Datasets:

willtheorangeguy
/

2019-Backstage-Transcripts

+**Nick Janetakis:** That is interesting how that works, too. I tend to buy domain names first as well, and then they just sit there and nothing happens.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Just last Friday Adam and I were talking, and we have this idea, and we're talking about the idea, and we're both independently doing domain name searches while we talk about an idea... You know, because you almost have to have -- for some reason, there's like a road bump and you can't continue forward until you have a good domain... \[laughs\] But then also lots of times that's the farthest it goes, right? You get the domain and you're like "Yes!", and then there's some sort of satisfaction to that that it almost removes the impetus, or at least it has for me, where I'm like "That's good enough. I'm gonna sit on that for a few minutes", and it turns into ten years.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I feel the exact same way.
+**Jerod Santo:** So Janetakis...
+**Nick Janetakis:** It's Greek.
+**Jerod Santo:** And you're from Greece?
+**Nick Janetakis:** No, I was born in the U.S. Just my dad's side is Greek.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay. Where do you live?
+**Nick Janetakis:** New York.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay. Manhattan, or...?
+**Nick Janetakis:** No, Long Island. It's a little bit East of Manhattan.
+**Jerod Santo:** Born and raised?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yup.
+**Jerod Santo:** Cool.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I would like to move eventually, but I wanna become one of those digital nomads, where you just travel the world for a couple months in different countries.
+**Jerod Santo:** Isn't that what everybody -- that's the dream right there, all the digital nomads... And they write blogs about they're nomadic, and we're all just reading the blogs and envy them.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yup. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** That's kind of how it goes. That's Instagram for nerds - blogs of digital nomads, where we can see lives that they've prepared, handwritten what their life is like, and we can just envy them. Very much Instagram-style, at least, where you see the curated version of people's lives, and then you look at your real life and you think "This isn't adding up."
+**Nick Janetakis:** Right. You see the five seconds of 24 hours.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. By the way, Backstage \[unintelligible 00:02:23.21\] In fact, this could be a show right here... Why not, in fact...? So listeners out there, if you have listened to the most recent episode of the Changelog, which would mean you're a hardcore listener, because this is the Monday following -- I think we released it on Saturday this week, because reasons... If you listened to that, episode 344, "Inside the 2019 infrastructure of Changelog.com", you'll hear Gerhard mention Nick... And I'm not sure if he called you Nick Janetakis (I can't recall what he called you), but he mentioned, Nick, that you are a person who's been in the Changelog community for a while, you've been involved in our codebase, you are using it to a large degree for inspiration or even guidance on the CMS that you're building for your business... Why don't you introduce yourself to me? I mean, that's about as much I know about you; I know you're making videos online, I know you're big into Docker, and that kind of stuff, and you teach people these things... But that's about all I know, so maybe introduce yourself to me.
+We've known each other just casually in our Slack chat, but we tend to talk shop, and I thought "Hey, let's hop on Backstage and talk shop, because it's fun", and others can benefit perhaps as well. Tell everybody what you're up to with your videos.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Right. I guess the TL;DR - my name is Nick Janetakis, I've been a freelance web developer for about 20 years, and as of about four years ago I started doing video courses, mainly around Docker, Flask, and other programming topics. Since then, I started a blog, and I pretty much write about everything openly, from the dev business point of view up to technical details as well.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[04:14\] That's definitely where your and my paths cross - both the technical details and on the dev business. I know you're selling subscriptions or videos directly to developers, we are providing content for developers, so we have a lot of similar thoughts, similar tasks, the exact same audience... Slightly different angles on it, but... Talk about your application you're building. I know this is a side project, to a certain degree, and you have existing videos that you've been selling other ways... Help me understand where you're at in the technical sense.
+**Nick Janetakis:** When it comes to hosting videos, you don't necessarily need to develop your own course hosting platform... There are these other platforms out there, like Thinkific and Teachable; I'm not sure if you've heard of them before... But they're basically like a course-hosting platform as a service; they're a SaaS app that you sign up for, you pay whatever ($50-$100/month) and they give you the whole enchilada. So people can sign up, they can create an account, they can put in billing information, credit cards or PayPal, and then they can go consume the courses that you've created, because those Teachable and Thinkific sites, if you're the course instructor, you get an admin back-end where you can assemble the course however you see fit. You create your table of contents, upload the videos, etc. So they're just like an end-to-end SaaS for building courses, and distributing them as well.
+But you know, when you're a developer, you just think in your head that you wanna develop things, and I feel like... \[laughter\] I think developing my own course platform has been something I've wanted to do for a long time, but I still do freelance work now, so it's very hard to balance the time of creating the actual course I wanna create, and then develop the course platform, and then do freelance work, and then do what I can to contribute to open source, based on projects I'm doing, writing blog posts, the whole social media thing, personal life - there's a lot to take on.
+So I actually did start building my own course-hosting platform about nine months ago, and this is kind of how I got introduced to your codebase... So I determined I wanted to use Phoenix with Elixir. Right now it's quite popular as a technology, but it's not on the same level as Rails when it comes to tutorials, and things like that, so it was a little bit tricky to get started, especially if you've never used a functional programming language before, which I haven't done... And then I just ran across the Changelog codebase, and it's kind of funny, because one of the courses that I wrote - and I'm not trying to pitch my courses here, but "Build a SaaS app with Flask." So it's a Flask course where we actually build a real-world SaaS app; accepting monthly payments, and custom admin dashboards, and Stripe integration, and all this good stuff... And it's like a real application, with like 4,000 lines of Flask etc. and I was very, very fortunate to find your project on GitHub, because it reminded me of that type of project. It's not just a simple to-do app, or "Here's how to make a blog with comments." You know it's a real app, running in production, really good test coverage, really good everything; best practices... And for me that was heaven.
+I basically used your platform as almost my sole learning experience for getting used to Phoenix and Elixir. Sure, I read the documentation, but it was more like I read the docs to get the super-duper basics, and then it was like I'm just looking at your code, and then occasionally harassing you on Slack if I get really stuck...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Yeah.
+**Nick Janetakis:** But I owe everything of the platform --
+**Jerod Santo:** What's funny about that-- now, go ahead, you were just gonna give me a compliment, and I'll take it. \[laughs\]
+**Nick Janetakis:** \[08:07\] Oh yeah, I said I owe basically everything based on what I've done so far in the course platform to your progress of what you've done for the community on that front.
+**Jerod Santo:** Awesome. So that relates to what I was just gonna say - we were on WordPress for years. In fact, we started on Tumblr - this was even before I was involved; Adam and Wynn set up a tumblelog -- I think that's what they're called, Tumblrs or tumblelogs back in the day, because Tumblr was super-hot... And then it moved to WordPress when it relaunched, in 2012, I think, or 2013... Adam did most of the heavy-lifting there. Then we've been on WordPress for years, and it was just lots of headaches. We love WordPress, it's a great general purpose CMS, but like you said, as developers and as hackers we have very specific needs, and we want things to work in very specific ways, and the freedom to diverge from the mainstream is really what we desire... And I build web apps for a living, and I have for a decade, mostly in Rails previously...
+So I wrote the new CMS in Elixir and Phoenix, and had to go through a lot of the learning curve and the pain. One of my strengths as a developer is I will just endure until I actually figure it out... So it took us a long time to get me running, but the language itself, once I understood pattern-matching, was very productive. It was just like "Okay, now how do I do this particular thing in Elixir or in Phoenix, in this context, which I know how to do very well in other contexts... How do I do it here?"
+So it was very much a learning experience for me. In fact, we didn't open source it right away. We open sourced it maybe like a month after we relaunched on the new CMS, and some of our internal conversations (Adam and I) about open sourcing it - we knew we wanted to, but the question was like "What value would it provide others?" Because the first fear is like "Well, if someone is just gonna rip us off and build a competing podcast and news platform, basically using our platform to compete with us in the space...", it's kind of like "Well, the platform is not really what we do." It is more so now, because we have news and it streamlines the way we put content out, and everything, but if you're going to actually compete with us, you have to create good podcasts. That's really what you have to do. So there wasn't much fear of that.
+Also, it's completely custom. And I didn't build it like this, as a general purpose podcasting CMS. We had our own show slugs hardcoded in the areas of the codebase... It was not built as a general purpose thing. So I thought, "Well, the way it's gonna provide value is the exact way that you're using it", which is there weren't very many (and there still aren't very many) open source real-world -- even if it's a pretty small domain, and pretty basic functionality in terms of like it's a content management system with some nifty features... It's gonna be a good example for people.
+And then the readme, one question in the FAQ was "Should I use this for my podcast?" It's like, probably not. You probably shouldn't fork this, or have like a "Deploy to Heroku" button for you; it doesn't really make sense. But you could absolutely use it in the exact way that you're using it, which is kind of like just a path of somebody else has plowed down in front of you, so you can save time and learn along the way... So it's pretty awesome that you got whole hog into that and basically built your own, using ours as kind of a roadmap.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. And just to be clear, I never even -- well, I did clone the project, just so I can look through the codebase locally, but I didn't fork your project.
+**Jerod Santo:** You started completely from scratch.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. Brand new, totally from scratch. And then I just pulled out the components of things that I liked from your app into mine... Like the user registration, with the magic links, and all that stuff. That's very non-specific to a podcast platform.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[12:07\] True. I talked about one of my strengths as a developer... But one of my weaknesses as a developer in terms of being generally useful code is I don't ever (pretty much ever) go back and abstract libraries from things I build. I will build this magic link-based sign in system, and if I were to start tomorrow on a brand new site, instead of packaging that up into a mix -- what did I call them? I forget... Libs, packages... I don't know.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, packages.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, packages... And then reusing my library, and then having a library. I will actually do the same thing that you just did - I will go look at my old code and I will write it again, with my newfound knowledge; or improve it the second time. I don't do libraries, it's just weird. I know a lot of people think in libraries. General use, reusable libraries - I never think that way. I always just build.
+So like you said, this is a thing that more people would like to use. If I would have had the forethought, I would have built it in a way that it could just be a library, and then we would have more open source stuff... So it's kind of a downfall of mine that I just don't think that way.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I also think in a weird way having it in-lined in your codebase -- I mean, it doesn't necessarily make it better, but it makes it easier see how it's being used in a real application... Versus a tiny, little microscopic package that does just the user authentication with the magic link, it may have been tricky to figure out how do I actually implement that into my app. I guess technically if you did that, you would have implemented it into Changelog, so I could have seen that, but...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. But that would have been one implementation, versus...
+**Nick Janetakis:** Exactly, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I've had that struggle as a library user for years... Thinking back to the early Rails gems, and Devise became the gold STDIN Rails gems... But it was like, I can pull in Devise, and it has all these features and it's great in terms of I can turn on or off a certain aspect; like, do I want the "Remember me" thing, and do I want logging etc.? And passing an argument turns that off or on - that's really cool, but I would rather just have the code in my code... Even if somebody else wrote it. That's why I was cool with code generators back in the day, back when I used them more - it was because I don't want to have to peel back this black box and find ways of overriding methods and doing all these tricky things in order to customize, when I could just have the code in my code.
+So maybe that's another reason why I don't think in libraries, because I don't like to use them very much... Unless they're just like a JSON encoding thing, like encode the JSON/decode the JSON; I'm not gonna have to peel that back. But really application-level features specifically are very difficult as dependencies, and so maybe that's why I don't think that way.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, absolutely. Plus, to make a really good abstraction, that's -- I don't know if Devise is the best, but you can't knock it for what it is; it's pretty popular, for the most part... But yeah, creating a good abstraction is very hard, and often times you need to duplicate your code, maybe in 3, 4, 5, 10 different projects, before you get something that might even be reasonable to have as an abstraction.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. And that's a very good point, one that I've learned over time - we tend to prematurely abstract things. And while I don't think in libraries, I definitely think in terms of abstractions, and dry. We tend to really want dry. And as soon as we see a pattern once - I'm saying this like the royal we, but I'm probably talking about myself... We want to say "Okay, pull out a function, pull out a module here, and I'm gonna reuse this in ten places." And what you find out is a) YAGNI, in those cases; you actually aren't gonna use it ten times. Maybe you're gonna use it twice, maybe three times. But what you realize is that third time that you use it, it's different enough contextually code that you're now complicating the function that you're pulling out in order to take different arguments or handle a slightly different case.
+\[16:29\] So the rule of three, which I think Jeff Atwood has written about and many people talk about is so powerful, and I've learned it over time, if you're not using it three times - and in my case, I think if they're not pretty much identical uses - then you shouldn't be drying that code up; just go ahead and leave it wet, and let it be, because you're gonna cause yourself more harm down the road.
+That's something that I have learned the hard way, it's taken years... But now I see it all the time, especially in less experienced developers, who are just like "Ooh, a pattern. I'm gonna pull it out", and you end up causing yourself more harm than good.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, absolutely.
