you also have LogFire, which is kind of like your observability product, which I tried before. It's very nice. What are some of the learnings you've had from building an observability tool for LEMPs? And yeah, as people think about evals, even like what are the right things to measure? What are like the right number of samples that you need to actually start making decisions?Samuel [00:33:33]: I'm not the best person to answer that is the truth. So I'm not going to come in here and tell you that I think I know the answer on the exact number. I mean, we can do some back of the envelope statistics calculations to work out that like having 30 probably gets you most of the statistical value of having 200 for, you know, by definition, 15% of the work. But the exact like how many examples do you need? For example, that's a much harder question to answer because it's, you know, it's deep within the how models operate in terms of LogFire. One of the reasons we built LogFire the way we have and we allow you to write SQL directly against your data and we're trying to build the like powerful fundamentals of observability is precisely because we know we don't know the answers. And so allowing people to go and innovate on how they're going to consume that stuff and how they're going to process it is we think that's valuable. Because even if we come along and offer you an evals framework on top of LogFire, it won't be right in all regards. And we want people to be able to go and innovate and being able to write their own SQL connected to the API. And effectively query the data like it's a database with SQL allows people to innovate on that stuff. And that's what allows us to do it as well. I mean, we do a bunch of like testing what's possible by basically writing SQL directly against LogFire as any user could. I think the other the other really interesting bit that's going on in observability is OpenTelemetry is centralizing around semantic attributes for GenAI. So it's a relatively new project. A lot of it's still being added at the moment. But basically the idea that like. They unify how both SDKs and or agent frameworks send observability data to to any OpenTelemetry endpoint. And so, again, we can go and having that unification allows us to go and like basically compare different libraries, compare different models much better. That stuff's in a very like early stage of development. One of the things we're going to be working on pretty soon is basically, I suspect, GenAI will be the first agent framework that implements those semantic attributes properly. Because, again, we control and we can say this is important for observability, whereas most of the other agent frameworks are not maintained by people who are trying to do observability. With the exception of Langchain, where they have the observability platform, but they chose not to go down the OpenTelemetry route. So they're like plowing their own furrow. And, you know, they're a lot they're even further away from standardization.Alessio [00:35:51]: Can you maybe just give a quick overview of how OTEL ties into the AI workflows? There's kind of like the question of is, you know, a trace. And a span like a LLM call. Is it the agent? It's kind of like the broader thing you're tracking. How should people think about it?Samuel [00:36:06]: Yeah, so they have a PR that I think may have now been merged from someone at IBM talking about remote agents and trying to support this concept of remote agents within GenAI. I'm not particularly compelled by that because I don't think that like that's actually by any means the common use case. But like, I suppose it's fine for it to be there. The majority of the stuff in OTEL is basically defining how you would instrument. A given call to an LLM. So basically the actual LLM call, what data you would send to your telemetry provider, how you would structure that. Apart from this slightly odd stuff on remote agents, most of the like agent level consideration is not yet implemented in is not yet decided effectively. And so there's a bit of ambiguity. Obviously, what's good about OTEL is you can in the end send whatever attributes you like. But yeah, there's quite a lot of churn in that space and exactly how we store the data. I think that one of the most interesting things, though, is that if you think about observability. Traditionally, it was sure everyone would say our observability data is very important. We must keep it safe. But actually, companies work very hard to basically not have anything that sensitive in their observability data. So if you're a doctor in a hospital and you search for a drug for an STI, the sequel might be sent to the observability provider. But none of the parameters would. It wouldn't have the patient number or their name or the drug. With GenAI, that distinction doesn't exist because it's all just messed up in the text. If you have that same patient asking an LLM how to. What drug they should take or how to stop smoking. You can't extract the PII and not send it to the observability platform. So the sensitivity of the data that's going to end up in observability platforms is going to be like basically different order of magnitude to what's in what you would normally send to Datadog. Of course, you can make a mistake and send someone's password or their card number to Datadog. But that would be seen as a as a like mistake. Whereas in GenAI, a lot of data is going to be sent. And I think that's why companies like Langsmith and are trying hard to offer observability. On prem, because there's a bunch of companies who are happy for Datadog to be cloud hosted, but want self-hosted self-hosting for this observability stuff with GenAI.Alessio [00:38:09]: And are you doing any of that today? Because I know in each of the spans you have like the number of tokens, you have the context, you're just storing everything. And then you're going to offer kind of like a self-hosting for the platform, basically. Yeah. Yeah.Samuel [00:38:23]: So we have scrubbing roughly equivalent to what the other observability platforms have. So if we, you know, if we see password as the key, we won't send the value. But like, like I said, that doesn't really work in GenAI. So we're accepting we're going to have to store a lot of data and then we'll offer self-hosting for those people who can afford it and who need it.Alessio [00:38:42]: And then this is, I think, the first time that most of the workloads performance is depending on a third party. You know, like if you're looking at Datadog data, usually it's your app that is driving the latency and like the memory usage and all of that. Here you're going to have spans that maybe take a long time to perform because the GLA API is not working or because OpenAI is kind of like overwhelmed. Do you do anything there since like the provider is almost like the same across customers? You know, like, are you trying to surface these things for people and say, hey, this was like a very slow span, but actually all customers using OpenAI right now are seeing the same thing. So maybe don't worry about it or.Samuel [00:39:20]: Not yet. We do a few things that people don't generally do in OTA. So we send. We send information at the beginning. At the beginning of a trace as well as sorry, at the beginning of a span, as well as when it finishes. By default, OTA only sends you data when the span finishes. So if you think about a request which might take like 20 seconds, even if some of the intermediate spans finished earlier, you can't basically place them on the page until you get the top level span. And so if you're using standard OTA, you can't show anything until those requests are finished. When those requests are taking a few hundred milliseconds, it doesn't really matter. But when you're doing Gen AI calls or when you're like running a batch job that might take 30 minutes. That like latency of not being able to see the span is like crippling to understanding your application. And so we've we do a bunch of slightly complex stuff to basically send data about a span as it starts, which is closely related. Yeah.Alessio [00:40:09]: Any thoughts on all the other people trying to build on top of OpenTelemetry in different languages, too? There's like the OpenLEmetry project, which doesn't really roll off the tongue. But how do you see the future of these kind of tools? Is everybody going to have to build? Why does everybody want to build? They want to build their own open source observability thing to then sell?Samuel [00:40:29]: I mean, we are not going off and trying to instrument the likes of the OpenAI SDK with the new semantic attributes, because at some point that's going to happen and it's going to live inside OTEL and we might help with it. But we're a tiny team. We don't have time to go and do all of that work. So OpenLEmetry, like interesting project. But I suspect eventually most of those semantic like that instrumentation of the big of the SDKs will live, like I say, inside the main OpenTelemetry report. I suppose. What happens to the agent frameworks? What data you basically need at the framework level to get the context is kind of unclear. I don't think we know the answer yet. But I mean, I was on the, I guess this is kind of semi-public, because I was on the call with the OpenTelemetry call last week talking about GenAI. And there was someone from Arize talking about the challenges they have trying to get OpenTelemetry data out of Langchain, where it's not like natively implemented. And obviously they're having quite a tough time. And I was realizing, hadn't really realized this before, but how lucky we are to primarily be talking about our own agent framework, where we have the control rather than trying to go and instrument other people's.Swyx [00:41:36]: Sorry, I actually didn't know about this semantic conventions thing. It looks like, yeah, it's merged into main OTel. What should people know about this? I had never heard of it before.Samuel [00:41:45]: Yeah, I think it looks like a great start. I think there's some unknowns around how you send the messages that go back and forth, which is kind of the most important part. It's the most important thing of all. And that is moved out of attributes and into OTel events. OTel events in turn are moving from being on a span to being their own top-level API where you send data. So there's a bunch of churn still going on. I'm impressed by how fast the OTel community is moving on this project. I guess they, like everyone else, get that this is important, and it's something that people are crying out to get instrumentation off. So I'm kind of pleasantly surprised at how fast they're moving, but it makes sense.Swyx [00:42:25]: I'm just kind of browsing through the specification. I can already see that this basically bakes in whatever the previous paradigm was. So now they have genai.usage.prompt tokens and genai.usage.completion tokens. And obviously now we have reasoning tokens as well. And then only one form of sampling, which is top-p. You're basically baking in or sort of reifying things that you think are important today, but it's not a super foolproof way of doing this for the future. Yeah.Samuel [00:42:54]: I mean, that's what's neat about OTel is you can always go and send another attribute and that's fine. It's just there are a bunch that are agreed on. But I would say, you know, to come back to your previous point about whether or not we should be relying on one centralized abstraction layer, this stuff is moving so fast that if you start relying on someone else's standard, you risk basically falling behind because you're relying on someone else to keep things up to date.Swyx [00:43:14]: Or you fall behind because you've got other things going on.Samuel [00:43:17]: Yeah, yeah. That's fair. That's fair.Swyx [00:43:19]: Any other observations just about building LogFire, actually? Let's just talk about this. So you announced LogFire. I was kind of only familiar with LogFire because of your Series A announcement. I actually thought you were making a separate company. I remember some amount of confusion with you when that came out. So to be clear, it's Pydantic LogFire and the company is one company that has kind of two products, an open source thing and an observability thing, correct? Yeah. I was just kind of curious, like any learnings building LogFire? So classic question is, do you use ClickHouse? Is this like the standard persistence layer? Any learnings doing that?Samuel [00:43:54]: We don't use ClickHouse. We started building our database with ClickHouse, moved off ClickHouse onto Timescale, which is a Postgres extension to do analytical databases. Wow. And then moved off Timescale onto DataFusion. And we're basically now building, it's DataFusion, but it's kind of our own database. Bogomil is not entirely happy that we went through three databases before we chose one. I'll say that. But like, we've got to the right one in the end. I think we could have realized that Timescale wasn't right. I think ClickHouse. They both taught us a lot and we're in a great place now. But like, yeah, it's been a real journey on the database in particular.Swyx [00:44:28]: Okay. So, you know, as a database nerd, I have to like double click on this, right? So ClickHouse is supposed to be the ideal backend for anything like this. And then moving from ClickHouse to Timescale is another counterintuitive move that I didn't expect because, you know, Timescale is like an extension on top of Postgres. Not super meant for like high volume logging. But like, yeah, tell us those decisions.Samuel [00:44:50]: So at the time, ClickHouse did not have good support for JSON. I was speaking to someone yesterday and said ClickHouse doesn't have good support for JSON and got roundly stepped on because apparently it does now. So they've obviously gone and built their proper JSON support. But like back when we were trying to use it, I guess a year ago or a bit more than a year ago, everything happened to be a map and maps are a pain to try and do like looking up JSON type data. And obviously all these attributes, everything you're talking about there in terms of the GenAI stuff. You can choose to make them top level columns if you want. But the simplest thing is just to put them all into a big JSON pile. And that was a problem with ClickHouse. Also, ClickHouse had some really ugly edge cases like by default, or at least until I complained about it a lot, ClickHouse thought that two nanoseconds was longer than one second because they compared intervals just by the number, not the unit. And I complained about that a lot. And then they caused it to raise an error and just say you have to have the same unit. Then I complained a bit more. And I think as I understand it now, they have some. They convert between units. But like stuff like that, when all you're looking at is when a lot of what you're doing is comparing the duration of spans was really painful. Also things like you can't subtract two date times to get an interval. You have to use the date sub function. But like the fundamental thing is because we want our end users to write SQL, the like quality of the SQL, how easy it is to write, matters way more to us than if you're building like a platform on top where your developers are going to write the SQL. And once it's written and it's working, you don't mind too much. So I think that's like one of the fundamental differences. The other problem that I have with the ClickHouse and Impact Timescale is that like the ultimate architecture, the like snowflake architecture of binary data in object store queried with some kind of cache from nearby. They both have it, but it's closed sourced and you only get it if you go and use their hosted versions. And so even if we had got through all the problems with Timescale or ClickHouse, we would end up like, you know, they would want to be taking their 80% margin. And then we would be wanting to take that would basically leave us less space for margin. Whereas data fusion. Properly open source, all of that same tooling is open source. And for us as a team of people with a lot of Rust expertise, data fusion, which is implemented in Rust, we can literally dive into it and go and change it. So, for example, I found that there were some slowdowns in data fusion's string comparison kernel for doing like string contains. And it's just Rust code. And I could go and rewrite the string comparison kernel to be faster. Or, for example, data fusion, when we started using it, didn't have JSON support. Obviously, as I've said, it's something we can do. It's something we needed. I was able to go and implement that in a weekend using our JSON parser that we built for Pydantic Core. So it's the fact that like data fusion is like for us the perfect mixture of a toolbox to build a database with, not a database. And we can go and implement stuff on top of it in a way that like if you were trying to do that in Postgres or in ClickHouse. I mean, ClickHouse would be easier because it's C++, relatively modern C++. But like as a team of people who are not C++ experts, that's much scarier than data fusion for us.Swyx [00:47:47]: Yeah, that's a beautiful rant.Alessio [00:47:49]: That's funny. Most people don't think they have agency on these projects. They're kind of like, oh, I should use this or I should use that. They're not really like, what should I pick so that I contribute the most back to it? You know, so but I think you obviously have an open source first mindset. So that makes a lot of sense.Samuel [00:48:05]: I think if we were probably better as a startup, a better startup and faster moving and just like headlong determined to get in front of customers as fast as possible, we should have just started with ClickHouse. I hope that long term we're in a better place for having worked with data fusion. We like we're quite engaged now with the data fusion community. Andrew Lam, who maintains data fusion, is an advisor to us. We're in a really good place now. But yeah, it's definitely slowed us down relative to just like building on ClickHouse and moving as fast as we can.Swyx [00:48:34]: OK, we're about to zoom out and do Pydantic run and all the other stuff. But, you know, my last question on LogFire is really, you know, at some point you run out sort of community goodwill just because like, oh, I use Pydantic. I love Pydantic. I'm going to use LogFire. OK, then you start entering the territory of the Datadogs, the Sentrys and the honeycombs. Yeah. So where are you going to really spike here? What differentiator here?Samuel [00:48:59]: I wasn't writing code in 2001, but I'm assuming that there were people talking about like web observability and then web observability stopped being a thing, not because the web stopped being a thing, but because all observability had to do web. If you were talking to people in 2010 or 2012, they would have talked about cloud observability. Now that's not a term because all observability is cloud first. The same is going to happen to gen AI. And so whether or not you're trying to compete with Datadog or with Arise and Langsmith, you've got to do first class. You've got to do general purpose observability with first class support for AI. And as far as I know, we're the only people really trying to do that. I mean, I think Datadog is starting in that direction. And to be honest, I think Datadog is a much like scarier company to compete with than the AI specific observability platforms. Because in my opinion, and I've also heard this from lots of customers, AI specific observability where you don't see everything else going on in your app is not actually that useful. Our hope is that we can build the first general purpose observability platform with first class support for AI. And that we have this open source heritage of putting developer experience first that other companies haven't done. For all I'm a fan of Datadog and what they've done. If you search Datadog logging Python. And you just try as a like a non-observability expert to get something up and running with Datadog and Python. It's not trivial, right? That's something Sentry have done amazingly well. But like there's enormous space in most of observability to do DX better.Alessio [00:50:27]: Since you mentioned Sentry, I'm curious how you thought about licensing and all of that. Obviously, your MIT license, you don't have any rolling license like Sentry has where you can only use an open source, like the one year old version of it. Was that a hard decision?Samuel [00:50:41]: So to be clear, LogFire is co-sourced. So Pydantic and Pydantic AI are MIT licensed and like properly open source. And then LogFire for now is completely closed source. And in fact, the struggles that Sentry have had with licensing and the like weird pushback the community gives when they take something that's closed source and make it source available just meant that we just avoided that whole subject matter. I think the other way to look at it is like in terms of either headcount or revenue or dollars in the bank. The amount of open source we do as a company is we've got to be open source. We're up there with the most prolific open source companies, like I say, per head. And so we didn't feel like we were morally obligated to make LogFire open source. We have Pydantic. Pydantic is a foundational library in Python. That and now Pydantic AI are our contribution to open source. And then LogFire is like openly for profit, right? As in we're not claiming otherwise. We're not sort of trying to walk a line if it's open source. But really, we want to make it hard to deploy. So you probably want to pay us. We're trying to be straight. That it's to pay for. We could change that at some point in the future, but it's not an immediate plan.Alessio [00:51:48]: All right. So the first one I saw this new I don't know if it's like a product you're building the Pydantic that run, which is a Python browser sandbox. What was the inspiration behind that? We talk a lot about code interpreter for lamps. I'm an investor in a company called E2B, which is a code sandbox as a service for remote execution. Yeah. What's the Pydantic that run story?Samuel [00:52:09]: So Pydantic that run is again completely open source. I have no interest in making it into a product. We just needed a sandbox to be able to demo LogFire in particular, but also Pydantic AI. So it doesn't have it yet, but I'm going to add basically a proxy to OpenAI and the other models so that you can run Pydantic AI in the browser. See how it works. Tweak the prompt, et cetera, et cetera. And we'll have some kind of limit per day of what you can spend on it or like what the spend is. The other thing we wanted to b

Watch the full video here: https://youtu.be/3j1XIBn3Ih4 Discover the shocking similarities between your body and a VCR and cassette player! SUPPORT THE MISSION AND YOURSELF

Among the topics of note on the program today, are you the parent of a child with autism? Do you believe it was caused by any vaccine your child may have been given? Also, with it being that time of the year where we see mixes of rain and snow and fluctuating temperatures above and below freezing, leading to the formation of ice in driveways and elsewhere, have you suffered a major injury slipping on ice? And to round things out, what is a relic from the past, like a VCR for example, that kids today have no idea what it does?

The tool we call "VCR" can be a life changing way to interact with our loved ones and even those who feel like enemies. Chris tells us stories about how to validate others' hearts and feelings, even when we may not agree with them, so that everyone can end up in a place of God's peace.

This week on Redesigned, we look at GTA 6's long-awaited launch date, the controversial AI-generated story, ‘Roommate From Hell,' which is a short film depiction of Jesus and the Devil as roommates.We also take a nostalgic deep dive into the struggles in the 80s and early 90s, when there were just four terrestrial channels was all we had in the UK. Remember adjusting the aerial for a clear picture? Or programming a VCR with VideoPlus codes from the TV guide? And how did Sky TV shake things up when it launched?Plus, we look at DJI's new Flip drone, a beginner-friendly, folding camera drone, and discuss what it means for casual users. Whether it's tech, culture, or a trip down memory lane, this episode has it all.Credits: Axel Blake - @axelblake (Instagram)Tyler Cohen (Roommate From Hell) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMu48Mt8vHMThe Every Day Investors - @theeverydayinvestors (Instagram)Enjoyed the episode? Please hit follow so you don't miss an episode. You can also follow me on Instagram / Threads: @thecontentpro_ Website: https://www.thecontentproducer.co.uk Email: andrew@thecontentproducer.co.uk

Welcome to the NEW Quiggin Out Podcast. Yes you read that right. The MMA has been dropped and the direction of this podcast has stepped aside from being just focused on MMA but open to pop culture and amazing creators like the one featured on this episode, GeekFireInk. Richard and I, henceforth Zuni, have been connected for the better part of a year where his videos would come across the daily feed and there would be a message here or there commenting on his hilarious Arnold impersonations or videos that me rolling with laughter. This episode dives into the man behind GeekFireInk, why his page actually has that name, the inner light, stand-up comedy, VCR's , voiceovers, Terminators and so much more. Zuni doesn't hold back on his history with paramedic school, being 24 hours from death or literally driving home from helping combat the fires in California as we filmed this episode. (Episode was filmed December 17). I have been waiting for the right time to post and really wanted this episode to be different. A re-branding should come with new intros, new outros and a new looking format. From the bottom of my heart, I hope you enjoy this new direction!

What if technology isn't just about moving forward but also about the joy of looking back? Join us on Tech Time Radio as we dive into the depths of space exploration, discussing the crucial role of advanced clocks and the historical parallels to maritime navigation. Our exploration takes a turn as we question Meta's decision to end fact-checking, with thought-provoking implications for Silicon Valley. Adding a twist to the tech talk, we sip on Sagamore Spirits Double Oak Rye Whiskey while unraveling the truth behind NVIDIA's identity as they pivot towards AI and supercomputing.We're thrilled to have cybersecurity expert Gwen Way with us, sharing her unique insights into technology, recent mergers, and, of course, our Gadgets and Gear Segment that looks at the Neutral Freedom X Multi-position chair, a Kickstarter gem promising versatility in seating. The episode takes a light-hearted turn as we celebrate the US Supreme Court's landmark decision on VCR recordings, reflecting on how it paved the way for modern DVR systems. Our anecdotes about recording TV shows during the pre-internet era add a charming touch of nostalgia, reminding us of the tech evolution we've witnessed.We wrap up with a retrospective glance at soon-to-be-obsolete technologies, weighing the balance between nostalgia and progress. From ICQ to Chromecast, we ponder their fading relevance and the journey of technology into the future. Join us for a compelling hour where tech news meets whiskey, offering insights, laughs, and a touch of nostalgia.Support the show