+**Jerod Santo:** So where are you at with your deal? I know you're still working on it, you said nine months ago... Where does it stand?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Well, nine months ago I started it, and I was super gung-ho about working on it, but it was so hard to really fit in a time to do it then, because I was just too overburdened with too many things going on... And it's another weird thing to talk about too, it's like, well, Thinkific, which is the platform that I'm currently using now, or Teachable an alternative... It's sort of good enough, but it's not quite what I want. There's certain things that I don't -- I don't wanna just bash them openly on a podcast, but there's certain UI decisions and certain things that have happened in the past, that... I wanna change these things, but I can't do it, because it's not my platform.
+Even things like I wanna customize the workflow for actually creating a payment, but they control the whole entire template for that page, and I have no control over that. Little things like that.
+**Jerod Santo:** The problem with being in that circumstance is there's no fire under your butt... Because the thing that you're on is functional, and working, and it's not as if this has to get out tomorrow or you're losing money, or whatever it is. So that means that you can just kind of trudge along. Do you find that to be a limiting factor on your progress, like you don't really need it that bad, so you just kind of work on it...?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Exactly. And it's not like people are emailing me and being like "Nick, the platform is garbage. You can't click this option or that option." This work. I will say this - five days ago, or -- April 29th, about a week ago from here, PayPal integration just stopped working with Thinkific's platform. People would try to pay with PayPal and an error would come up, and it just says "Payment provider not supported", or something like that. It was a generic error that came up, and Thinkific didn't notify us instructors about this. They have a public status page, but you're not going to the status page habitually. You're not going there three times a day, "Is it up? Is it up? Is it up?" You would expect something as big as transactions not working for them to email you that "Hey, by the way, half the people buying your courses can't pay for it." That kind of fueled the intensity of a thousand suns to get me going. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Another angle at this is that similar to us, where our website stack provides us certain luxuries, and one of the things that Adam and I do is sweat all the details; that's just who we are, we want everything to be great that we do... And that was really where we were with Wordpress. It's like "This is good, but it's never gonna be great, because a) we don't enjoy hacking on it, and b) we're always fighting against the generic." So that's why we built custom - so we can make things exactly the way that we want, because we run everything.
+\[20:13\] That being said, like I said before, a podcasting and news CMS is not our business. Our business is creating content. We wanna be logging the news, we wanna be recording and producing podcasts, not necessarily writing software... Because no one's banging on our doors saying "More software, please."
+So in your circumstance, every hour that you spend on your custom CMS, you're not spending on creating video tutorials, which is where your value is... So that's something you probably consider, too.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Sure. And the reason why I'm even starting a back-up now creating the course platform -- I don't know, it is hard to balance all that stuff, because doing a 10-hour video course, the final video length, that might take 4-5 full-time months of developing. It takes a long time to plan it out, write the scripts, get the source codes... And the source code needs to be not just okay, it needs to be really -- I went over it many dozens of times, and had people beta test it... It's a huge process, so it's hard to get into the mindset where you can balance your life almost.
+For me, I've always had the horse rider's arm on, like "one thing at a time" type of thing... But nothing gets accomplished outside of making the course if you think like that... So now I'm trying to balance my time a little bit better, where I'm just gonna allocate an hour or two a day until the course platform has some type of MVP that I can ship out.
+So rather than be like, okay, I'm gonna finish the next course I'm working on maybe in June or July, or something like that, and then work on it... So I'm gonna try out the balanced approach and see how that works.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Slow and steady, that's a good way to do it.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** You have made your coursework -- is this your full-time endeavor, and you've been able to support yourself completely on the coursework?
+**Nick Janetakis:** No, I still do freelance work as well.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay, consulting plus... But not like a full-time job.
+**Nick Janetakis:** No, I've never been employed at a corporate type of programming job. I've always been self-employed in some way.
+**Jerod Santo:** So is it mostly training, are you contracting our your development time? How are you adjuncting them?
+**Nick Janetakis:** For the freelance work, it basically comes down to -- you know, people usually email me... Which is kind of interesting, as an aside. The course has actually fueled quite a bit of my freelance work, so I'm not going out there pitching myself or looking for work. Some people will just take my course and they want a personal experience. So it's either doing custom work, and actually sitting there writing code to implement something that they want, or sometimes we just hop on a call like this and we do some screen-sharing, they show me a project they're working on, I give insight on this and that...
+And then I'm almost acting as like an accountability partner. I offer advice as well, but I have a number of clients where once a week I meet with them, and they just show me what they've done in the previous week... Like, "Is this good? Is this bad? What can we change here? Next week's stuff", things like that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I'm not sure if I ever wanna phase myself out of doing that type of work, because it almost comes full circle back to creating the courses. When I work with these people on a regular basis, I'm being exposed to all sorts of crazy, interesting and cool problems that I never would have been exposed to if I didn't speak with them... So I often get decent blog post ideas, or even course topics that I always make generic. I'm never gonna use their company name, or anything like that, but it's a good idea generator.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[23:55\] Yeah. I'm in a similar spot, I've been doing contract dev since '06, and on my own since 2012, and continue to this day to do that, and The Changelog has always been my side project. Now, we've been fortunate enough that Adam was able to make it his full-time project. It was always a hobby/side project for him up until -- I think it's been three or four years now... 2015-2016 he went full-time on Changelog, so it's been going very well... And we're at a point now where I could come on full-time anytime now, so we're getting close to doing that.
+One of the things that I've always thought was a must-have - I've taught web development as well - is having real-world experience on a day-to-day basis. Not moving into the realm of someone who just talks about things... Even as a teacher, I didn't wanna be a teacher that just taught what I used to do, or what I learned; I wanted to have actual real-world, in-the-trenches experience to bring to my teaching. And the same thing with podcasting, these conversations... It helps being in the thick of it, day-to-day, and having client work where everything is -- like you said, I've seen it all, I've experienced lots of different codebases, different circumstances...
+That being said, my desire is to move over and do Changelog full-time and not do the client work, because lots of reasons that we could go into if you find it interesting... But I'm sure you probably know the reasons pretty well as a freelancer yourself. But then the question is "Well, how are you gonna stay sharp?" And I think the answer to that is there's tons of software that I could be writing around here; I'm always gonna be writing software, it just won't be other people's software, it will be our software... Which to me is like a tractor beam. That's engaging, that's something I would love to be doing... Because I've been writing software for other people for so long.
+But it definitely is a concern, it's like maybe I'll lose a technical edge by not exposing myself to so much software besides our internal projects.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, that is something I thought about in the past too, for wanting my own course platform... Because that really is the ultimate -- it's like the Changelog equivalent for a course creator; having your whole platform that you just develop yourself and maintain - that is real-world experience, if people are signing up, paying money, launching courses...
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure. Yeah, and my hope is that not only continuing to use our platform as real-world production, day-to-day grind software, but also now having the freedom to experiment with more of the things that we come across... Because just time-based -- I mean, there's so many software projects that we either have on the shows, or it pops up in Changelog Nightly and I log it on Changelog News, that I would love to actually dive deeper into these things, but I just don't have time now... Whereas I believe I'll have time to do deeper dives, maybe in video, maybe on the streams (like I was doing on Twitch for a little while) into other people's software and the community, and contribute back some more, and stay sharp that way... Which I just don't have time now, because I have client work really balancing out my schedule.
+So that's another hope - I'll have the platform, I'll have our internal tooling to work on, and then I can also do more experimental coding, which let's face it, that's the fun stuff, right?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Sure. I have a question for you though - how much time do you actually put into the Changelog codebase? Infrastructure, the actual application etc.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[27:58\] Personally, not very much at this point. It comes in fits and spurts. We have ongoing features that I work on, but... Are you looking for an hours/week number?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, like a rough estimate.
+**Jerod Santo:** I would say in the current phase I think we're probably at 5-10 hours/week on the code specifically. There's a lot of stuff around the code, and around our site or infrastructure, even just working inside the community that flushes that out... But it's not a full-time job by any means.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Right.
+**Jerod Santo:** You're probably putting way more hours in because you're in the active development phase. We have a feature list, and we have things I'm working on, but they all kind of interact -- for instance, right now we're doing something called metacasts, which is kind of a... I was about to say "kind of a hack." It's completely hack. But I think it could be pretty cool.
+One of the issues that we have is our search kind of sucks inside of podcast directories. Finding us inside of Apple Podcasts, finding us inside of Overcast, which has gotten a lot better, finding us in Spotify etc. isn't as easy as we think it should be... And it's obviously a primary way that people find us, is they're searching for things inside of the podcast indexes. Some of that is just because these indexes have really rudimentary search engines. So for typical phrases -- this is kind of like search engine optimization, but only inside podcast indexes. For certain topics and phrases we're just nowhere to be found, and we can't figure out why. All the metadata is there, we've done all the things that I know to do to make it as good as possible, but it's not good enough... So what we wanna do is create these things called metacasts, which is basically a kind of a cross-cutting podcast based on topics and specific podcasts, which can have its own name, have its own artwork, and hit really strongly on specific keywords. They won't be publicly on the website, they'll just have RSS... And they will be submitted as new podcasts to Apple, to Spotify etc. But they're gonna be keyword-based.
+For instance, maybe just easier with an example - Kubernetes. Kubernetes is very popular, people would love a podcast about Kubernetes; there are Kubernetes podcasts, but across our five shows, especially GoTime and The Changelog, there's tons of Kubernetes content... So a metacast on Kubernetes and basically cloud-native things, where it pulls in based on the topics that we tag our episodes with, specific episodes from those podcasts, so that we can have a podcast called "Kubernetes from the Changelog", and that's the very first word in the title - that will really help us, we think, in the podcast indexes. So that's something that I'm building right now. Internally we call it metacasts.
+That also is tied into some of the artwork changes - each one has to have their own artwork, so there's some design decisions involved, and there's other reasons why it hasn't quite shipped yet, it's not done... But I can't just crank it out and be done; there's things that are timeout-based... They just kind of like product things that slow down development.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Right. A lot of good stuff packed in that conversation.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Have you done any search engine optimization, or anything like that?
+**Nick Janetakis:** \[32:09\] A little bit. That's like a whole topic that I've been thinking about for the last 4-5 years when I started making a blog. It's like "Do I wanna put all of my content on my main nickjanetakis.com/ site, or -- because right now I actually host my courses on their own domain name, so diveintodocker.com, buildasaasappwithflask.com etc. So I really just have that one landing page for the course, like the description of the course before you would buy it... Whereas all of my content - I don't know how many blog posts (like 200-something), they all live on my main site... And I always wonder if it would be better if certain content were posted on those course domains instead, like Docker content on a Docker course. But it really comes back down to abstractions... Like, if I put all of my Docker blog posts on the diveintodocker.com domain, because that's one course, what happens if I make a new course - which I'm planning on making - for Docker in the future? It's like, well, do blog posts go on that second Docker courses domain name, or the first one, or somewhere else?
+**Jerod Santo:** Right...
+**Nick Janetakis:** It becomes a weird mess now, of like "Where does content go?"
+**Jerod Santo:** Yes. If you're looking for a take on that...
+**Nick Janetakis:** Sure.
+**Jerod Santo:** I would say at the end of the day what you offer is your teaching, so I would tend to put everything on nickjanetakis.com, and then link to the specific courses... I could flip-flop on that; that's a tough one. Long-term I think you'll do better to build your own personal brand, versus these specific course brands, because you will outlast your courses, especially in this industry... But then you also risk the chance of attracting someone to your blog and having them not ever know that, by the way, you have a Docker course which they are interested in.
+So if you do a good job of the cross-promotion and the CTA in your blog design, maybe linking to specific things based on what you're writing about, I would tend to think I would put everything under a name, versus the courses... But I could definitely be talked out of that, too; that's just my first initial thoughts on it.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. I don't know if you wanna look at the site now - you probably don't have to, but... I do have a courses link in the nav bar, and then it just gives you a listing of all my courses. But of course, if I do write a blog post that's relevant to Docker, let's say, there is like a call-to-action at the top that says "Hey, by the way, look who has a Docker course!"
+But yeah, I feel like developers -- we're both developers ourselves... I don't know, I'm basically immune to advertising, entirely. Of course, I run AdBlock. I would never even think to do paid ads. But even like any marketing stuff, like - really? You're gonna put pop-ups on your page? Unless your content is unbelievably amazing, I'm just gonna immediately close... So it's very hard to find ways to market to developers, and that's also something I've been struggling with for a while. But I just keep powering through, create video content, text content... I don't try to word my blog posts to be sales pitches; I just write about the thing naturally. I don't know if it's the most effective thing in the world. It works okay, but I'm sure there's way to improve, and it's an interesting thing, I think.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah... It's a balance. Looking at your website right now, I would definitely say your "Learn Docker with my newest course" banner - I think that's really solid. I think it's not obtrusive. The fact that you have the taste to not overlay "Sign up for my newsletter", "Buy my new course" as I'm reading, is key. I'm an insta-close on anybody who pops up anything on me... Which is the same thing that we do. And we have a strong call-to-action to sign up when you hit the homepage signed out. Changelog.com, you're signed out - there's a nice, big banner there. It's not an overlay, but you can't miss it. You can exit out, and we'll store that in the cookies so we won't show it to you again.
+\[36:15\] If you're signed in, it obviously won't show it to you, because you've already signed up. But we try to stay super-tasteful with any sort of promotion that we do, because we have being offended by pushy people. You know, we're developers...
+So I'd say you're doing quite well in that regard. I'm just looking at one of your blog posts; there's a quick jump-down to a video, it's cool... Do you have one that's specifically -- this one I'm looking at is "Calculate invoice amounts with Bash", that's the most recent one.
+Here we go, "Docker tips." So does this one have it's own at the end?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, there's a little CTA at the bottom where people can actually -- well, in the Docker posts they can sign up for free and they get a little emailed based Docker course that eases them into the paid video course, if they want... But of course, opt-in; it's not an annoying pop-up type of thing. Which is funny because -- I don't know, I don't think I'm a natural when it comes to sales. For me, sales has always been like the snake oil/car salesmen, and it's like "Buy my stuff!" while he's hovering over your face... So to get better at sales, what do you do when you get better at stuff? You practice things, you read up... So I read so many different copywriting books, and tried to follow all these "influencers" on YouTube; people who are internet marketing gurus... They're all like "Oh yeah, you have to have all these pop-ups, and things like this, and hammer that person with 10,000 ways to opt-in..."
+Even newsletters... When was the last time -- I'm not bashing newsletters, because your whole entire business makes sense to have a newsletter... But for the random developer like me, who's just a dude blogging about whatever the heck I'm interested in, like Bash scripts, and Docker, and Flask, and programming in Elixir - you're not gonna sign up for that guy's newsletter... What is he gonna give you that's that valuable, you know?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I do know... That being said, it seems like you do have a fair amount of content that would be pretty valuable to people. You do have the free email course, which I do think is a good way of going about it... But do you mean like a weekly thing, where you're writing a newsletter every week?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. Even if it's custom things, or just regurgitating the blog posts, because maybe you don't go to the site manually.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, it's interesting... Nadia Eghbal recently wrote a post which I really appreciated. It's called "The perks of patronage." She wrote it a few weeks back... And it's a very interesting thing. I don't know if you're familiar with Nadia's work at all. She's a long-time community member of ours, and has written a lot about open source sustainability; a lot of the human side of software an technology, very insightful stuff... And there she's writing about what patronage looks like nowadays, and what people are coming for when they're subscribing to somebody, whether it's a Twitch streamer, or they're buying video courses... I think specifically she's focusing on Patreon and Kickstarter as subjects of that post. I'll send you the link to read it...
+One of the things that she says that was interesting to me, which I hadn't really considered before, and it made me wanna do more stuff that's personality-based, or personal, or... Even Backstage - we've been doing Backstage for a while; we don't record it very often... But I wanna do more Backstage stuff, because she says that there's actually a relationship to a person that matters more than the ones and zeroes of what you're providing them, or the dollar value of "This content is worth this value."
+\[40:10\] Anyways, I don't have much beyond that to say about it... It's made me change a little bit my perspective, because I would originally agree with you. But now I might say "Well, maybe people just like to hear from Nick Janetakis", and maybe they appreciate your work, and you do help them learn, and they would love to just keep up with what you're doing, and what your thoughts are on whatever it is you think is interesting to write about.
+Some of it is around this idea of the new rise of personal newsletters as the newest social network, as people are starting to move away from public everything into more private, inbox-based writing. Kind of a new version of blogging. Anyways, I'll send you that link.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, please.
+**Jerod Santo:** It might stoke some of your thoughts on that.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I am 100%. First, let me get this straight here - I think the value of the newsletter is as high as it gets. When I'm ready to release a new course, I am sending that out to my list. A very large percentage of the course selling income is from those initial emails blasts. Very infrequently, but yeah. I totally agree about--
+**Jerod Santo:** Do you read newsletters? Do you sign up for newsletters?
+**Nick Janetakis:** It's so funny how that works, at least for my brain... I'm signed up to a number of newsletters, and I read almost none of them.
+**Jerod Santo:** Hm... What about RSS? Where do you get your news?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Well, fortunately (or unfortunately; maybe fortunately), I just go to Hacker News every once in a while... And by "once in a while" I mean like every 15 seconds...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Nick Janetakis:** No, not that bad, but usually I just scan Hacker News, and then maybe some Subreddits...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I was addicted to Hacker News for years. I was one of the very early adopters of Hacker News. I went straight from Digg to Hacker News, when Digg went south. I know a lot of people went from Digg to Reddit, and then Hacker News eventually... So because I saw Hacker News in what I would consider its glory days... Of course, this is like the person who discovers the band, and then when everybody comes and likes their band, they think they've sold out. But Hacker News used to be a treasure trove of everything, and I've weaned myself -- the way I actually weaned myself off of Hacker News was by subscribing to the Hacker Newsletter. Because there's this thought of like "I'm going to miss out, so I have to check what's number one today", or whatever that thing is where you say "Once in a while, every 15 minutes." Because I used to be one there all the time probably 8-10 years ago.
+Hacker Newsletter really helped me out, because he does a great job of basically including all the links that are good that week, and he sends it on a Friday morning, or Saturday morning if he slacks... And so you just don't have to go there, and you can still feel like you're keeping up. That's the way I weaned off Hacker News.
+I actually have used Reddit more now than I used to. Specific Subreddits are pretty good. The home is trash mostly, but...
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I still do RSS... I subscribe to specific people. Again, it's that personal touch. I'm not gonna subscribe to The Verge on RSS; that's just insanity. Or I personally wouldn't subscribe to Changelog News on RSS, because we're gonna post 5-10 things a day, and I don't want that. I wanna know what Nick has written lately. I subscribe to specific developers' blogs, because they're infrequent and high-quality usually.
+But I also do newsletters now... And I used to be a "Kill the newsletter" kind of guy, like no email. It's actually kind of nice having something just put in your inbox once a week. Of course, you can ignore it if you want to... But I like how it's packaged up and presented. It's not like a Daily Star, minute-by-minute stream of what's happening in this time box.
+**Nick Janetakis:** \[44:21\] Yeah, I've even had some people who have subscribed to my list be like "Just send more stuff."
+**Jerod Santo:** Send more stuff... \[laughs\]
+**Nick Janetakis:** Because for a while it just got to be like -- I would post something every three or four months. Very, very infrequently. But I think when someone connects with you at a human level, and they're one of your true fans, or whatever, you just wanna consume as much of their content as possible, I think. That's how I am. When I find someone interesting, I'm just gonna binge all of it, everything they do.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I've never been a binger. Will you go back-catalog? If you find a person who podcasts, and you found them episode \#68, will you go back to \#1 and just back-catalog them?
+**Nick Janetakis:** I wouldn't watch all of them from \#1 up, but I would absolutely go to the back-catalog and just look through all the topics and see which titles catch my eye. Like, "Oh, that sounds interesting..." And I'll be way more lax about that, too. If I really enjoyed one of their podcasts, I would be more inclined to watch more of their older stuff, versus someone who is like a so-so podcast. So-so I probably wouldn't even go back.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, that's what always surprises me. If I find somebody, I will rarely go back. I will subscribe and I will be a faithful subscriber to a new contact, but I'm just not really a back-catalog person... And there's some slight exceptions to that, but pretty much that's a rule.
+But we have so many people that go back-catalog on our shows; it always surprises me. They're back there, listening to episodes \#1 through \#20. And now, let me just say to you... If you like The Changelog - okay, go back to \#200, maybe go to \#300, but don't go back to \#1 through \#20, because we've gotten a lot better at what we do since then; there's some lower-end podcasts back there in that catalog.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. That's definitely a testament to creating content. Just like coding, at the start, it's gonna be pretty bad, but then you just keep doing it and doing it and doing it, and 100 episodes later it's good.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. How many videos have you done?
+**Nick Janetakis:** 190 of them are in the Flask course. The Docker course has like 75. There's probably been about 20 hours of actual final cut video. But the amount of recording that took place to get to that point was a lot. So I don't have exact hard metrics off the top of my head, but usually, for every one minute of final video that I'll release to someone, it's about 7-8 minutes of real lifetime to get to that. Just between having to take, and retake, and then edit, and all that stuff...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I'd love to hear your process real quick maybe, before we tail off here... How you go about -- maybe even tell me how it's changed over the years, but specifically what are you doing now and what works well for you?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Well, I'll try to condense this. I don't know how much time we have left - like 10-15 minutes, something like that?
+**Jerod Santo:** It's our show, it can be as long as we want it to.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Okay. I'll try not to ramble too long...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Yeah, 10-15 sounds fine.
+**Nick Janetakis:** When I first started doing courses I didn't even have a real microphone. Basically, my cousin had a non-RadioShack microphone... You know those really wimpy ones?
+**Jerod Santo:** Sure, yeah.
+2: He had something that looked reasonable. Okay, so let me use that. Back then I didn't even use noise reduction, and all this other stuff. You can hear crickets in the outside, because it was during the summertime, and it was like 8,000 degrees with the windows open... It wasn't extremely bad, but I also had terrible headphones. I didn't even hear half that stuff then. Ignorance is bliss type of thing. \[laughter\] So then eventually, as I did more courses, I upgraded my equipment.
+\[48:07\] For the longest time I was using this one program ASIO Link Pro on Windows, and what it allowed you to do was -- I was never that type of person who wanted to record my audio, and then have to go in and actually remove noise for all the tracks, and then import it into my video afterwards. I'd much rather have all of that stuff done in real time... It saves so much time in the editing process.
+So one of my biggest improvements for workflow was a couple years ago I started using that ASIO Link Pro program, which allowed me to take input from my microphone, direct it through that program, put it into an actual digital audio workstation - I happened to use REAPER back then... Do the noise cancellation, and leveling, and compression there, and then output it directly to the program I was using to record the videos. So when I hit Record to record a video, my audio was already pristine, in final form. That saved a ton of time when editing.
+But then something really unfortunate happened, and I feel terrible about it. The developer of that software literally died, and his brother ended up making a post on the Subreddit...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh...
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. And it was one of those programs -- it wasn't free; it was like $50 or something... But it had a registration server key where it phoned home every time you opened the program. And with him, the server went down as well... So I literally couldn't record my courses anymore. I mean, his problems were a lot worse than mine... But yeah, that made me rethink about my whole entire audio situation.
+Right now what I'm doing is I have a $60 Dynamic mic that has an XLR input, and it goes right to an audio interface. I don't know if you know Scarlett 2i2. It's that red--
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. It's sitting on my desk right over there.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, so that's a pretty good audio interface. It seems to work well on Windows, Mac, and even Linux. So I have that hooked up, but then I also have now a new piece of hardware that's basically replacing that ASIO Link Pro, that does noise cancellation, and a little bit of compression and DS-ing. That's the DBX286S. A little bit expensive, I think it was like $199, but... It means that now I can just flip the mic on and talk, and I don't have to worry about the audio quality at all. It might be a little bit weird over Skype, but when you're doing it with no network latency, the audio comes out pretty good.
+And then for the editing process with the videos I just use a program called Camtasia, which works on Windows and Mac. Also a paid program. Basically, I hit Record on that -- or sometimes I use OBS when I wanna do some webcamp stuff, but... Yeah, I'll just add all my videos in there.
+I think Camtasia is pretty nice, because it's very optimized for screencast-style videos, where you're recording your desktop with maybe a webcam... But sometimes in post-production I wanna do things like zoom into a specific area of my screen, or maybe highlight a specific area with a highlighter, or like a fade-out type of thing... There's all these really nice effects where you can do overlays and tooltips with text that is just very hard to do with other video editing programs, like Kdenlive, or Davinci Resolve, or just some open source one. Davinci is not open source, but they're free, technically.
+But yeah, for me I think - just like coding - when you're making courses, you wanna always improve your workflow to create the content as fast as possible, and have it look as good as you can, within reason. So that's pretty much my process now.
+**Jerod Santo:** Very cool. Yeah, I've used Camtasia. It seems like pretty good software. I've got the Scarlett sitting over there... I haven't done too much in terms of video; I'm just kind of dipping my toes into that water, but always interested in hearing how people who create good coding videos go about it.
+**Nick Janetakis:** \[52:14\] I'm gonna change it around, though... About a year ago (or six months ago maybe) I did want to -- so right now, I don't know if you know this, but I am running Windows, unfortunately. At least there is the subsystem for Linux, which is pretty decent... My whole dev environment is actually driven by Tmux and Vim and all this other stuff; very command line-focused, and it's actually pretty good. But I did wanna switch to native Linux, but unfortunately I had some issues with the Scarlett in Linux. I kept getting these weird -- the audio would completely drop out... A hardware malfunction type of drop out. It wasn't even like -- what's that term...? It wasn't like something was getting overloaded, it was just like a signal drop. But apparently it's not happening to everybody, and I was using the Debian Testing channel, so maybe there was something wrong with that... But yeah, ideally I would love to go native Linux and just record with FFmpeg on hotkeys, and optimize the heck out of it.