In our latest episode of Welcome to Cloudlandia, we explore the remarkable growth of our coaching program, from its modest beginnings in 1994 to the bustling network of 18 associate coaches providing 600 coaching days annually. This evolution underscores the importance of adaptability and foresight as we hint at exciting expansion plans for 2026. Beyond the professional landscape, we delve into the nostalgic appeal of different climates and regional traditions. We compare the frigid allure of snowy winters with the sun-drenched charm of Florida and San Diego, offering a cozy reflection on why people choose to embrace extreme weather. Our conversation then turns towards the intricate dance of leadership and organizational structures. We explore the shift from rigid hierarchies to fluid, networked systems, imagining the profound changes in productivity that have paved the way for today's entrepreneurial landscape. From the global dominance of the US dollar to the speculative world of cryptocurrency, our discussion unveils the strategic significance of these economic elements, adding a light-hearted twist to our take on Canadian healthcare services. SHOW HIGHLIGHTS We discussed the remarkable evolution of our coaching program, starting from 1994 with 144 workshops conducted solely by me, to a network of 18 associate coaches delivering 600 coaching days annually. Dean shares his experiences from the icy north and reflected on the gradual adaptation to warmer climates, providing insights into the unique economic opportunities that arise from natural challenges. We explored the nostalgic memories of childhood winters, contrasting them with the warm climates of Florida and San Diego, and discussed the cultural differences in regional terminology. The episode delved into the shift from rigid hierarchical structures to more fluid, networked systems, highlighting the transformative impact of technology on productivity and organizational dynamics. We imagined the productivity revolution that could have occurred if a writer in the 1970s had access to a modern MacBook, pondering the implications for decision-making and strategic planning. The conversation touched on the global dominance of the US dollar as the world's reserve currency, and the minimal impact of foreign trade on the US economy compared to other export-driven nations. We questioned the viability of Bitcoin as a true currency due to its lack of fungibility compared to the US dollar, and discussed gold's role as a hedge against currency inflation. The episode highlighted the Canadian dollar's strategic role as a financial hedge, particularly in relation to tax burdens and global business ventures. We examined the concept of "sunk cost payoffs," encouraging reflections on optimizing investments in fixed costs to achieve greater returns through training and education. The episode concluded with a light-hearted discussion on Canadian healthcare services, and the humorous notion of using Chicago as a secondary tier for healthcare needs. Links: WelcomeToCloudlandia.com StrategicCoach.com DeanJackson.com ListingAgentLifestyle.com TRANSCRIPT (AI transcript provided as supporting material and may contain errors) Dean: Mr Sullivan, mr Jackson, fresh from the frigid north, oh my goodness. Dan: Dan I you know. Yeah, I'm just happy to be back. It's sunny and warming. I'm going to say it's warm yet because it was only got up to like 6.3 or something yesterday, but it's warming up and it's warmer than it was. I did escape, without defaulting, my snow free millennium. I didn't get a cold this time, that's true. And I didn't get any snow on me, so that's good yeah. Dean: Well, we're actually in Chicago today and it's 49. Oh my goodness, wow, we're actually in Chicago today and that's 49. Oh my goodness, wow, it's deciding to see if it can upset Orlando, the area, a last valiant attempt before the total freeze sets in. Dan: Yeah, exactly. Dean: Exactly. Dan: Well, Dan, what a great couple of workshops we had this week. They were really I know about one of them, I know about one. Dean: That's actually a good thing to say. You know when you're developing a company. Dan: Absolutely yeah. Dean: I was telling people that in 1994, fifth year of the program, I did 144 workshop days that year and the reason being I was the only coach. So then in 95, we started adding associate coaches and we're up to 18 now. We just had our 18th one come on board. Come on board and this year the total coaching team will do 600 coaching days compared to 144 back in 1994 and I will do 12 of them. Dan: I was just gonna say yeah, 12. You got three groups times four, right yeah? Yeah yeah, that's great the connector. Dean: the connector calls which I, which I, which I absolutely love. I just think those two hour coaching calls are superb. Dan: I do too. Two hour zoom. Two hour zoom calls are the perfect. That's the perfect length. Anything more is too much. Dean: Yeah, so if you add those up, that would be using eight hours as a workshop day that would be 16 more days of coaching in a year, but that's significantly fewer than my 144. The problem with the 144, you didn't have much energy for creating new stuff, right? Dan: Yeah, and you were. Yeah, I guess that's true, right, and some of it you were having to. The good news about the position you're in right now is you really only do the same workshop three times, right, Like you do a quarterly workshop, but even that by the third time you've learned. Dean: Well they actually change. I mean they're probably 90%. In other words, number two is 90%, brings forward 90% of number one, and number three brings forward Because you've economized. You know I can do this quicker, I can do this. You add some new things, you get some new ideas. Dan: And you see what land is right, how things land. Dean: Yeah, yeah. By the time you get to number three, you've probably in my case, I've certainly created some new material. That just came out of the conversations. It's a nice. It's a nice setup that I have right now yeah, I love that in these. Dan: You know you're already, you're booked out for 2025. Dean: As am I. Dan: This is a great. This is the first year going in that I'm kind of embracing the scaffolding. We'll call it. Dean: My sense by 26, we'll have a fourth. We'll have a fourth quarterly workshop. Just because of the growth of the membership, but what that is more, choice for the participants during any quarter. They'll have four opportunities Anyway. Dan: I'm really enjoying being back in Toronto. That's such a great and our group is growing. That's nice. It'll be the place to be before we know it. Dean: It will be. There will be a certain cachet that you have that you know. I don't know how we'll signify this, but do it at the mothership. I do the program at the mothership. Dan: I do the program. Oh, that's the best, yeah, yeah. That's so funny I've gotten. I've got the Hazleton is fast turning into the official hotel too, which is great. I've got Chad hooked over there and Chris does there, so that's good, we get the whole so is she thinking about coming into PreZone? We're working on her for sure. I think that would be fantastic, yeah, and same Norman's coming back in March, so that's great, oh, good. Dean: He'll be in Toronto. Is he doing anything new besides the multitude of things he was doing before? Dan: Well, you know, he sold his main business, so he is now, you know, a new chapter. Dean: But he still didn't sell the ambition. Dan: The ambition didn't go with the sale. Dean: Yeah, the waste management company. Dan: That's right, that's right Right. Yeah. Dean: And I remember him coming. I forget when it was but they had just had a hurricane that especially affected the Carolinas. Dan: South. Dean: Carolina and he came in for a party, you know, for before free zone, and I said how are you doing, norm? And he says well, you know, I don't. I can't talk about this everywhere, but I certainly do enjoy a hurricane every once in a while, because he's in the waste management. Dan: Right, exactly, and also in the plywood business, also in the plywood business. Dean: Yeah, both before and after both before the hurricane and after the hurricane people buy plywood. Yeah, both before and after the hurricane and after the hurricane, people buy plywood, so yeah. Dan: You know that's an interesting thing. Dean: I'm reminded of what I'm going to tell you because I grew up in Ohio. And Ohio is two very distinct states. There's the north and the south, and I grew up way up in the north, in the middle of. Dan: Ohio. Dean: But we always considered the people who were down by the Ohio River, part of the Confederacy. You know, I don't know if they put in great new flood controls, since I was growing up in the 50s down there, but every, you know, every couple of years there was just a massive the Ohio River, which is a mighty river. Couple of years there was just a massive. Dan: Ohio River, which is a mighty river. Dean: I mean it's one of the major rivers and it's one of the, you know, flows into the Mississippi. It goes all the way from. Pittsburgh. It goes all the way from Pittsburgh to the Mississippi. That's covering a whole number of states. But you know there are people who would live there. They get completely washed out, they'd rebuild and then three or four years later they'd get washed out and they'd rebuild and everything like that. And I often wondered what the thinking process is around that You're in a disaster zone and you keep, you keep rebuilding in the disaster zone. Is it short memory or I think that's probably true or you just like the opportunity to build again yeah, it's built back better. Dan: Yeah, the whole yeah yeah, I think it is true. Dean: Right like people but a lot of people say I wouldn't do that, you know I wouldn't live there where they do. But I'm not saying people are stupid about this, I'm just saying I'm just I'm not comprehending. But I live in a place that gets frigid every year and people say I couldn't understand how you would continue living in a place. So what do you think it is? How? Dan: you would continue living in a place. So what do you think it is? Well, I have been struggling with that question since I was a little child. I remember we grew up in Halton Hills and I remember my father's family is from Florida and my dad worked with Air Canada, so we used to fly, we used to come to Florida quite a bit over the winter. Dean: And. Dan: I remember, just I remember, like it was yesterday, the time when I realized I must've been, like, you know, four or five years old when I realized I had the experience of being out playing in the yard in the morning with my snowsuit on, and then we got on a plane and went to Florida and in the afternoon I was swimming in the pool and that just like baffled my brain, like why don't we just live here? Why doesn't, why doesn't everybody live here? Yeah, and my parents are explaining that it's summer all year, you know, and I'm like I couldn't understand and so in my mind that was kind of like before I knew about, you know, I learned about immigration and you know two different countries and the people can't just live, even though I'm a dual citizen, that's why most people don't. And in my mind I still remember that to me didn't explain why would people live in Buffalo? That was an option. If you're in the United States, you can live anywhere you want. Why would somebody choose Buffalo over Florida? I don't get it, I don't know. And this is all pre-cloudlandia you know where now it's like we're really seeing this. The relevance you know less and less. Dean: Yeah, what? What you're telling me is that, when you were the age that you described, florida had a great deal of meaning, and Canada didn't, toronto didn't, it didn't have a great meaning, and so for me, for example, I just loved winter. You know I grew up loving winter, you know, and I used to go. I mean, you know, I was fields and forests and the woods were just magical when it snowed, you know, and you'd go. It was an entirely different world. I mean, they were four times a year, they were different woods because each of the seasons, the trees and the, you know, the trees and the terrain are really radically different, and so so that's why I like it and you know, I've been to San Diego, you know, and San Diego is just about the most temperate, certainly in the United States it's the most temperate place. It's 72, and I said, God, I couldn't stand living here. Dan: Oh man. Dean: Yeah, yeah, I know Mike, mike loves it. Yeah, and I can understand and I can understand why I mean I like it when I'm there. Yeah, I said you mean. You mean next week, when the next season comes, it's going to be exactly the same. And then the second, third season is exactly. Dan: You know it's not all sunshine and rainbows. They have june gloom. That's the uh, that's the weather that comes in. Dean: Every morning in june you get this fog, marine layer fog that comes in and see, I would find that really interesting yeah like I, I would find the fascinating fog you know I would, that's it yeah, yeah so yeah, I don't know it's really interesting, but it depends. Uh, there was just such meaning for me in those early childhood winters, you know yeah, and sometimes you know, and then, yeah, you could imagine you were an arctic. You know you could. Also, you know you had the tobogganing and sledding and tobogganing and our neighbors had horses with a sleigh. You know and everything Do you know what's so funny. See the thing I can remember, you know. I certainly know that Santa's dressed for winter, santa's not dressed for Florida. Dan: Right. Dean: Well he's just not dressed for Florida, that's true. I mean he must get hardship pay going to Florida. Dan: Got to take off that top layer. He's got to get his shorts on underneath all of that. Yeah, so funny. You know I heard you brought up toboggan and you know Chad Jenkins. I heard for the first time he referred to his toque as a toboggan and I had never heard that before. Dean: Yeah, of course. It was a stocking cap. I mean everybody knows, everybody knows it's a stocking cap. You know, yeah, I never heard that word. I never heard that word. I thought it was sort of some sort of elitist word. You know, you get that after you get graduate degree a stocking cap becomes a two person. Dan: No, we never called it. That's the Canadian term for it everybody forget about that. Your childhood was in Ohio. But a stocking cap a beanie as they say so funny a beanie is something else. Dean: a beanie is just, it's like a yarmulke for the Jewish people, but it sort of resembles that. Yeah, anyway, these are deep subjects that we're talking about. Dan: What was your big? Chad and I were talking about the workshop days and you had mentioned it's one of the best workshops that you had in memory. I would love to hear what you're. Yeah, certainly. Dean: Yeah, yeah. What I remember about best workshops is that generally the afternoon previous best workshops were by lunchtime. You were setting up for the real punchline in the afternoon, but this one by lunchtime you were setting up for the. You know the real punchline in the afternoon but this one by lunchtime. It had been a great workshop up until that time, and almost like it had two complete shows. There were like two complete shows when we, when we did yeah, you know, I mean it's a qualitative thing you just, you know I don't have a scoring system for saying it, but you just have a feel, feel for it and everybody was, everybody was totally engaged, yeah, pretty quickly in the morning, yeah and yeah, but it was. I mean that thing about leadership. You know the I hadn't uh, pulled back that diagram, the pyramid and the network diagram. I hadn't pulled, I hadn't pulled back that diagram, the pyramid and the network diagram, I hadn't referred to that in about 25 years and I just brought it back. Dan: And. Dean: I didn't know I was going to use it until I actually walked in the room to start the workshop. I said I think there's something about this diagram that'll create a context and more and more as I've been thinking about it, you know what the greatest entrepreneurial resource is in the 2020s and that's probably what Trump brought in. Elon and Vivek, you know, for their doge, their doge department. Anyway is that the greatest source for entrepreneurial growth is the obsolescence of bureaucracy. Dan: Yes, yes, what really? Dean: struck me, big systems falling apart, big systems falling apart, that's the greatest resource for entrepreneurial growth. Dan: The thing that struck me too is that the triangle, triangle, the pyramid method that you showed there, that the difference in the network thing is the absence of a border around stuff, you know, like I, that's. What really stood out for me was when, and maybe we should explain, can you verbally explain? Dean: what your vision is. Yeah, this comes from a book. It was actually my first book. It was called the Great Crossover and I was starting to talk about this in presentations I was making. I think the first one was 19. 