+**Jerod Santo:** That'd be cool.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, Linux and hardware historically have been the source of many, many lost hours of people trying to figure out why the Wi-Fi doesn't work, or why this particular headset doesn't work, or that interface... I think it's been the -- I won't say the downfall, but it's definitely been a stumbling block for a lot of people using Linux, those particular weird scenarios with drivers, or whatever it happens to be... That's where we're at with people recording on Linux, especially because we use Skype, and Skype on Linux is just not reliable software... Whereas for audio calls, Skype on the other two platforms is reliable software. It's not the best user experience, but it is the best in terms of latency and keeping that connection alive.
+When we have somebody who calls in and they're like "I'm on Linux", we're like "Oh, it's gonna be a long afternoon", because things are going to go not well. It's a shame, because everything else about it, in my experience, is pretty awesome.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah. It's really unfortunate too, because I discovered i3, which is a tiling window manager. I don't know if you know a little bit about that stuff, but -- oh, God... There's nothing on Windows that's even remotely comparable. Sure, there's some built-in hotkeys where you can split two windows left or right, or up or down, but a proper tiled window manager... I don't know. I fell in love with it immediately, but now I feel like that alone is enough to switch to native Linux, if I can get my audio working well... Because there's hardcore solutions to get Camtasia to run on Linux. It doesn't run natively on Linux, but you can technically buy the second video card and then do like a GPU pass-through virtual machine through KVM. Then it's almost like the VM has dedicated access to that second GPU or video card that you have, and then you can actually just run Windows on that. Then it's like you're kind of running Windows and Linux side by side, but Linux is still your primary host OS, type of deal...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. That's cool.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, I've seen people gaming at 120 frames per second on very modern games through that type of setup, so I'm pretty sure video editing should be fine.
+**Jerod Santo:** There's a piece of software - I can't think of the name right now - where you can basically merge two machines across two monitors, with one mouse, one keyboard.
+**Nick Janetakis:** I've heard of that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I've used it. It worked really well. In fact, somebody put it in Ping. Let me look it up. Ping is our repo on GitHub where people suggest shows, and stuff... They said "You should have these guys on", and I was like "I love that software!"
+**Nick Janetakis:** \[56:07\] Yeah, I know exactly what you're talking about, but I can't think of it.
+**Jerod Santo:** The guy didn't actually end up coming on, otherwise I would totally remember what it was.
+**Nick Janetakis:** It for sure starts with an S. But I think what I'm gonna do is -- you know, I'm in the middle of working on a course now, so once that course is rolled up and out, I may experiment a little bit more with some native Linux stuff, even if it involves buying a completely different set of hardware.
+**Jerod Santo:** Synergy.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yes. Maybe.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right. I've found it. The story of Synergy... Synergy is -- that's the name of the Ping, I've found it. It was closed. I close them once I do the invite, just to keep it cleanly. But... I feel like the guy just never responded. The story of Synergy... Yeah, this stuff goes back years. Basically, what it is -- I mean, talk about a hack... It's basically the thing that bridges... And I think you install the client on both machines. Let's say you have Windows on your left-hand machine, your monitor on the left, and Linux on your monitor on the right. And a single keyboard, single mouse. You install -- I think one is a client server, if I remember... You install it on Windows, then you install the client on Linux, and it just -- I mean, Synergy is a pretty good name, even though it's a lame business term for this, because it actually just merges the two. It feels like one machine, and you're switching environments just by dragging your mouse across to the other monitor. It's pretty cool. "Synergy - combine your computers into one cohesive experience. Share one mouse and keyboard between multiple computers."
+It's one of those things where you just think "That's gonna be buggy..." And maybe there's bugs; I'm sure there's bugs, it's software... But man, it sure worked seamlessly for me back when I used it. I had a similar scenario where I wanted to use Linux, but I had specific Windows needs. This was way back before the hardware on laptops was really strong enough to do VMs and stuff without totally bogging your machine down... So I ran two machines side by side. You can even copy and paste between the computers. Cool.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, there was a video I watched of it a couple months back, and it was very nice... It seamlessly moved the mouse from one OS to the other.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Each time you do it, you're kind of impressed. Every time you drag that mouse across to the other OS, it's just like "Oh, man..." Cool, Nick. Well, this has been fun. Like I said, Backstage is a great place to talk shop. You and I have lots of shop that interacts with each other. I loved hearing about what you're up to... And make sure you send me any links with things that we mentioned, so we can put them in the show notes, for people that are interested. I'll put Synergy in there, as I'm sure listeners are at least intrigued if they'd never heard of that one.
+\[58:54\] Listeners, let us know if you enjoyed this. We have discussions on Changelog.com. Speaking of our custom CMS, we have recently added commentary. So while everybody else removes comments from their websites, we're putting them back. We're putting them back on the website. One of the cool things about that is you can discuss specific episodes. All news items get comments, and each episode of the podcast gets its own news item, so you can comment on podcast episodes.
+To do that, if you open your show notes, there's a link to it in the show notes. It says, I think, "Discuss on Changelog News", or something like that. Click that link. If you're on the website, click the Discuss button there in the toolbar, let us know what you think. If you have questions for Nick, or for me... If you like this style of episode, let us know; if you hate this and hope we never publish it again - well, don't be mean about it, but we appreciate that feedback as well... And yeah, I look forward to doing this more often, if people think it's something they wanna listen to.
+**Nick Janetakis:** On that note, thanks a lot for having me. And on the topic of comments, really quick - I'm really happy that you added that feature to the Changelog site, because that's gonna come in handy for my platform as well.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Anything else I can add to our site, so that you can benefit...?
+**Nick Janetakis:** Yeah, absolutely. What you can do is in the markdown preview for the comments in that text box, let's get things set up - and by "let's" I mean purely you - add some front-end capability where I can take some image in my clipboard, or drag and drop the image in there, have it get uploaded and produce the URL, similar to GitHub, how they do the issue comment. I would be a very happy person if that were to happen by tomorrow afternoon.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, boy... I can't make -- actually, I can make a guarantee on timing; it won't happen by tomorrow afternoon. That being said, if you procrastinate long enough, that's definitely on our hit list, because we want the commentary to be as capable as people are used to on other websites... So that's definitely something that we will be doing, just not any time real soon.
+**Nick Janetakis:** That's okay. I have plenty of other things to work on.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Alright, see you later, Nick.
+**Nick Janetakis:** Alright, thanks. Bye.

Dwayne Johnson’s movies are actually really educational_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

	@@ -0,0 +1,587 @@

+**Adam Stacoviak:** Alright, we're backstage here at OSCON.
+**Jerod Santo:** Day two.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Day two, in the bag. Day one was pretty crazy...
+**Jerod Santo:** Hallway track style, of course...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Our booth was so busy... We have a booth here at OSCON because of O'Reilly, and we love coming here... And we record from the expo hall floor. We get to see a lot of people, meet a lot of people, see listeners out there... Thank you for coming by and saying hello. It's just so awesome to get that hallway track feeling, meet some people, shake some hands...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, yeah. It helps that we're sandwiched in between Python Software Foundation, which are nice folks, the popcorn machine, which you know that brings a crowd...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, yes. The smell...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, yeah. She's preparing popcorn as we speak. And then the book where you pick up your free T-shirt, your OSCON T-shirt. Everyone's gotta go to that booth.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** High traffic. It's probably the best placement in the hall.
+**Jerod Santo:** When you go to a conference, it's mostly about the swag.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. Of course. You've gotta outfit yourself. You've got two goals at a conference - meet people, and get new clothing.
+**Jerod Santo:** Which is why it's good that companies and brands that moved beyond T-shirts and are now providing us socks...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Socks, yes!
+**Jerod Santo:** Sometimes you'll find a hat... Mugs...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The occasional awesome travel drink, mug, or something like that...
+**Jerod Santo:** Tell them about our awesome free mug hack that you've put together over there for Changelog fans.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, so my idea was that you come to a conference and there's often some sort of mug or drink dispenser, some sort of cup thing given away... And I'm like "Well, in most cases you don't really like those things", because maybe it's got a Verizon logo on there or something - which is fine, I like Verizon, but... Do I wanna brand myself--
+**Jerod Santo:** AT&T. Do they have an AT&T logo on there?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There you go... You may not want that. So I'm like "Well, we'll give them some circle stickers that stick onto mugs, or their favorite drink dispenser, or cup, or whatever you've got. You put our sticker on there... Boom!
+**Jerod Santo:** Transformation.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** People like when I say "Boom!"
+**Jerod Santo:** Do they?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I said that a couple times yesterday, and people were really laughing...
+**Jerod Santo:** People like it when you say "Boom!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Audience, if you like it when I say "Boom!", email us. We wanna know.
+**Jerod Santo:** Email Adam. Adam@changelog.com. He'd love to hear from you if you like the "Boom!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right. Well, we actually say it after shows, too. We say "Boom goes the dynamite!"
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right. That's our key that it's over with.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. It's how you know it's done.
+**Jerod Santo:** The guest always wonders what's happening at that moment. When I say "Boom goes the dynamite", they're kind of like "What is that...?" "The show is over, okay?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** "It's over now."
+**Jerod Santo:** "It's over now. You're done." I also like to tell them that they're off the Budweiser hotseat, but nobody gets the reference, because it's from the 1990's ESPN Sports Center.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, my gosh...
+**Jerod Santo:** Dan Patrick used to have an actual...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Spud MacKenzie.
+**Jerod Santo:** A Spud MacKenzie. \[laughs\] That's a dog, man...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, my gosh...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] You're just doing pop culture references from the same time period. What else have you got?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's it.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Budweiser was huge.
+**Jerod Santo:** Budweiser was huge.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't why, but they just were.
+**Jerod Santo:** They had all sorts of commercials, like "Why ask why, try Bud dry." Do you remember that one?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They were doing amazing with their marketing.
+**Jerod Santo:** They really were.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's the way you do it.
+**Jerod Santo:** The "What's up" guys... Remember that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No...
+**Jerod Santo:** "Whazzuuup?!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, yeah!
+**Jerod Santo:** Was that Bud?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't know.
+**Jerod Santo:** I feel like that was Budweiser.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't know, honestly...
+**Jerod Santo:** That was annoying...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It was pretty annoying. I think what repopularized it, if not the first time, was when the Marlon Wayans brothers did that scary movie parody, and it was the ghost from Scream, the bad person in Scream, which was like this ghost face, which became super-popular for Halloween, too.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[04:17\] Oh, for sure.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** This is definitely Backstage, by the way...
+**Jerod Santo:** Backstage, and back in the past...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Because that ghost face was pretty awesome, and then... I forget which of the Wayans brothers it was in that comedy/parody movie, but they were like "Whazzuuup?!" And they were like inhaling the cannabis, and stuff like that; they had some buddies over there, and they got really crazy.
+**Jerod Santo:** That was post-whazzuup commercial. They were riffing on the commercials though.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, the point was that it repopularized it to a new generation.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, REpopularized it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I was looking up Scary Movie - that was in the year 2000, so that's almost 20 years also. Scream itself has to be older, because like you said, that was a parody of Scream... Which is kind of weird, because Scream itself was kind of a parody of itself, which is why it was --
+**Adam Stacoviak:** In a way...
+**Jerod Santo:** It was tongue-in-cheek, it was self-aware.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** It was one of the first movies that I remember that really kind of embraced the tropes of horror and still was scary, but made fun of itself.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** But funny. Right. It was being very cliché about things...
+**Jerod Santo:** That's 1996.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Like running upstairs, for example, away from the bad person.
+**Jerod Santo:** Where people always do the worst thing... The dainty person who's like "I'm gonna go check what's in the garage..." It's like, "You're tiny. There's a killer loose..." "I'm just gonna check what's in the garage" because you heard noise?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right... Like, "Come on, get some..."
+**Jerod Santo:** It's like "Don't do that. Don't go check in the garage."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So anyways, yeah "Whazzuuuup?!", that was from there.
+**Jerod Santo:** Anyways, so Budweiser was good at advertising.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** What does that have to do with anything?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Spud MacKenzie.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, the Budweiser backseat. So back in the late '90s, maybe 2000's, Sports Center was the number one show for sports fans.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, yes.
+**Jerod Santo:** Dan Patrick and Craig Kilborn, and there was this cast of hosts on Sports Center that were funny, and charismatic... And Dan Patrick had a specific segment called The Budweiser Hotseat. It was an interview segment where whoever (some athlete) would come on the show, and they would lob hardballs at him/her, and at the end Dan Patrick would say "You're off the Budweiser hotseat." \[laughs\] And nobody remembers that. But I say it to way too many people.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah... I understand it though, so I'm tracking with you. It's fun.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, it resonates, because they've just been interviewed for an hour, and they're feeling like "Okay, it's time to relax."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I said something yesterday and I can't recall what it was, but it was like Dick Tracy.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right, Dick Tracy.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I was talking about a watch. On your Apple Watch, if you have one, you can actually talk to it and text message via voice, basically. So I tapped a little microphone button and the next thing you know, I can capture my voice with this Dick Tracy device, and send it through the airwaves all the way to my wife, in some distant --
+**Jerod Santo:** Right, just like Dick Tracy used to.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And I was like "What...?!" So I've referenced Dick Tracy, and...