1987, I gave a talk on this and what I said is that growing up in the 40s and 50s it was entirely a big pyramid world big corporations, big government and big unions, and even you know well, I'll just stick to those three and it was because of industrialization that industrialization takes on a certain form. And then part of industrialization is the administration offices that go along with factories and what they are is that you know, when you have a big plant, a big factory, and it runs on the assembly line, in other words, things move from station to station and the people at each station just do a single task and then they pass it on to the next person. To have an administration that takes what the factory produces and gets it out into the world. they also have to create an assembly line of information, and the reason why it becomes very stiff and static over time is just the sheer cost of amortizing the factory. I mean like a steel mill. You know a steel mill. You build a steam mill. It takes you about 50 years in the early 20th century it took you about 50 years to pay back the cost of the steel mill, the amortized cost of it. Well, you had to get it right in the first place and you couldn't be fooling around with it. So everything was kind of fixed and that's why people could be hired, you know, at 18 years old, and they didn't really have to learn that much in the job they were doing. Once they got it down it was good for life. You know the steel workers. I mean they might have modernization somewhere along the line, but it was still fundamentally the same activity. So society kind of took over that and you had some big events. You had the huge growth of government administrations during the Great Depression when Roosevelt came in with the New Deal, and there was just these huge. They had never. And I was reading an article, theodore Rose, in the first decade of the 20th century the executive branch had about 60 employees. You know the presidency, you know Now it's I mean it's not the biggest but it's got thousands. The executive branch, you know just the White House plus the executive building next to it. It's got. You know it's got thousands of people in it. You know just the White House plus the executive building next to it. It's got you know, it's got thousands of people in it, you know, and there's layer after, layer after layer. And. But they were really huge in the and then the Second World War. Everything got massively big, but they were all pyramidical. Everything was pyramidical. You know. You had a person on top and then maybe 10 layers down. General Motors in the private sector, it was the biggest. That was the end of the 50s, 1959. They had 21 layers of management, from the CEO right down to the factory floor. There wasn't much leadership. There was a very few people at the top leadership. The rest of it was just managing what the leaders wanted. So that's the setup for the you know story. And that persisted and things were. You know, there was great productivity from around 1920 to 19. And then starting around 1960, there was enormous cost. There was enormous, there was even enormous growth, but there wasn't much increase in productivity because they had basically maxed out what you could do with that kind of structure. And then, because of and the change maker is the introduction of the microchip, Right. Especially when it gets along to being a personal computer. Dan: Yes, that's what I was. That really fits in with the you know, by the 1950 to 1975-ish that's what we're talking about. That was kind of the staple of the hierarchy system. And then you're right, that's where some of the you know the microchip at its greatest thing really was the beginning of being able to detach from physical location, like I remember, even you know where. This is part of the advantage that the microchip gave us. If you look at what were the things that were kind of the first mainstream you know beneficiaries of our ability to electronify things, that it was the answering machine that gave us freedom from having to be on the phone. It literally provided the first opportunity. Fact, check me on this. I mean just think I'm just making this up, but could that be the first time that we had the opportunity? Dean: You're asking a two fact finder to fact check you. Dan: Just gut, check me on this. Does that seem like a? Dean: Oh, gut check. Dan: Yeah, gut check, I forgot who I was talking to. Dean: That's an entirely different animal. Dan: Is that the first time? Like? The answering machine gave us the first opportunity to be in two places at once. We could be there to answer the phone and not miss anything, but we could also be away from the phone. The vcr gave us the chance to record something, to not miss it, so we could be somewhere else. The pager, the cell phone yeah, these things were all sort of our. Dean: This was yeah, well, you're moving in a particular, you're moving in a particular direction. If you say where, what do all these things have in common? Dan: you've just identified it. Dean: You know that, yeah yeah, I was thinking. I remember the this would be in the 70s the selectric, the ibm selectric typewriter you know, was a real precursor of word processing, you know, because you could. First of all they weren't keys, it was just a ball that revolved. It was just a little ball that revolved, and you know. And so there was no jamming. I mean, there was no jamming. And of course it was electric, it was an electric typewriter. But the big thing is that you could get it right, you know, you could program it and then you just put in a sheet of paper and you press the button and it typed out the entire page and everything like that I remember, I remember that was that was that filled me with wonder right, you know when I said wow, that's really amazing. You know, you know, as a writer, I sometimes I have this is the sort of fantasies that writers had. And I said, if I had been a copywriter back in the 1970s, but I had a Mac at home, I had my Macbook at home. Dan: Oh, my goodness you were one of those. Dean: Okay, and you know I do all the writing, you know I do all the writing on it, you know I do spell check and everything else, and then I would hire somebody to type it on a typewriter. Dan: I don't know how I'd do it. Dean: I would have it typed out, but with lots of mistakes, because a writer shouldn't have perfect typing and I'd look busy during the day, but the first thing in the morning I would just unload an enormous amount of stuff and I'd be so far ahead, but I'd never tell anybody about my Mac. Yeah, that's funny Now how my Mac would have been invented only for one person. I haven't really worked that out yet. Dan: Oh boy, but that's you know, it's so. What struck me when you were doing it? Dean: Yeah, somebody asked me a couple months ago, you know, it's so. What struck me when you were doing this is yeah, somebody asked me a couple of months ago you know the conversation if you had a superpower, what superpower would you want? And I said you know, I've given this a lot of thought, I've tried out a lot of possibilities, but the one that I think I could just stay with for the rest of my life is tomorrow. Tomorrow's Wall Street Journal yesterday. I could stay with that for the rest of my life is tomorrow's Wall Street Journal yesterday. Dan: I could stay with that for the rest of my life. Oh, okay, that's even great. Tomorrow's yesterday, so you would get a full 24 hours with it 48. Dean: 48 hours with it, you get a day in between for activity. Yeah, I'd probably move to Las las vegas oh, that's so funny. Dan: Yeah, that would be a really good. That would be a really good one, that'd be a fun movie. Actually the prognosticator, the thing that struck me, dan, about the difference between the pyramid with the layers of people, the circles, the one person at the top, the two leaders, the managers, the supervisors in the workforce, was the boundary of the pyramid itself. Right Like prior to when that was brought up, the only efficient way to communicate to everybody was to have them all within the borders of the wall, the same. Yeah everybody in the same place and what struck me when you drew the circles all just connected to everyone, without any borders. That's really. We're at the fullest level of that right now where there's never been a better time. Are the best at doing and be able to plug into you know a who, not how, network with vcr collaborations. Dean: I mean, that's really the a great, a great example of that is the um connector call we had on. We had a friday, I had a connector call and I tested out a new tool which is called sunk cost payoffs. You look at everything that you'll always be paying for, ok, so in our case, we have. You know, we'll have a. We have more than 100 team members. We'll always be paying for more than 100 team members. More than 100 team members, and then all of our production costs for material and then our complete operations, because we're always going to be an in-person, you know, workshop company you know we're not going to be anything else and taxes and regulations, you know, and everything you have, and I said we're always going to be, we're always going to be paying for these, you know. So the question of what are the top three and the you know, the, you know, I just picked. The top three are, you know, our team, including our coaches, absolutely. And then the creation of the thinking tools, and you know. So we have all that. And then I said, so that being the case, I'm just going to accept that I'm only going to pay. Now, what are the strategies for just multiplying the profitability that I get out of the things that I'm always paying for? And it was very interesting because a lot of people said you know, this has always bothered me. The sunk cost has always bothered me and I've often thought is there any way of getting rid? The sunk cost has always bothered me and I've often thought is there any way of getting rid of the sunk cost? But now I'm thinking maybe I'm not investing enough in my sunk costs. I'm not investing enough. Dan: And. Dean: I'm about 10% more spending away from getting a 10 times return. If I just put a little bit more emphasis here, getting a 10 times return, if I just put a little bit more emphasis here for example, training and education of staff, training and education of staff, it might cost you 10% more for your team members, you know, but you probably get a much bigger return than the 10% because it already exists. It already exists, you don't have to create it. Anyway, that's just a setup. So we were just one person said you know I should link up with Lior. Lior was on the call. He said I should link up with Lior and you know it was Alec Broadfoot actually. He said I should link up and we should do this and I said why don't you do a triple play? Who would be the third person? And everybody in the room said Chris Johnson. Oh yeah right Like that, and it was immediately. There was a three-way. I think I'm suggesting what happened. There is exactly what you just said before. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Is that there's no spatial restrictions on the new organization you just put together. It's just three capabilities and they're in Cloudlandia. Dan: The reason why they can do it is that they're in Cloudlandia. Yeah, there's no borders and there's just the connections between the modules. That's really the capabilities. Yeah, well, it's the vision capability. Dean: I'm going to go back to the pyramid network model that we started talking about, so you had to have you know enough leadership. You had to have this huge structure. That was all management. There wasn't leadership from the bottom, there was leadership from the top. But in the network, if you think of three circles and they're connected, so they're connected, they're in a triple play. So you have the three circles, the connection, you have three circles and then you have the lines in between. The connector lines are the management, but what happens in the middle is the leadership. Dan: That's a much. That's great, and the things can all go out like in three dimensions, and they can well. Dean: not only that, but any one individual can have a multitude of threes. Dan: Yes. Yeah that gets pretty exponential, pretty quick, yeah, yeah. Dean: Anyway. Dan: I was just on a Zoom with Eben Pagan and Salim Ismail and yeah, we were talking about this, you know, because Salim, of course, his Exponential Organizations book and framework is really that was certainly a playbook that fits with this, you know, or a expandable workforce, and it really is. The ideas are what's at the central, that's the vision. Right, that's the thing. The visionary is the, the can see the connections between, but there's never been, it's never been easier to, uh, to have all of these connections and that's what I really think like if you're able to look at what people's capabilities are. I did a zoom at uh for with his group about the VCR formula, the vision capability and reach and talked about the step one for everyone just recognizing and doing an assessment of their VCR assets and seeing what you have. Almost look at it as, like everybody, having playing cards, you know, like baseball cards with your stats on the back that show your the things you know, the things you can do and the people you can reach is a pretty, you