+**Jerod Santo:** What was funny was when you were doing that, you were--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** You were tracking, but they were not.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, but you were explaining an Apple Watch and how it works, how you can talk to it, to a nice young woman who was wearing an Apple Watch at the time...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, that's true...
+**Jerod Santo:** I was like "Dude, you don't have to explain it to her, she totally gets it. What she does not get is Dick Tracy."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right. I figured it was worth explaining, just in case. Just so that like if I wasn't like exposing a new feature to somebody... Like, somebody out there is wearing an Apple Watch right now and had no idea that they can text-message with their voice. And right now, they're texting their wife, their girlfriend, their spouse, their mom maybe even, their kids - who knows? All these individuals in their family... \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Everybody. Text the whole family. "Did you know I can talk to my wife...?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[08:02\] "...about this Dick Tracy device?"
+**Jerod Santo:** And then their mom says "Yes, honey. Just like Dick Tracy." And then they say "Who's Dick Tracy?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** "What? Who's Dick Tracy?" So yeah...
+**Jerod Santo:** And the answer is "Who's Dick Tracy?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** He's a character in a show...
+**Jerod Santo:** He's a character in a show... \[laughs\] Nobody knows who he is. Even us who referenced him can't even--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Dick Tracy is from the '50s or '60s, or something like that...
+**Jerod Santo:** It was an old comic book; I believe it was a comic book first...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, sure.
+**Jerod Santo:** And then eventually a movie star in Warren Beatty. He was a private detective, and he ended up arresting and killing mafia-type figures... And he would talk to his watch.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** This is Dick Tracy?
+**Jerod Santo:** It was Dick Tracy.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Wow. He's a monster.
+**Jerod Santo:** He was a pretty cool guy...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Let me see if I can pull up that reference, "When did the movie Dick Tracy first ship?" Or I guess -- what do they say in the film world? Launch... Debut...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, debut...
+**Jerod Santo:** When was the premiere?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Premiere, yes...
+**Jerod Santo:** As developers, we just say ship all the time. "When did that ship? When's this gonna ship?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, it's a cool word to use for like -- oh, you know what a cool word is actually in mountain-biking? "Send it."
+**Jerod Santo:** Dick Tracy, 1990. Send it?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, send it.
+**Jerod Santo:** What does that mean?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** If you're on a trail and you're shredding and you come up to this jump, and you hit that jump right and you launch off that thing and you totally clear it, that's called sending it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Do people tell you to send it?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Send it!!!
+**Jerod Santo:** They'll yell it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, your buddies will be cheering you on, because you're about to--
+**Jerod Santo:** Because you might be timid, you might not be sure about this...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes, and it's that vote of confidence. "Send it!"
+**Jerod Santo:** Now, do they use the past tense? Like "You sent it!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, I think so.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I've heard it said before.
+**Jerod Santo:** Are you gonna start to try to work "Ship it" in there to those folks?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No, I don't think it's worth it.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The point was the word choice of the exact same thing. We say "ship it", or "shipped", or...
+**Jerod Santo:** They say "premiere, debut"...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Premiere, debut... They say "Send it"... I love all these little -- what are those called? Is it an -ism for that area?
+**Jerod Santo:** Like an idiom?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Idioms... I like that. I like that about different cultures within a culture.
+**Jerod Santo:** Subcultures.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, subcultures. Subcultures... \[laughter\] I like that about that, because you can--
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm just here to come up with words that represent what you're saying.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right... \[laughter\] Anyways...
+**Jerod Santo:** So I think you should work on this "ship it" thing in the mountain-biking culture...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Community.
+**Jerod Santo:** You know, cross-pollinate good ideas. "Ship it" is a good idea, so the next time your buddy is about to really hit a ramp, or a berm, or whatever they hit...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Jump...
+**Jerod Santo:** "Ship it!!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Ship it!
+**Jerod Santo:** What if he's like "I don't know what that means!" He crashes. He's like "I didn't know what to do."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** He'll crash because of it, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** "I didn't know what to do. I was gonna send it, but then you told me to ship it, and I just... I froze up and I crashed my bike, man..."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We're getting some people in here today... The action has actually opened it up here in the expo hall.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We're doing the Backstage early...
+**Jerod Santo:** And here comes an interview.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Potentially. We'll see.
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure. First break - one of the ironies of us at OSCON is we have to ask everybody how the conference is, because we hang out on the hallway track.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** So it's like "What talks are you gonna see?" "None of them." Keynotes? Barely. So people come out, we ask them what they saw, what they're thinking about it, what are the trends... I haven't really captured any trends this year yet. I had one guy who was complaining "Too much blockchain, too much serverless." So those might be trends; maybe he was just cranky, I don't know...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's hard to tell.
+**Jerod Santo:** So that might be a theme...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Blockchain and serverless... I don't know, how do you feel about blockchain?
+**Jerod Santo:** \[12:04\] Mixed emotions.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah? Why is that?
+**Jerod Santo:** I feel like the hype around it became one of those moments where it was the solution to all problems, to a certain degree, and I think we've seen what's played out so far is that it can be a good solution for some problems, and we're in a phase where we're trying to figure out what those problems necessarily are. So that's why it's mixed emotions. It's like "Well, there was this promise, there's some things that are legit, there's a lot of smoke..." There was a lot of currency going around the word...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...until the bottom fell out of the ICO craze...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What do you think is not applying particularly? What are some key areas where it was like "Oh, blockchain will solve these problems", and they tried it and it just didn't?
+**Jerod Santo:** It seemed like -- and maybe this is actually working well and I just haven't seen it yet, but it seems like a lot of the using it as a chain of custody for physical goods hasn't really... I know Walmart's doing some stuff, and I know IBM's got some projects, and Hyperledger is a thing, but... I guess I just haven't seen any of that, like big stories of successful applications of that in shipping, in logistics etc.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. I did see the recent news from Shell. They had a big investment in Ethereum I believe it was. It wasn't very popular on the news feed, but it was interesting to me, because I was like "Here's this big oil company, trying to find a way to use blockchain to essentially ensure that we as consumers, when we buy electricity, that it is--" Because they have a network of electricity, essentially, this energy...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. Oh yeah, that was interesting.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And basically, it was that as a customer you would be ensured that if you bought windfarm energy, that the energy your house is using is in fact that energy, because of blockchain technology.
+**Jerod Santo:** How would they track it though?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That to me is the black box.
+**Jerod Santo:** Is the tracking of energy flow already digitized? I assume so...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** From what I understood there was some sort of energy network. I don't know if that's a literal IP-based network, or if it's just a network of storage devices for large-scale energy. I honestly have no idea how the energy grid really works. From what I understand though, you can't contain energy; that's why it's always almost like a stock market, the way you trade it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Trading energy is really big in Houston, which is where I'm from... And I know a lot of people who are involved in selling energy, basically... In the process of procuring it, enabling it, infrastructuring it, and then also selling it... Which is pretty interesting. Because that's what the world uses. So back to the point of blockchain, I thought that was a really interesting use of it, to ensure that as a consumer I'm in fact using the energy I thought I was buying - from the windfarm, to the sustainable energy sources, to just natural coal-burning processes to derive energy.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. And at the same time you see companies like Microsoft continue to invest in blockchain things... So usually where there's enough smoke, there's a fire, and I think there's eventually gonna be a fire, but there's been a -- you know, hype phases are phases; I feel like we're at the kind of exhausted (of the topic, of the word, of the conversation) phase, and then...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** All the exciting things have happened.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...eventually, we'll see real use cases happening out there.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[16:11\] Yeah, right. All the exciting hype has been in place, the gauntlet has been thrown.
+**Jerod Santo:** Also, a lot of people have to now build the things, and that takes time.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. That's a good key there, too - ideas are just ideas until they're actually executed, you know what I mean?
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It seems very logical, but... You often think the idea is the most magical thing, and it's actually a marriage of many parts. You've got the idea, the ideation, the vision, the aspiration to even do something, and then you've got the actual execution process. And then the follow-through.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So there's a lot of key components to just simply shipping an idea, so to speak.
+**Jerod Santo:** And that's why I think the ICO as a novel instrument for funding bubbled, because it was so easy to feign competency; you were selling ideas, so all you needed was a white paper to get investment... And there's your idea.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There was a pitch, basically.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. And some of those were in more or less stable or completed forms. Some of them actually copy-pasted other people's white papers around...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, really?
+**Jerod Santo:** So it got really sloppy. Yeah...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Dang...
+**Jerod Santo:** Then they get called out, because you know, we can learn these things; we have technology.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We do have the technology...
+**Jerod Santo:** But very few teams actually had the technical chops to pull off what they were building, and those that do are still working on a lot of these things.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's interesting, man. So what about serverless then? Or have you got more on blockchain?
+**Jerod Santo:** Serverless... I don't know. I can say where it's interesting for certain use cases. I still haven't been sold on the "convert everything over", because it just seems like the workflows and the tooling - which I know is being rapidly developed at this phase - what I have seen so far has not congealed into a completed offering. There's still a lot of question marks - how do you do this, how do you do that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What in particular?
+**Jerod Santo:** I think for me it's visibility into where your code is erroring, where there's problems, how you run local versus on Lambda, or wherever you're running the code., differences there, if there are any...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Does that tie you to a cloud then, because you're serverless? Does that mean that you're all in on cloud, so you always have a cloud provider, or your own cloud?
+**Jerod Santo:** No. It depends on how you implement, but a lot of the frameworks and the libraries and stuff are trying to sit in-between and make you cloud-agnostic; or you could be on multi-cloud and just run against this set of abstracted APIs. You could definitely write directly against Lambda, and then I'm sure you have certain Lambda things that you're stuck with...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** How is serverless different than just developing something around the idea of APIs? It seems like serverless in that is very similar, except for the fact that serverless sort of lives nowhere...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, so I guess the difference is...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Because you used to be able just to--
+**Jerod Santo:** ...if I'm building against an API that I created, like a microservice architecture, I'm in charge of all of those services.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So I have to make sure they're provisioned, and deployed, and monitored, and... It's just a layer up from that. You just care about the code, and if it gets called at the right times, then the service provider basically takes care of spinning up whatever containers need to get spun up real fast, and keeping things cashed and whatnot, and all that stuff... It's not that there's no servers - as people have said - it's that you don't care as much about them; you don't have to think about them as much.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...or hopefully at all, if the abstraction holds.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[20:15\] The idea thought is not so much do less, but to have more focus. If you as a team no longer really have to concern yourself with the uptime of the infrastructure which you're on, then that's one less point of -- you know, where you're not focused on the product, and the service itself, rather than the technology it's running on.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It gives you--
+**Jerod Santo:** I think doing less and focusing and related. You can focus, because you are doing less...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah... What I mean is it's not about laziness, it's about optimization of the efficiency of your team, for example.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, some people argue that laziness is about efficiencies, too...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\] That's true, I guess.
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm too lazy to do this myself over and over again, so I'm gonna automate it... So that's about my efficiency, because now I can reapply that work to something more creative or higher-value. So laziness is a virtue in certain senses... And then in the other sense, where you're actually so lazy that you don't get anything done, or can't get yourself to work, or whatever... That's a different kind of laziness.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you wanna go into the many layers of laziness?
+**Jerod Santo:** There are seven layers of laziness.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm currently living between layers four and five -- no, I don't know.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What else here at OSCON? We've got blockchain, serverless... That's stuff that you've heard that was too much of. What have you heard that's been--
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, it was just one guy that said that. It wasn't like this is --
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's a unanimous group of one.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I'm just getting my information from people who walk by and say "Hey, what's interesting? What are people talking about?" and he was just like "Too much of this, too much of that." Like, "Okay."
+I haven't heard too much about machine learning today or yesterday... I don't even know if I heard the term, except for maybe when we were talking about Practical AI... But from other people...
+We had a couple of people talking to us about bio -- biotech? I don't know; what is it called? Yeah... The genome stuff.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Editing of DNA.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** DNA becoming a technology of sorts, the sequencing.
+**Jerod Santo:** Genome sequencing. We have a guy coming back later today to talk to us about editing genomes, and whatnot...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes. And they're legit doing this. It's intense. I actually learned about it through a movie. Dwayne Johnson's movies are actually really educational.
+**Jerod Santo:** The Rock?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, The Rock. If you haven't heard of The Rock before, you know --
+**Jerod Santo:** He has a series of educational movies. Jumanji, Jumanji 2, Jumanji 3... \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[23:04\] And let's not forget Moana...
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's probably the most educational movie out there ever... So I highly recommend it. But anyways, Rampage is where I heard about this...
+**Jerod Santo:** Rampage - is that from the old Nintendo games?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right, yeah. You've got the wolf, you've got the --
+**Jerod Santo:** You saw that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah!
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I mean, I was kind of bored, and I was like "I like him in movies", so I figured--
+**Jerod Santo:** I hope you were on a plane, or something...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Nah, I was...
+**Jerod Santo:** So did you pay money to watch that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay, good.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It was free. Well, I guess with the services. You know...