know good framework for collaboration Chad, actually building a building a software kind of or an app tool around that, which is. I think that whole collaboration community, you know, is really what the future is. I just get excited about it because it allows you to be like in that world. You know, the you don't need to ever get slowed down by the inability to execute on capability. You know, because the you don't have to anymore, you can tap into any capability, which is kind of a great thing. It's like any capability with capacity is a great thing, and even if you have limited capacity, that's fixable as well. Dean: It's really interesting because I was talking about the sunk cost payoffs. Our 120 team members is just such an incredible you know, incredible capability. And all of them are in their unique ability. Everybody goes through the complete unique ability identification and starting in. We started already, but 2025 will be the first year where, four times a year, they all update their 4x4 for themselves. So you do it the first time with them. In other words, that you say this is where I want you to be alert, curious, responsive and resourceful, and this is I want you to produce results that are faster, easier, cheaper, bigger. If you choose, you can be a hero in these four areas and, by the way, these are four ways that you can drive me crazy. If you really want to drive me crazy, just do any of these and you probably won't have to update your 4x4 next quarter because you'll be somewhere else. Okay, always give them a choice, always give them a choice you can do this or you can do this and anyway, but that's going to produce massive results over the in 2025, I could just feel it. And I have a team, a loose team, just 16 members that I just hang out with in the company and we're doing it every quarter and you can just see the excitement as they go forward. I'm just writing the book right now with Jeff, so we're in our first edition, the first draft of casting, that hiring, but it's really interesting. And then the weird thing is that we're always going to be having increasingly the majority of our dollars being American dollars and more and more of our expenses in Canadian dollars. And that just multiplies, it's $1.41 this morning. That's great. Is that up or down? Oh, no, two months ago. Dan: It's $1.41 this morning. Dean: That's great. Is that up or down? Oh no, two months ago it was $1.34. Dan: Oh my goodness. Okay, so it's getting better. Dean: Well, it's like seven cents you know seven cents on every dollar and, being who Trump is and being who Trudeau is, I don't see the Canadian dollar getting any stronger. Dan: Yeah, that's At least until next. Dean: October, until next October. I mean, you know it's dangerous to be a charismatic person, okay, and because you know people's hearts just melted. He was the son of Pierre and he came along and he's this handsome. You know he's handsome, and you know, and he's you know, he's he knows, you know, he knows he's handsome and he's and everything like that. And they went along and he said such beautiful things but for nine years never did anything. You know just he spent a lot of money and he hired a lot of government employees, but as far as actually increasing productivity, increasing profitability, nothing over nine years and uh, everybody's just made up. Everybody's just made up their mind about him and there's not and you it's really almost enjoyable watching him struggle that there's nothing that he used to be able to get away with he can get away with now and you can just see the strain on him. He's still. You know he's still. He's very young looking, you know he's and, looking, and and and yeah, he hasn't. Dan: He didn't really age like obama and cl Clinton and the others before him in the presidential role. You see the aging of the weight of being the president. Dean: But he's kind of thrived. Dan: When I was there last, it was you know he started timeless. He's got a lot of timeless. Dean: He'll always be like 40. He'll always be like 35. You know he'll be, yeah, 40. He'll always be like 35. You know he'll be yeah, and you know and anyway interesting. And everybody's just sitting on their hands. You know the entire country is just sitting on their hands until you know the elections next October. It has to be next October. It could be sooner, but I don't think it will be, and you know, and he'll be out, I mean he'll be out. And he's lost five points of popularity since Trump got elected. Wow. Dan: The thing they were. Dean: You know, it's really obvious Trump is governing. Dan: Yeah. Dean: I mean, he's not been inauguratedated yet, but it's like he's the leader everybody's already. Dan: There were emergency meetings being held, or I saw that Trudeau was gathering all the premiers getting ready to address the possible tariffs. You know the response to the tariffs it's. You're right, everything's kind of everybody's. Dean: Yeah, he was. Did you see the? I don't know if you saw any of the videos, but he went to the opening, the reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral, and I did not. Looks beautiful. Dan: Have you seen any pictures oh? It's beautiful, no, I mean I never liked it. Dean: I you know when I would go. I went there a couple of times it I never liked it. I went there a couple of times it was dark and dingy and everything else. It's spectacular. Dan: It's spectacular. Dean: But, everybody, all the leaders in Europe who were there like everybody was there from Africa, from the Middle East and everything, all the leaders and they were all running up and they were holding his hand, in two hands, you know smiling at him and they said don't tariff us, don't tariff us, let's be friends. Let's be friends. Let's be friends. Talk about. Talk about your vcr formula being the uS economy is a hell of a capability. Dan: Holy cow. Yeah, I just saw Peter Zion was talking. I watched some of his videos and he was talking about why he doesn't worry about the United States geopolitically, you know, because we're miles away from anybody physically, we're in physical advantage away from anybody that would cause us or want us harmed. We are energy independent, we have the reserve currency. It's so much stuff. Dean: Half the arable land in the world. Dan: Yes, exactly Half of the ocean-going land in the world. Dean: Yes, exactly Half of the ocean-going ports in the world. I don't know if you knew that, but the US. If you count all the river systems, the lake systems, the ocean coasts and everything they have, half of the navigable, the ocean-going port. If you leave this place, you can go to the ocean, the ocean going point If you leave this place, you can go to the ocean. They have you know plus the military, I mean the Navy. The US Navy is seven times bigger and more powerful than all the other navies in the world combined. It's just enormous things, yeah, but it's the economy that really matters. It's the. You know it's that? Yeah. Did you see the one he did the? You know it's that. Yeah, did you see the one he did? Well, I don't think Peter Zion did one. He did one on why there won't be a replacement for the US currency. It's the reserve currency in the world, you know. Dan: And he said. Dean: first of all, it's so big the dollar is so big that America doesn't really even have to pay attention with what other people are doing with the dollars. As a matter of fact, there's more dollars in use around the world than there is far more dollars in use in around the world than there is in the US economy, which is the biggest economy. Dan: But the. Dean: US isn't a export economy. It's only about maybe up to 15% of the GDP has anything to do with foreign trade, import or export. It's about 15%. 85% is just Americans making stuff that other Americans are buying, and Canada is an export country. Dan: I mean it's totally an export country. Mexico is an export country China. Dean: Canada is an export country, I mean, it's totally an export country. Mexico is an export country. China is an extreme export country. Dan: And yeah. Dean: So anyway. Dan: What do you think? I haven't heard Peter Zayn talk about Bitcoin or how that you know crypto. Dean: I can't remember him ever saying anything. I've never seen it. Dan: Because that was big news that it just passed a hundred thousand well, you know, there's only so many of them well, what? When did you? Uh, do you remember when you first heard about bitcoin? Was it prior to peter diamandis introducing it to us? Dean: no to team no, I'd never heard about it before. Dan: Me neither. When he introduced it to us it was at about $500. Dean: But it's not a currency, it's not a currency. It's a speculative investment. It's a speculative investment because, it's not fungible. Do you know what the word fungible is? I didn't know what the word fungible. Yeah, you know word fund. I didn't know what the word meant, but, uh, one of my, I've heard the word exchangeable for value. Right, but it's not yeah, the easiest to exchange for value, easiest thing to exchange for value in the United States. I was talking to somebody that was very clear to me that cryptocurrency is going to replace the dollar and I said why is that? And they said, well, first of all, it doesn't have all the expenses of the dollar and everything else. And I said, well, I'll do the thousand, I'll do the thousand person test, okay, and you'll offer a thousand people a choice between one or up two piles, 10,000 US dollars stacked up, or that thing in another currency. What do you think if you gave the choice to 1,000 people, what would it be? Dan: Right, yeah, they would want the US currency, of course. Dean: Yeah, I don't know who it is that would choose because it's instantly fungible for anything in the world. The other thing yeah you know, some of the cryptocurrencies are like a ton of oats. Dan: A ton of oats. Yeah, that's what I've understood about. I've never understood that about gold as a. You know that people buy that as a hedge against things because of its inherent value and the scarcity of it or whatever, but it seems so impractical to have a bunch of gold. Dean: Yeah well, it's really interesting is that gold holds its value forever. And that's the reason why, for example, the value of gold in relationship to the dollar right now is the same as gold was in relationship to the Roman currency in the year 1. Dan: Okay. Dean: If the currency gets really inflated, the value of the gold goes up. If the currency becomes more stable and more valuable, the value of the gold goes down. It's a perfect hedge. But it never has a value in itself. It only has a value in relationship to the currency. Dan: Okay, that makes more sense, then that makes more sense. Dean: Yeah, yeah, okay, that makes more sense. Then that makes more sense, yeah, yeah. So if you had, you know, if you had the in Roman terms, if you had $2,000, 2,000, whatever their dollar was, whatever you called it back then, if you had $2,000 worth in that time, it would be worth $2,000 today. It's just a constant value thing. Dan: It never goes up. Dean: It only goes up or down in relationship to where the currency is. Dan: Yeah, that makes sense. Dean: Yeah, yeah, yeah. Dan: So I wonder, you know, I've heard somebody talk about it. Dean: I mean, the real hedge for us has been the Canadian dollar. Dan: Right, exactly. The real hedge for us has been the Canadian dollar. Dean: Right exactly. It's been an average of 26% for 35 years. Dan: That's great, which offsets the tax burden in some ways. Right, I mean, that's yeah, yeah, yeah. Dean: Yeah. But, it fixes us. I mean, that's why the US people say when is Coach going to go global? I said I have to tell you something it's the United States. Dan: Yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: That is global, that is. Dean: Right. Dan: Exactly yeah. Dean: Yeah. Dan: Amazing. Well how long are you in chicago? Dean: uh, now, just this week well, our workshops this week are on my workshops on thursday, so we come in because we like spending time with our team, yeah and so, yeah, so we want to make sure because we have a pretty good size team. I think we have a pretty good-sized team. I think we have 22, 23 now in Chicago. So, we like hanging out with them. Also, Chicago's our standard medical center. It's Northwestern University Hospital. I have three or four meetings this week, and so this is where we come. You know, this is the second tier of the Canadian health care system. Dan: It's Air. Dean: Canada, chicago. I got you, I got you, I got you. That's funny. You live in the second tier of the Canadian health care system. Dan: I just skipped the whole first tier and go right to the second. Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly Second tier of the Canadian healthcare system. I just skipped the whole first tier and go right to the second. Yeah, yeah yeah, yeah. Dean: Well, except for getting my certain couple prescriptions okayed at the pharmacy, that's my entire extent of my contact with the Canadian healthcare system this year. Oh, wow. Dan: Yeah, you're going into the Cloudland Canadian healthcare system this year. Dean: Oh wow, yeah, you're going into the. Cloudlandia healthcare system and Nashville and Buenos Aires. Yeah, Chicago, Nashville and Buenos. Aires, yeah, yeah. Dan: So what idea popped up during our one-hour talk for you. Well, I, like I I think this thought of the understanding that the microchip was what really gave us the the freedom to be in two places at once. It's a time travel and it gives us now in its fullest thing here. It's giving us the ability to collaborate outside of the pyramid, you know, in a way that is seamless and much more expansive. It's just completely understanding that. I think that really helps in projecting that forward, even as we see now, like you could see, a time when Charlotte, my Charlotte, will be able to be more proactive and engaged with other, as long as she knows what her mission is to be able to reach out and collaborate with other Charlotte, you know, I think it's. Dean: I think it's great. Dan: Yeah. Dean: I think it's great yeah. Dan: Yeah, yeah I think it's. Dean: I think it's great. Yeah, I think it's great. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think it's great. Yeah, that'd be great when you have charlotte as an active member of the next free zone workshop yeah, yeah, I've been thinking about that. Dan: I can't wait, that'll be fun. Yeah, although it was really it was, it was really great. Dan, I did the two workshop days. You know, I was joking. Dean: You did a 1989 version Exactly. Dan: Yes, no phone, no contact with the outside world, and it was actually very. It was very. Dean: It's very liberating, isn't it it? Dan: really was and the fact that I didn't really miss anything. You know, that's kind of the except I had my focus 100% in the building. You know that was it was valuable. Dean: I'm going to do that. Yeah, absolutely. Buildings are still useful. Yeah, absolutely. Dan: All right. Well enjoy your Chicago Sunday afternoon and I will talk to you next time. Dean: I'm fixed now on Sundays until January. Perfect. Dan: Me too Good. Dean: Back in Toronto Good. Dan: I'll be here, bye. Dean: Okay, bye.