+**Jerod Santo:** It was prepaid. Was it like a Hulu thing, or what?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Part of my subscriptions. It was of the movies I could watch.
+**Jerod Santo:** Alright. It must have been pretty good, because you've been mentioning it a few times.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, the reason why I mentioned it is the point; I'm glad you're bringing it back, because - CRISPRs was talked about on there. It's this project of genome sequencing. So I heard about it, I was educated via a Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson movie called Rampage, about CRISPRs, and this whole idea of editing DNA.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. So I guess the point is if anything that you say is incorrect, it's because you've been educated by The Rock... And by the way, if you're listening to this and you're being educated by Adam now, think about what's happening here...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Uuh...
+**Jerod Santo:** It's getting slippery--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And if you happen to know The Rock, tell him to reach out.
+**Jerod Santo:** If you know Dwayne Johnson and you'd like to get him on The Changelog...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right...
+**Jerod Santo:** What would we talk about The Rock with, if we actually brought him on one of our shows? What could we possibly act like is on topic from him?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Commitment. That man is committed.
+**Jerod Santo:** Like Git commits?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I think committed to being a -- he seems to be a pretty awesome human being; there's a lot of people who like him, he's very likeable. He's very talented, I would say, as somebody who's an on-screen personality, which is not very easy; it's easy for some. He has an insane workout schedule which he is highly committed to, which is I think commitment - being committed to your career, your physique, your mental stability... He's an awesome family dude...
+**Jerod Santo:** I had no doubt that he's interesting.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I'd hate to see some bad news come out about him, because he's pretty cool. And I think he's an idol to a lot, in good ways, and a model to many, on like just being committed to yourself.
+**Jerod Santo:** Die a hero.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. Or live long enough to...
+**Jerod Santo:** Turn into Bill Cosby. \[laughter\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Please, do not put that into our transcripts. That's redacted.
+**Jerod Santo:** Time to wrap up on that one...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** This is redacted...
+**Jerod Santo:** That was the "Boom!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, there's just some things you don't wanna be searched for.
+**Jerod Santo:** Boom goes the dynamite!
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughter\] That's right. Give that one up. Transcriber, don't put that in there. Unintelligible. Cannot be fixed. But yeah, The Rock. He's pretty educational. Super-cool dude. Rampage, I learned about CRISPRs, genome sequencing... I mean, that's the best, when you learn about bleeding edge technology via a Sci-Fi comedy called Rampage, featuring Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson.
+**Jerod Santo:** Based on a video game from the '80s.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right. Bringing it back to the '80s, I'm tellin' ya, man...
+**Jerod Santo:** It all goes back...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** My gosh...
+**Jerod Santo:** Everything goes back to the '80s.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Dude, I've seen some people dressed here today and yesterday...
+**Jerod Santo:** Like it's the '80s?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And I'm like "Wow, you came out of my junior high, basically", you know what I mean? That was actually the '90s.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, fashions are cyclical, you know? They come in, they come back out, eventually...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. It's so wild though. I feel so old for seeing that.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's why I try to keep the same clothes for as long as I can - because eventually, they'll be back. \[laughs\] We should stop.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, that's the point where you stop right there.
+**Jerod Santo:** Boom goes the dynamite!

Hey, is that Burt Reynolds_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

	@@ -0,0 +1,547 @@

+**Adam Stacoviak:** Big day today, Apple's special event, March 25th, 2019. We like to take things from a developer's perspective, so when we cover all this different stuff we're always thinking about it from our audience, which is developers. We've got Apple News, we've got Apple Pay, we've got Apple Car, we've got Apple Arcade, Apple TV, Apple TV+... Lots of stuff to talk through.
+I think the biggest thing for me, Jerod, was just privacy, across all these things, aside from obviously Apple TV+, because hey, that's just content, but... Whatever.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Well, Apple has been selling big on the privacy front - security, privacy... These are things they think consumers want. In my case, they're right. I don't know about you...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I would agree, yes.
+**Jerod Santo:** Today, more than ever, I think privacy is a big thing, and I think -- who were we having a show with...? We were talking about how we're training our privacy for convenience all the time, but we're starting to see the -- maybe it was the BAT show, with Brave (the Basic Attention Token), talking about how people are starting to really value privacy more than they did maybe 3-5 years ago, just because of all of the leaks and all of the shady tactics of large tech corporations around the world. People are starting to value privacy more than they used to, and Apple is well-positioned to provide privacy, because at the end of the day -- well, now they're a services company, but for a long time they've been trying to sell you hardware, not sell your data to other vendors.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think it's important too for them in particular to have this be a named thread across all these things, because it sets a tone for other companies when they launch things to make that a feature. They've made privacy a feature, basically... And I think that's really interesting, because like you'd mentioned, a couple years ago we didn't really have that much concern for it. I don't think because we truly had no concern, but because we assumed that these companies were for us, not against us... And in some ways, they are for us, because they want more engagement, but they're against us in the fact that they take what's ours, make it theirs, and sell it, and never include us in that process, or make us aware.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. Well, we're included, but it's buried down in the end user license agreement, and we are unbeknownst to us thinking we're getting free service, and as you and I both know and as probably most of our listeners know, when there's no price on the service, then you're not the customer, you are the...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The product, that's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...the product, exactly. So these are things that we've been well aware of for years now, and I think are trickling down into the mainstream, and people who value their privacy tend to be interested in what Apple has to offer; because of the way their business model is set up, they are well-positioned... So yeah, as they move into services, they are very much stressing privacy and curation across all these - Apple News, Apple News+, Apple Arcade, Apple TV, Apple TV+, like you said...
+Let's talk about Apple News+, because this is something that -- I don't know, do you read Apple News? Do you launch the News app?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I used to, actually. Small story there - like anybody, whenever you're bored, you usually grab your phone and you grab a small handful of favorite apps. These are mine: Instagram, YouTube... I don't do much posting on Instagram, but I do a lot of reading of it; so I still catch up with people, but I'm a lurker. So my swipe left used to be my finality of it, like "Let me catch up on some world news real fast", and News would be right there on that swipe left.
+Recently I watched a minimalism video from a guy on YouTube named Matt D'Avella; shout-out to Matt if he's listening... If you're a listener, that's awesome. But he was like, "Here's how you make your phone not distract you, basically." So at his advice, I took that and removed that and other things from your swipe left... So long story short - I used to.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[04:11\] The big difference now from the previous Apple News... "Long story short, I used to..." \[laughter\] I like how you like to give the long story, and then you give the TL;DR.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** You could have just started there, and it would have saved a few minutes, but I wouldn't have that context, so I do appreciate that... But I mean the big news is they're adding magazines in a subscription. So they're bringing the magazine back... Over 300 magazines. The guy actually slipped up in the presentation and said 3,000; I was like, "Whaa...?" Then he's like, "Hold on... It's only 300." That was one of the funnier moments of this particular presentation. A $999 a month -- gosh... Now I just did it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There you go.
+**Jerod Santo:** 3,000 magazine for $99/month... No. 300 magazines currently, for $9,99/month. Apple News+, all of the things you kind of expect from a magazine. I think somebody in our Slack community was saying it's kind of like the old Newsstand merged into Apple News. But they've got a lot of magazine there, all the ones you'd think of: Wall Street Journal, which is a thing you'd subscribe to on its own; L.A. Times, so there's newspapers, which has its own separate subscription... It's all bundled in. I saw Wired in there, Vanity Fair, the Time Magazine, the New Yorker etc. Pretty much all the magazines you'd expect are there... But is this exciting? Is this something where it's like, "Oh, finally, I can read magazines on my phone"? I don't know, I feel like I'm over magazines. I feel like the only time I care about a magazine is when I'm sitting in the waiting room of a doctor's office, or something.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I thought about that, and I thought something similar aside from the doctor's office, but... I think what we miss is we're just fed news. News typically follows the crowd. News happens on Twitter, news happens on Facebook, and what they're actually calling us to do by doing this is say "Okay, take a step away from those things and get emerged in stories... Not just simply news." So I think if we can get the Wall Street Journal and the L.A. Times, or even like The Verge piece they did on the people that do all of the monitoring for Facebook, that kind of big exposé kind of thing - I think if we're seeing this as a platform for those kinds of magazines that do that, then what you can do is really just take a step away from what I would consider maybe distraction media, and kind of move it towards attention media, where it requires you to truly disable other things and focus on this, and read a 15-20 minute multimedia kind of experience. I think that's kind of interesting. I don't see it as being very mainstream. I think it's particularly positioned towards iPad users, because the screen is bigger, but...
+**Jerod Santo:** Exactly.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I mean, when they led with that, I was like "Really?" It's cool, but... Really?
+**Jerod Santo:** A couple of things there, maybe on the production or the business side, as well as a little bit on the developer side... So I do wonder how as a creator, like if you think you're working for Wired Magazine, how the actual production of these magazine assets that get shipped into the news app work, and if they're going to be very similar to whatever the spread that you would do for the magazine itself, like the layout there, and the artwork, and all that... Obviously, they have more stuff because it's digital, and the part that you liked was the live covers, where they have this Parallax effect, there's video integration... It's kind of this idea of rich media experience, which Apple has been kind of promoting for years now, even with the iBooks author, and with their iBooks... None of it has really -- I don't know, it hasn't been like a huge hit. I think it's solid...
+\[08:10\] I know there's lots of people who have complained about how it's difficult to produce good iBooks using the iBooks authoring tooling, and all that... I just wonder how that works with Apple News magazines for the people who are putting those things together, and then also how Apple is going about the personalization and the curation, because because of the privacy thing, they're saying "Hey, we don't know what you're reading. We don't let advertisers track anything in Apple News, but it is personalized and it is curated based on your likes", so how do they accomplish that? And it sounds like that on-device machine learning, where everything is localized, it never hits their servers - which they've started doing I think in iOS 11, or at least promoting it back then... And it seems like it's working.
+The question was, you know, Google's fashion of personalization, which is ship everything off to Google servers, that's where the best machine learning can happen, because they know the most about you... And then ship the answers back - versus Apple's style. The question was "Can Apple actually deliver quality curation with on-device only machine learning, versus having this huge amount of knowledge about you?" I'd say so far it seems like they're doing a pretty good job of it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What makes you think that? What makes you think they're doing a good job? Is it because you see it personally?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I use the Apple News app on my phone, and I'm generally pretty happy with the stuff that they feed me. I don't always read it all, but... Maybe five years ago you'd have these recommendations, especially Netflix recommendations, before the algorithms get real good, where it's like "Why do you think I would like this...?" And that's usually the moment where you notice the recommendation engine, is when it fails... But when it doesn't fail, you don't really notice it; you're just like, "Oh, this looks nice."
+I would say Apple News has pretty much done a good job of recommending things that I would be interested in reading, based on whatever they're currently using - the stuff I've read before... Well, it says they don't know what I read; I guess it's just stored on my phone, what I read. So yeah, just from personal experience, it just seems like it's working pretty well, but... More mileage may vary.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Maybe the interesting thing there I think is this sort of edge device privacy thread that's across all of these things - Apple Pay, Apple Card, Apple News+... These are all sort of on-device machine learning, plus, as you'd mentioned, this curation based upon your previous... This seems to be -- as you mentioned, Google is sort of following in Apple's footsteps with some of the stuff as well, but it all goes back to this more powerful chip. What was on the new iPhone? This Enclave thing... What's that again?
+**Jerod Santo:** There's a Secure Enclave. There's actually a chip with -- not TensorFlow. Or maybe it is TensorFlow. The TPU -- no, that's Google's thing. M12? I don't know. I can't remember what it's called. They had an actual machine learning named chip on-device, but I can't remember what it's called.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I think they have this notion of the Secure Enclave, which is where it stores your face ID, your touch ID, things like that, about you... All of your secure stuff. That's powered with this on-device machine learning.
+**Jerod Santo:** A12 Bionic, I've found it. The smartest, most powerful chip in the smartphone. It has a built-in neural engine etc. full-on chip, and it's really focused on those particular CPU-heavy tasks... Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[12:01\] This is interesting about Apple - they wanna be a privacy-focused company, as a brand... But it requires, in their case, the way they deliver products, particular hardware, and in this case technological breakthroughs, in this kind of device, to have that many chips and that much smarts behind a smartphone. Without this technology enhancement, they couldn't be - well, I'm sure they could be, but they would just be a little further behind - the company they wanna be. So on the iPhone, on the iPad - each was there. Now, what I didn't hear was how that affects Apple TV... Because I'm not sure what Apple TV has for machine learning, or this other stuff; so it wasn't a case played there, but they mentioned of the Apple Arcade, where... Hey, I just wrote "privacy" again, and I'm like "No... Hey, this is the third time we're hearing about privacy." Third new thing, third time they mention privacy as a feature... You know, you're just seeing this marriage of a company's desire, and it requires hard work, it requires technology advancements, it requires a particular perspective when it comes to respecting your customer, too.
+**Jerod Santo:** Absolutely. Let's put a bow on the Apple News+ discussion with saying a little bit more -- well, we've got some answers here, but there's some open questions, especially on the production side. Is this good or bad for journalists, for newspapers, for magazine companies, on the long run? We're not sure. There's been talk that maybe Apple was forcing a 50% take. It's a $10/month subscription and it's gonna divvy out based on how much time you spend reading these particular publications; you know, who gets what kind of money, is this gonna work out well, is it gonna save journalism, is it gonna squash journalism?
+We've seen this before with Facebook and instant articles a couple years back. That ended up being kind of a deal with the devil, so to speak, from the publishers' perspective, because it was not a thing that saved journalism. Many publishers, I think, have regretted getting involved... But everyone's on board here. So that's left to be seen... I don't know; I don't know how it's gonna play out. The question is, I guess, from the consumer side, $10, Apple News+, 300 magazines - are you gonna subscribe to this? Are you gonna add this to your bundle?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I will say I would if I was an iPad user. I don't think I'll probably do it on the phone. I could be swayed there, maybe a month free, which is great... So I could be swayed during these first 30 days, but at this point I'm saying "I don't think so."
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. One cool note about it - they've had this across a couple of these announcements, "No extra charge with family sharing", which is kind of cool.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, super-cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm an Apple Music subscriber for $10/month, but then to add Rachel and the kids to have access to that, it was $5 extra. So I paid $15 to get the family onboard. So hopefully that's a shift, and that will eventually get removed from Apple Music as well, because... You know, it just feels like they're nickel-and-diming you, when it's like "Hey, I'm already subscribing to this thing." "Here, give us another $5 to get access for everybody." It's like, "Come on..."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. I think it'd be different too if I was actually reading these magazines, or have read them subscription-wise in the past.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Here's why it might get me... I'm not excited about the magazines, I don't think I would really read them. I do like to flip through a magazine every once in a while, but I read their websites; I like Wired.com, for example. That being said, I had almost considered subscribing to the Wall Street Journal a few times this last (maybe) 18 months, where they just -- I've been linked to them enough times where I'm like, "Man, maybe I should just subscribe to this", because it'll have a lot of the synopsis, and you can read the takeaways, but the details are behind a paywall... So I've almost subscribed to the Wall Street Journal. And if I get that for free as part of this, bundled into that, for $10 plus all the other stuff, plus it's an easy one-click, added to my subscriptions - hm, I might give it a shot.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[16:24\] Maybe.
+**Jerod Santo:** So Apple Pay - the big news with the new Apple Pay stuff is Apple Card. Apple Pay, they give a bunch of stats - 10 billion transactions this year, so it seems like it's gaining adoption. 70% merchant penetration in the United States. Not quite as good (I don't believe) in Canada, but there's some places where it integrates much better with their current infrastructure. It has even better than that penetration... But they're adding their own Apple Card, which is a collaboration with Goldman Sachs on the back-end... This card is pretty compelling. What do you think?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Apple Pay or the card?
+**Jerod Santo:** Apple Card, yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The card is amazing. They actually have a physical version of it, too. They started out with software, which is pretty awesome, and the fact that you can just literally go into the wallet app and apply right there; you don't have to wait for the card to get to you, like any other traditional credit card. So they started out the demonstration describing this software-based version of the card and how they're changing things, but then they turned it on the fact that "Hey, there's sometimes that Apple Pay is not an option", and that's fine; they understand that it's not gonna be an option everywhere... So instead, they give you this physical card. It's a titanium card. There's no number, there's no signature, there's no CVV, there's no expiration date... It's literally just a card with an Apple logo on it, and I believe your name was on it...?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, it's etched in titanium. Something classic Apple, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. I mean, I want...
+**Jerod Santo:** You want the card.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I just want the card. \[laughter\] I still use physical cards, which is cool; I don't mind it...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So that's my first thoughts on it - the moment I can apply, I'm gonna get one. The other side of this is Mastercard... I don't know about you, Jerod, but my bank will often send me an offer and it seems awesome, and then it's like "Oh, it's a Mastercard", and I'm like "I'm not even gonna get a Mastercard, because... Mastercard isn't cool. AmEx, Visa - those are cool brands. Mastercard is not a cool brand."
+**Jerod Santo:** Do you think Visa is a cool brand? I've never had that thought once in my life. AmEx I'll give you, Discover maybe, because they're more exclusive, they have their own deals going on... But to me, Visa and Mastercard are the most interchangeable, "who cares", "I have no allegiance to them whatsoever" brands.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Really?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Well, what's the difference between a Visa and a Mastercard? There's zilch.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I'll tell you. A Visa is everywhere you wanna be.
+**Jerod Santo:** So is the Mastercard. Anywhere that takes Visa, they take Mastercard.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That was tongue in cheek, because that's their tagline, but I think...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Hold on, I'm googling Mastercard's tagline...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They probably are more interchangeable. So I guess that basic question, "Why did they choose Visa?" Was Mastercard their first choice, or was it because Mastercard would bend to their will?
+**Jerod Santo:** Who knows...? This is the inner machinations of large corporations, and who knows how certain deals go down and why. You can go back to the iPhone and say "Well, why did it roll out on AT&T and not on Verizon back in the day, and the reason was because Verizon wouldn't bend, and AT&T would, so Steve Jobs got his way. Why is it Mastercard and not Visa? Who knows... I don't know. Maybe for that exact reason; maybe Visa wouldn't bend, Mastercard would. That being said, having an Apple card would be cool, but Mastercard - everyone's got one of those.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[19:57\] Maybe it's something that everyone can really identify with, is when you read your credit card statement, and you're like "What the heck is that?" They're using machine learning in their Apple Maps to reduce the obfuscation of their merchant names, which is like "Hey, this is literally the 7-Eleven on the corner" versus whatever it might be...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[event audio playing in the background\] Whoops... I just reloaded the event, without intention. Sorry.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That happened to me... Nobody got to hear that, but that happened to me, too. I just left it open, and it replayed again after a bit. So your lag was about five or ten minutes after me, which is kind of interesting.
+**Jerod Santo:** Hilarious.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** But yeah, machine learning in maps to make merchant names more readable in a statement is genius.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's a great idea. So I guess the idea there is I go to the Kwik-E-Mart on the corner and I buy some milk, and later on I'm looking at my statement and the Kwik-E-Mart is owned by some other company, or whoever runs that transaction, I see a bunch of gobbledygook, plus like "Mart-mart" or some terrible thing, and I'm like, "What? Why did I spend $5 at some random place? I don't even know what it is." But they're gonna actually use -- I don't understand where the Maps comes in; machine learning + Maps, they definitely said that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, the Maps is the location part of it...
+**Jerod Santo:** So they're gonna know where the transaction happened then?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** From what I could tell, one, it comes up in text. It says "7-Eleven, so-and-so city". But then I believe you can click on it and it will show you not only the transaction information, but the location of where you spent the money at.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's a cool feature. That's a very cool feature. So a couple other features of the card, just for those who didn't get to watch it... It's feeless, first of all. So no fees. I think that's a big seller. It's integrated, of course, as only Apple can, tightly into the iPhone and Apple Pay. You can get set up in minutes, you can just click through and apply, and just right there you're accepted. And then it'll do the cashback.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's really interesting, honestly.
+**Jerod Santo:** The cashback is 3%, 2% and 1%. Yeah, the way they're executing it is unique and compelling. 3% back when you buy stuff directly from Apple, 2% back anywhere that you use Apple Pay, and then 1% back when you fall back to the physical card... But the cool thing about it is that they do the cashback daily, versus some sort of monthly or quarterly cashback. So at the end of each day they just redeposit the cash right back into your Apple wallet.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And like she said too in the presentation, that's actually cash. I can give it to you, I can use it in other ways; there's not a limitation with how I can use or you can use this cashback. It seems logical, and it actually is.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Yeah, that's right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Leave it to Apple though to execute on logical.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I think this will be a pretty big deal, and I think a lot of people will have it. One thing about the -- we were talking about the uniqueness or the cool factor... The iPhone has always had a cool factor to it. One of the things that people think is cool is a level of exclusivity, or making them different, and over time the iPhone is so successful that everybody has one. I don't mean everybody globally, but just the generic -- it's not exclusive, it's mainstream. And if you think it's not mainstream, just go to a public place and wait for Marumba to play, or just turn on Marumba, and play it and then watch everybody check their phones, because they're thinking they're getting a phone call, you know? So I wonder if the Apple Card will have a similar effect, where it's like "Well, it's so easy to get... I just open the Apple wallet and I apply and I get my Apple card for free." Maybe it won't be so cool. What do you think?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I think the accessibility definitely is good credit, I would imagine.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[24:02\] Yeah, that's true. One thing to talk about is how do they actually give the percentage, what's the interest rate? They didn't talk about any of that. It's just based on your credit, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, they didn't say interest rate at all.
+**Jerod Santo:** No, I think it's variable depending on the person's credit; that's the way they made it sound.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** But not, they didn't say it at all. They said it's gonna be lower than everybody else's, but...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Depending upon the approval process - there's a lot of p's in that sentence I just said there... So depending upon the approval process - to say it twice - as you said, the cool factor could be a line drawn of like, not so much just good credit/bad credit, because that's kind of how it is anyways. If you lay down an AmEx, it usually says something about you that's not said if you just hand out a Discover card. So there's something that's said just based on the device or the thing you're using, just like an iPhone. If you're using an iPhone over something else, there's a certain cool factor; but as you mentioned, it's become more mainstream, so it's more common now. I think now the cool factor might be the latest iPhone; so if you have the latest iPhone, you remain cool-er... And maybe that's the case with this Apple Card with titanium.
+I guess you wouldn't know that you're using an Apple Card unless you're using the actual titanium card. That would be where the cool factor comes in, because otherwise... I don't know what card you use to go shop at the Kwik-E-Mart, I don't care... But if I'm at dinner with you and you lay down this titanium Apple Card...
+**Jerod Santo:** Slap down my titanium Apple Card...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I'm like, "Dang, Jerod..." like, that card has no number, I wanna hang with you.
+**Jerod Santo:** That card has no number, no signature, there's no CVV on the back... Which we joke about, but that's actually pretty cool for security though. As we said, the titanium card is just your name and a chip. That's all there is on it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** And so if somebody steals it or if you leave it at the Kwik-E-Mart, or something, less chance of information leak. The three-digit code isn't on the back, etc. There's no expiration date on it... So a thief or somebody who finds your card won't have all the information they will need in order to use it at a lot of places.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you know anything about the technology behind the security chip?
+**Jerod Santo:** I know that it was slow, and they're making it faster... \[laughs\] Does that count?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Like, if you were deep enough into credit card theft hackerism, could you get my card if you were skilled enough and extract information from the chip?
+**Jerod Santo:** I think you could. I don't think you could extract all the information that is on the card, but I think you could -- I mean, there has to be devices that can read the chip, right? That's what all these devices are. So you would have your own hardware that would be able to read whatever the chip is there to display. Now, I know there's nonces and there's one-time use codes that happen with these transactions, so... I'm not sure exactly how much you could get off, if you could replay it, those kinds of things; I know that they're way more secure than they used to be, than the swipe... Because the swipe was really just an obfuscated number, basically... Whereas these chips - there is a live communication back and forth on the payment network, with unique, one-time use strings and whatnot... Which is why they were slow at first, because it's like, "Well, you're at a Kwik-E-Mart, with a dial-up connection to a thing, and it's gotta go back and forth five times..." They've started to make that process much faster. I don't know the technology behind it, but I'm pretty sure if you have hardware access to it, plus your own -- like, you're a cracker who has means and you have your own hardware, I think you could probably get at whatever information is necessary.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[28:08\] I guess the good thing though is that it is just that one thing on the card, aside from your name. So your name plus that chip is the only thing that sort of identifies this Apple Card as different from yours and mine. The difference is the name and the chip...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...not the CVV, and the stripe on the back. Because right now your common credit card has a stripe on the back which has information on it, and then it also has - which is older technology - the secured chip, because you have to have two ways, and there's a transition period between old way to new way... And you've got all this other information - this CVV code, and the name, and the signature... I don't know about you, but I always wrote "See ID" on the back of my cards. I never actually put my signature there.
+**Jerod Santo:** I used to do that as well, but nobody would actually ask me for my ID, so it just... It was dumb. I just stopped.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, sure, it's dumb, but it also means that your signature isn't on it.
+**Jerod Santo:** I don't sign it either. I've never signed them.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Really? Okay...
+**Jerod Santo:** It seemed dumb. I was like, "Why would I put my signature on there?" I don't know, the whole thing is foolish, because then they have you sign a thing that says you're paying for it, but -- what, are you gonna go match that against the signature you have on the database?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[unintelligible 00:29:18.13\] "You can't have this thing."
+**Jerod Santo:** I mean, people just put a squiggly there, and it doesn't matter...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't know about you, but when I actually sign for a credit card, I actually do -- well I shouldn't tell everybody that...
+**Jerod Santo:** Tell everybody. Tell us what's your CVV.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** One unspoken thing so far was I saw Kevin Ball perk up whenever this was mentioned was the transits accepting Apple Pay.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yes, that's cool.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So you'd mentioned how you just used Apple Pay for the first time recently.