As the year draws to a close, Jackie and Danielle invite you to hop aboard the nostalgia express for a candid and comical stroll through 2024. From their humble Blockbuster origins to ranking in the top 10% of Spotify's video podcasts (humblebrag), the duo reflects on the highs, the lows, and the utterly bizarre moments of the past year. With stats like 44 episodes, 18,500 plays, and nine coveted Employee Picks, it's clear they've been working harder than a VCR rewinding after a rental rush. Whether they're diving into never-seen-before gems, roasting movies they secretly love, or bonding with guests over niche trivia, this podcast season was a delightful rollercoaster of retro goodness. But it's not all about the numbers—Jackie and Danielle also dish on their favorite moments, from outrageous hot takes about villains to unforgettable episodes featuring their moms and A-list guest stars (okay, A-list in their hearts). They leave no VHS unturned, reminiscing about films that held up surprisingly well (cough American Pie) and others they wish they'd left in the early 2000s (cough Bewitched). As they gear up for 2025 with themes, rewinds, and maybe even a snow day movie obsession intervention, one thing's for sure: the No More Late Fees podcast is still the ultimate blockbuster of your playlist. ·Season 4 Episode 38· No More Late Fees  ⁠https://nomorelatefeespodcast.com⁠ 909-601-NMLF (6653) — Follow Us on Social: Instagram https://www.instagram.com/nomorelatefees  TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@nomorelatefees  Facebook https://www.facebook.com/nomorelatefees Youtube https://www.youtube.com/@nomorelatefees  Twitter https://x.com/NoMoreLateFees  — CONQUERing ⁠⁠myconquering.com⁠⁠ 10% Off Code: JACKIE10 — NostaBeauty https://nostabeauty.com  20% Off Code: NMLF

There is so much Star Wars content out in the wide world. Some of it is loved, some of it hated, but there is one piece of Star Wars media that is so hated by its creator that it was almost lost media. If it wasn't for fans making bootleg VCR copies during its one and only broadcast it would be lost to time. I'm talking about of course the infamous Star Wars Holiday Special. A variety show set in the Star Wars universe that was also meant to sort of celebrate Thanksgiving/Christmas. George Lucas was so mortified by how this special turned out that he has tried to remove any trace of its existence from the earth, and because of that resistance it has since become a cult classic amongst Star Wars fans. But how did the Star Wars Holiday special end up so bad? Today, Savannah will be going over how the special was made and its content, so you can be spared from having to watch it yourself.

Grab some eggnog and fire up the VCR, The Christmas Tape is back for a fourth installment! This year we are visiting two of the wildest and most underappreciated Christmas specials of all time: The Pee-Wee's Playhouse Christmas Special and A Muppet Family Christmas.

12/09/2024 EPISODE 65 - "CLASSIC HOLIDAY FILMS: FUN BEHIND THE SCENES FACTS" We all know the iconic Holiday movies like “A Christmas Carol,” “It's A Wonderful Life,” “White Christmas.” This week, Nan and Steve go behind the scenes of some of your favorite classic holiday movies and dig up some fun facts about these films that you may or may not know. We talk about the snow, the casting, the locations, and a lot more! Join in the fun as they conjure up holiday cheer with these great films. SHOW NOTES:  Sources: Christmas in The Movies (2023), by Jeremy Arnold; Christmas In Classic Films (2022), by Jacqueline T. Lynch; The Many Cinemas of Michael Curtiz (2018), edited by R. Barfton Palmer & Murray Pomerance; Have Yourself a Movie Little Christmas (2010), by Alonso Duaralde; Ginger: My Story (2008), by Ginger Rogers; Christmas At The Movies: Images of Christmas in American, British, and European Cinema (2000), edited by Mark Connelly; It's Christmas Time At The Movies (1998), by Gary J & Susan Svehla; AMC American Movie Classics: Greatest Christmas Movies (1998), by Frank Thompson; The ‘It's A Wonderful Life' Book (1986), by Jeanine Basinger; Great Movie Directors (1986), by Ted Sennett; The Films of Frank Capra (1977), by Victor Scherle & Wiliam Turner Levy; "35 Surprising ‘White Christmas' Movie Facts About the Cast, Songs & More,” October 31, 2024, Good Housekeeping; “A Short History of Fake Snow In Holiday Movies: From ‘It's A Wonderful Life' to Harry Potter,” December 15, 2021, LAist.com; “The Song That Changed Christmas,”October 5, 2016, by Will Friedwald, Wall Street Journal; “It's A Wonderful Life: Rare Photos From the Set of a Holiday Classic,” November 26, 2013, by Ben Cosgrove, Time magazine; “On A Wing and a Prayer,” December 23, 2006, by Stephen Cox, LA Times; “Whose Life Was It, Anyway?” December 15, 1996, by Steven Smith, LA Times; “White Christmas: Rosemary Clooney Remembers Everyone's Favorite Christmas Musical,” December 1994, by Frank Thompson, Pulse! Magazine; “Less Than Wonderful: James Walcott Reassesses Capra's Christmas Classic,” December 1986, Vanity Fair; “Capra's Christmas Classic: Yes, Virginia, It's A Wonderful Life,” December 1986, by Trea Hoving, Connoisseur; “All I Want For Christmas is a VCR,” December 24, 1985, L.A. Herald-Examiner; “Bing, Astaire Bow Out, Par Recasting ‘Xmas',”January 7, 1953, Variety; “Bing Bobs Back into ‘Christmas' Cast at Par,” January 22, 1953, Variety,  “White Christmas: From Pop Tune to Picture,” October 18, 1953, by Thomas Wood, New York Times; “Around the Sets,” August 13, 1944, L.A. Examiner; TCM.com; IMDBPro.com; Movies Mentioned:  A Christmas Carol (1938), starring Reginald Owen, Gene Lockhart, Kathleen Lockhart, Leo G. Carroll, June Lockhart, Terry Kilburn, Barry McKay, and Lynne Carver; Christmas In Connecticut (1945), starring Barbara Stanwyck, Dennis Morgan, Sydney Greenstreet, S.Z. Sakall, Reginald Gardiner, Robert Shayne, and Una O'Connor; It's A Wonderful Life (1947), starring Jimmy Stewart, Donna Reed, Lionel Barrymore, Henry Travers, Thomas Mitchell, Beulah Bondi, Gloria Grahame, Frank Faylen, Ward Bond, H.B. Warner, Frank Albertson, Samuel S, Hind, Mary Treen, Todd Karnes, Virginia Patton, Sarah Edwards, Sheldon Leonard, and Lillian Randolph; White Christmas (1954), starring Bing Crosby, Danny Kaye, Rosemary Clooney, Vera-Ellen, Dean Jagger, Anne Whitfield, and Mary Wickes; --------------------------------- http://www.airwavemedia.com Please contact sales@advertisecast.com if you would like to advertise on our podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you grew up in the 80s, you grew up in the era of physical media. Our videotape collections allowed us to watch our favorite movies and TV shows over and over, allowing us to develop a deep appreciation for the things we loved. But how did we get here, and how did it all end up changing so drastically? Today we not only revisit the origins of the VCR itself but look at the VHS/Betamax format wars of the 80s and the worthy third competitor: Laserdisc. We also look at the growth of home video, the time when the VCR was under attack by Hollywood, and the progression of the VCR to DVD, Blu-Ray, and then streaming. This episode is also a look at how physical media has become a bit of an endangered species, but why it still has an important place in our modern world. Planes, Trains & Automobiles movie review: Patreon.com/80s

The AI Battle Mirrors Past Format Wars “History never repeats itself, but it does often rhyme.” — Mark Twain [TLDR: This week's Thursday Thought explores the ongoing battle for AI dominance among tech giants like OpenAI, Anthropic, X, Google, and Microsoft, drawing parallels to historic format wars that have shaped various industries. From the iconic VHS vs. Betamax struggle to the intense competition between gaming consoles like PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo, and the enduring rivalry between iPhone and Android, these conflicts reveal a recurring pattern. As AI companies follow similar paths, it's clear that, while technology evolves, the strategic dynamics remain strikingly similar.] The current battle for dominance between tech giants like OpenAI, Google, Anthropic and Microsoft is not just a race to the top — it's a modern-day format war. By examining the patterns of previous technology battles, we can gain insight into how this AI competition is likely to play out. Three key patterns emerge from past format battles that are now being mirrored in the AI space: The Power of Network Effects: Just like previous format wars, the AI battle will be heavily influenced by network effects. (A network effect occurs when a product or service becomes more valuable as more people use it, creating a positive feedback loop that can lead to rapid growth and market dominance.) The Underdog Advantage: History has shown that the winner is often not the one everyone expects — not the biggest company or even the best product. Early market leaders may fall behind as more adaptable or better-networked competitors take the lead. Ecosystem Building is Key: The final battleground is not just the technology itself, but the entire ecosystem built around it. Companies that successfully create a thriving ecosystem of developers, partners, and content will probably emerge as the ultimate winners. To understand these dynamics better, let's revisit three strategic battles that shaped the technology landscape: the VCR format war, the console wars, and the smartphone OS wars. Each of these battles offers valuable lessons for understanding the current AI competition. The VCR War: A Template for Format Battles (The also-rans in the VCR war (that I know of) included Philips and Grundig's Video 2000 (V2000), and RCA's Capacitance Electronic Disc (CED). The videotape format war between VHS and Betamax in the late 20th century stands as one of the most emblematic battles over technological dominance. Introduced in the mid-1970s, Sony's Betamax initially captivated the market with its superior video quality and compact design. However, JVC's VHS, which entered the market shortly after, quickly emerged as a formidable competitor by addressing consumer needs more effectively with longer recording times — up to two hours initially, which was soon extended to four, six, and even eight hours as the technology developed. The success of VHS was not solely because of its technical merits. JVC employed a strategic approach by licensing its VHS technology to an array of manufacturers, including heavyweights like Panasonic, Sharp, and RCA. This move flooded the market with VHS players, making the format more accessible to the average consumer. To further tip the scale in their favour, during the mid-1970s JVC established VCR supply relationships with leading national consumer electronics companies in Europe and the United States. In supplying Thomson, Thorn, and Telefunken (all independent companies at that time) as well as U.S. partners, JVC was able to gain the cash and the diversity of market experience that ultimately enabled it to outpace Philips and Sony. Philips developed videotape competencies in parallel with JVC, but it failed to build a worldwide network of OEM relationships that would have allowed it to accelerate the refinement of its videotape competence through the sale of core products. According to , by the...

Here's the LIVE Supporter-only Q&A from November 30th, 2024. Next week will be back to normal, so if you hate this format, don't worry, it'll be back to normal next time. Please consider supporting this channel via monthly support services, tips, or even just by using our affiliate links to purchase things you were already going to buy anyway, at no extra cost to you: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.retrorgb.com/support.html⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ T-Shirts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://retrorgb.link/tshirts⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Amazon Recommended List: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://retrorgb.link/amazon⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ TIMESTAMPS (please assume all links are affiliate / paid links that pay RetroRGB a commission on each sale.  Even if links are currently not affiliate, I may update them with one, should a partner list that item for sale in the future): 00:00  Welcome 1:15  Super Game Boy Bevel / Kill Savegame Battery? 4:05  Extron DVS 304 not working - Caps? 06:23  You're all awesome 06:52  Scripts for Domesday Stuff:  https://github.com/harrypm/RF-Scripts  /  https://github.com/danifunker/vhs-decode-py-scripts 11:15  Horizontal-only games on MiSTer for cabs - Symlink to folder? 14:05  DVD Player for CRT's 17:45  SD Card read/writes 22:05  RGB vs YPbPr output on MiSTer VGA ports 25:15  Backup saves from his 4-in-1 Saturn cart?? 26:41  YPbPr Out from Gamecube 28:35  SNAC Level Shifters? 30:55  RT4K vs 5x for LCD TV 33:10  Best Plug & PLay PS2 Solution 34:55  Any PS2 ODE's? 36:05  VCR for Composite to RF 37:30  Is it worth getting a PVM if you have a consumer CRT? 39:40  Best rev of PC Engine / TG-16? 41:00  Shoutout to GamesCare & their Neptune 42:07  My thoughts on HD CRT's (I love em) 44:23 Downscale 480i from my PC and Chromecasts:  https://www.retrorgb.com/downscaling.html 45:55  Support on Cyber Monday!:  https://www.retrorgb.com/support.html 47:34  Send 240p,480i,480p to a VGA monitor?:  https://youtu.be/iLkN2AZLBMA  50:08  Safe to plug multiple consoles into a one Triad power supply? 51:35  Does it make any difference to TATE a PVM on its left or right side? 53:25  Any benefits from using RGB instead of HDMI with the MiSTer when connected to the RetroTINK-4K? 55:00  The CoreGrafx has a slightly better sound chip than the PC engine and CoreGrafx 2. 55:55  50Ohm vs 75Ohm BNC terminators 58:20  Are you excited for Metroid Prime 4 Beyond? (No ;p) 59:20  Is the PCE Engine Block still good? 1:00:39  SummerCart64 flashcart for N64 1:01:27  Any Fixel ODE updates? 1:03:05  Can you install an UltraHDMI alongside Tim Worthington's N64RGB? 1:06:30  Thank you!:  https://www.retrorgb.com/support.html --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/retrorgb/support

GET‌ ‌EVERY‌ ‌EPISODE‌ ‌AND‌ ‌BONUS‌ ‌CONTENT‌ ‌AT:‌ ‌‌www.patreon.com/crackpotpodcast‌ In this episode, we delve into the baffling disappearance of David Glenn Lewis in 1993—a case that remains shrouded in mystery three decades later. David, a respected lawyer, vanished from his Texas home under puzzling circumstances, leaving behind an uneaten turkey sandwich, a still-recording VCR, and plane tickets he never used. Two days later, his body was discovered 1,600 miles away in Washington State, killed in a tragic hit-and-run accident. What events could have led him so far from home, and why? Was foul play involved, or did David's life take an inexplicable turn? Join us as we unravel the timeline, explore the theories, and ponder the unanswered questions that make this one of the strangest cold cases in modern history.  

May 2-2, 1982 This week Ken welcomes the amazingly talented artist, painter, and kindred spirit Eric White to the show. Ken and Eric discuss mutual friend Moon Zappa, BYOTVG, Eric's last solo show in NYC, worshiping garbage, saving things meant to be thrown away, Made for TV movies, Someone I Touched, Real People, That's Incredible!, Jefferson's flashbacks, prog rock, a mythical 1970s, TV things that terrified us as children, 1973, Chaka, The Kroft Bros, SCTV, magazine design, SNL, making deals with your parents to watch TV, Jim Henson, the mystery of Central time, Solid Gold, not having a subscription to TV Guide, CHiPs, Ripley's Believe it or Not, Jacque Cousteau, nature shows, streaming, the bizarre first year of SNL, Mr. Bill, WFMU's Best Show, things that only aired once, Archie Bunker in the electric chair, Sharpling and Wurster, the infamous episode of Too Close for Comfort, the infamous episode of Little House, Dick Cavet, Iggy Pop and Bowie on Dinah Shore, the trauma of the final episode of M*A*S*H, Charles Nelson Riley, Lady Elaine Fairchild, not knowing who bought your paintings, Star Trek, Happy Days, Night Gallery, the paintings from Night Gallery, the complicated TV watching politics involved in navigating divorced parents, Love Boat, Fantasy Island, Sha Na Na, the creepy real life end of Bob Crane, how sad The Architects of Fear episode of The Outer Limits is, the opening credits to Mystery, Edward Gorey, Mork and Mindy, Waltons, renting a VCR, Blade Runner, being obsessed with miniatures, Barney Miller, Sneak Previews, and the glory days of PBS. 

Tune in Tuesday 19 November 2024 as these Stupid B's pop the lid off Pop Culture. This week we dust off the VCR and rewind to the era of iconic movies and questionable fashion choices! We dive into some absolute classics (and some head-scratchers) from the 80s and 90s, giving you our take—tongue-in-cheek, of course.

Pat's laptop got stolen so we're wheeling the VCR into the classroom for another roundup of recent tales of liars, frauds, thieves, and bullshitters.

Burnt and Joan discuss the hotly anticipated Pharmacists' Parade of Dignity Falls, while Doug chimes in from above. Later, Diana is looking for a new VCR and will accept no substitutes!Want more TNL? Go to cbbworld.com and sign up for the Maximus plan to unlock access to all seasons ad-free, as well as brand new exclusive BONUS ROOM episodes adventuring deeper into Dignity Falls every month!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Halle and Alison fire up the VCR again to ruin The Ring Two.

Download our Mobile App! Apple App Store | Google Play Store --- The recognizable sound of the VCR gearing up brings back fond memories: the faint sound of the rapidly spinning guide rollers and the TV hiss as the leader tape spools through the machine trigger a happy sense of anticipation. These everyday noises are both comforting and familiar, creating a cozy feeling of nostalgia that is calm and relaxing. ---