+**Jerod Santo:** I have, yeah. At the IV.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I would put you in the early adopter camp, right? Or the early majority, at least.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's probably early majority, yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, yeah... Which is terrible it's so many years later. I've been using Apple Pay for a while, and I think the reason why I don't need more is because I -- I don't know. I just don't know why. I literally don't know why I don't use it anymore.
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm not socially conditioned to do so. I'm socially conditioned to reach for my wallet and grab a credit card and swipe it. I'm not socially conditioned to hold my phone up to the thing. And because it's not universal, I'm like -- I don't wanna ask somebody if they accept it, because then I feel like a d-bag, you know? I don't know, it just feels socially awkward. And then the cashier, sometimes they don't -- like, when I've tried it, it's like they don't know what I'm doing; or they do, but they're looking at me like that... I don't know, it just feels weird, because it's not the way everybody is doing it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So what you're saying is it's not cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** No, it's not that it's not cool, it's that it's socially awkward at this point for me.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, that's not cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay, then it's not cool.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\] Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** It makes me feel less smooth than smoother... The whole point being I'm trying to smooth out a process. That being said, when I do use it...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's easy.
+**Jerod Santo:** It is fast. And I think, "Oh, good thing I crossed the social weirdness and tried this, because hey, it was a lot faster."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think I would use it - and I have used, or let's say actually I do use it - in places that make that process smooth. For example, when I go to Whole Foods, it's natural there because they are already asking me to get out my phone to scan my prime membership, to get my discount. So I've already got my phone out, and to take the next step and pay with Apple Pay is a no-brainer.
+**Jerod Santo:** Have you ever used the watch?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I haven't used the watch yet.
+**Jerod Santo:** See, again, with the watch - I feel like it would be not cool, because I'm not sure how to do it with the watch, and I'd be fumbling around... I think you're supposed to hold the crown, but I'm not 100% positive.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I have no idea...
+**Jerod Santo:** Do you know what I do know how to do? Get the credit card out of my wallet and swipe it through a thing, so I'll just keep doing what I know.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[32:08\] But it is cool it's being added to transit, especially if you're trying to get onto the subway real fast, and you've just got your watch on... And it's not like someone's standing there watching you, and it's socially awkward; it's just faster and easier. I think that's cool.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What's cool too is Portland and Chicago and New York City - these are the places they're launching in in the U.S. These are all cities that their inner cities totally rely upon public transit like that... So you've got lots of people probably wasting lots of time recharging, charging, getting new cards...
+I remember when I went to Seattle... We spent so much time in line to get a one-time use card to take the metro, or whatever it was. We probably spent 25 minutes in line with our son, who needed a nap... We were traveling parents, basically; it was terrible.
+In a world where you've got Apple Pay, you've already got the necessary thing and you're swiping and you're moving along. If that was a thing there, we would have been on our way. We literally stood in line for like 25 minutes to get a one-time-use card that cost us like $4 to do the travel. It was just terrible.
+**Jerod Santo:** You almost sound like the movie theater guy there... "In a world, where you have Apple Pay..."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** Let's talk Apple Arcade. This was for me the most exciting part of this event, and the coolest thing talked about, and the one that left the most question marks, because... Coming this fall, no pricing info - come on, y'all, tell us what's going on here. But a subscription gaming service for iPhone, iPad, Apple TV etc, synchronized across that, and it's specifically for the indie game devs who have been making amazing games for iOS and haven't been making amazing money for iOS, because the ones who make all the big money are the free-to-play dinging you for in-app purchases over and over again games... Not the ones that are truly great games.
+So Apple has come out and said "We are backing the development", so they're actually partnering with specific small-game developers, they're financially backing the development of these games. They all come as part of a subscription package that's called Apple Arcade, and it looks like it's gonna be really good. I'm pretty excited.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That one -- I can't recall the name; I was trying to write the names down and watch at the same time, but the Japanese name (I believe it was Japanese), where they actually build live sets, real sets for the games, they take photographs and they do 3D art on top of the real photos - that to me is the kind of thing that I can see Apple backing, and for once, the kind of game I wanna play, where there's so much richness in how the games develop, not just the gameplay... You know, to go to that kind of length as an artist, to think through that, and to just use these small world sets - that to me is just super-awesome.
+**Jerod Santo:** And that's what really sets these games apart, is their art. Previously, for a little while you could make a good living on the app store, making an amazing game like -- is it Monument Valley? I'm just losing words...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's one of the ones they mentioned in their list...
+**Jerod Santo:** Although I feel like I got the title slightly wrong, but...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Monument Valley is right.
+**Jerod Santo:** I've got Stardew Valley in my head; that's a game on Nintendo Switch... Or Alto's Adventure. Games like these. But it's just gotten harder and harder with so many -- they said 300,000 games in the App Store? And so much riskier. Pretty much coming out with an awesome game, putting two years of your life into it, and charging $4.99 on the App Store - that worked back in 2010 and 2011, but it just doesn't work anymore. There's way too much risk. These are like starving artists, the people who continue to invest in the platform and do these amazing games...
+\[36:09\] So it's really cool that Apple has taken the risk off of the developers, and hopefully they're financing them upfront, as they work on these things. I think it's going to really leave a -- I don't know if "legacy" is the right word, but it's gonna produce a lot of these awesome games, and I'm super-excited for that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Also playable offline too, which is kind of getting into some of the features part of it. No ads, no other purchases are required, as you mentioned, playable offline... So you don't have to be connected to the internet to play. I assume you can do that. It's like airplane mode. "Hey, I'm in airplane mode. I can't play this game because it requires some sort of communication."
+Privacy, again, was in the feature set. I don't know what they said about that, I just wrote it down; I'm like, "That's amazing." I guess they're not watching what games you're playing, I don't know... What did they say around privacy?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, basically everything is on the device; they're not sending anything back up. There's no ads, there's no tracking, there's no in-app purchases...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Family sharing again, that's amazing...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. The only problem is what's this gonna cost, and when is it gonna be available? They're gonna launch with 100+ new and exclusive games... So it's interesting timing here, because Google just announced their game subscription Stadia service, which is somewhat like a merge between a Twitch competitor and a Steam competitor... Interesting stuff going on there, but everybody trying to get into the games market, and it seems like Apple has mostly ignored or just kind of let it be on iOS, and now really embracing it. I hope they come up with an actual controller for the Apple TV, because then games would be cool on Apple TV...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...but no pricing. So what's it gonna cost...?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I think that's really interesting, what you mentioned there, because the controller, the game platform to compete with is Nintendo Switch, in terms of how mobile it is... And what they've said in this experience was that you can play a game on your Mac, stop playing on your Mac and go to your iPhone or to your iPad or whatever and pick up right where you've left off... So it's very much like what the Switch is trying to do, except for they're missing, as you mentioned, that hardware, which is the first-party controller. And if they -- I don't know if there's any patents around the way the Switch works, but if they can essentially replicate what the Switch does with an iPhone, and let that be the platform, I think that'd be pretty cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** You've gotta imagine there's plenty of patents around it, but yeah, absolutely...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Something's stopping them.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, for sure.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** One thing it did say though was it's a miracle for game developers.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's what the Japanese fella, who's doing the -- one of the developers said that, right? It wasn't like Apple called it a miracle for game developers; it was an actual game developer that said that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. Because they were in a market where they had to compete with free...
+**Jerod Santo:** Exactly.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And as you mentioned, pouring so much into a game, they can't not charge something for it, because they have to have some sort of guarantee that they'll succeed, and their pricing model is also based upon how many they think they can sell... So all of those economics really hinder these indie developers.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, they absolutely do. And as a person who enjoys these games, and goes on the App Store and looks at games, and has the means to buy a three-dollar-game, a five-dollar-game, heck, a ten-dollar-game - pretty much whenever I wanted to, I could do that. Financially, I wouldn't miss my rent or my mortgage... I still don't really buy that many games for the phone, because there's no try before you buy; even though it looks great, the reviews are great, I don't love just sitting there and reading reviews... And then you just kind of pay that four bucks before you know if you're really gonna love it. So even the person who is a consumer of these kinds of things, I don't buy very many of them. Maybe one or two a year. And I'd love to play more games on my phone... But if I had a subscription that was just always on, and just auto-bill me every month, I wouldn't think about it twice; and I had complete access to all these games.
+I think they're gonna not only make more money as game developers, they're also gonna be having, I believe, more people playing their games than are now, which ultimately as an artist that's what you want - people benefitting from your work.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[40:38\] Right. What I see happening here is Apple now developing subscription services around marketplaces. That's what they did with News - it's a marketplace (for a lack of better terms) for distributing and consuming news; now they layered on a subscription to it. Same thing with Arcade. Arcade is essentially a subscription service laid on top of the existing app store, which was a marketplace. Same thing with Apple TV is happening there... I think that's an interesting business model to establish a platform, a marketplace, and then find ways to curate the best of the best, and in this case in particular, potentially back the best, or back the best like they're doing here. We haven't really talked about Apple TV+ yet, but that's the same thing they're doing there - they're literally throwing lots of money into this.
+I think one piece that hasn't been underscored enough is exclusive - it's what they said about Apple Arcade; these are games you can't play anywhere else. This is content on the future Apple TV+ that you can't watch anywhere else.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, absolutely. I start to think about these things - we see Amazon making similar moves, Google... All of the big tech companies are making these moves, and a lot of these moves are anti-competitive, in many ways. You create a marketplace and then you wait and watch what's successful, and then you create a service around successful things in that marketplace. That's kind of shady, in my opinion, and I think probably in the opinion of legislators, as things continue to advance... Not all sunshine and rainbows. That being said, it is consumer-friendly. It's not great for business competition, but it is consumer-friendly, at least in the short-term. Same thing with a lot of the moves that Amazon makes... So I just wanted to throw that in there.
+I do think the exclusives are really what they're going after, and with Apple TV+ this was probably like the second half of the event - basically them strutting out Hollywood star after Hollywood star who are on board, partnering with Apple, to make exclusive content for Apple TV+, which is another subscription coming this fall, which I believe they also did not announce any pricing around.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They didn't announce any pricing around it, but they say "It's more than entertainment, it's cultural." That was what Tim Cook said about Apple TV, and Apple TV+ in particular.
+I think it was pretty interesting, the fact that in traditional fashion, they didn't just say like "Hey, here's so-and-so from within Apple...", not that it's a bad thing, but like "Here's legit stars from this world of Hollywood that have and are investing." Spielberg was the first person out. That's pretty amazing. Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Aniston, Steve Carell - they came out, and... I love the way he was even self-deprecating, and his humor; it was pretty cool, the way they even came out... Very similar to Saturday Night Live, or something like that, where they were just sort of themselves, in their character.
+**Jerod Santo:** What's funny is I heard the description of the Morning Show - that's the show those three are doing on Apple TV+. I just heard the description a few weeks back, and I was like, "Meh. Okay." But then I saw Steve Carell and the two of them on stage - Reese Witherspoon and Jennifer Aniston - and I thought "I wanna watch this show. This is a show that I actually do wanna watch." I think for me at least it was effective as an advertising platform. For what these exclusive cultural things are, it looks like some pretty decent shows that they're putting together.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[44:27\] Yeah. The Morning Show reminded me of Newsroom, which was on HBO. Andrew Sorkin I believe it was... I don't know if that's his name or not, but Sorkin for sure is his last name.
+**Jerod Santo:** But it's not Andrew.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Amazing writer, phenomenal with dialogue. Just a phenomenal writer...
+**Jerod Santo:** Aaron.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, that's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** Aaron Sorkin.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right, sorry. I knew it was Sorkin though. And that show was amazing... Not that this has to be a repeat of that, but I was sad that it was just a three-season show. I wanted more, badly. I would have punched the wall for more, or something like that. I wanted it bad.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] I did enjoy that show. I like Aaron Sorkin quite a bit. I think this one will be --I think Steve Carell was kind of in character there. I think it's going to be that with a little more of a comedic bend, like maybe merge Newsroom...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Like Anchorman?
+**Jerod Santo:** Well...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Not that far, huh?
+**Jerod Santo:** Maybe not that far. I would say if you merged The Office with Newsroom, you got the Morning Show.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Okay...
+**Jerod Santo:** Because Jennifer Aniston - she can be very... I mean, of Friends she's very funny as well. Reese Witherspoon has done a little bit of comedy... So I think there's gonna be more lightheartedness. Newsroom was very serious most of the time...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Very serious.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I hope it's good. I think it might be.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The funniest side too is Steve Carell was in Anchorman.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right. "I love lamp."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I love lamp... \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Didn't I just say that to you last week at some point?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, it was a good one. It was a good one.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yup.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And then they rounded it all off with Oprah...
+**Jerod Santo:** You start with Spielberg, you end with Oprah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's a pretty solid line-up at that point, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't know really what to place this as... Is this a Netflix competitor? Or is it original content competing as -- I'm confused.
+**Jerod Santo:** I would think of it more like an HBO competitor.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Okay, that's a good point. Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Because Netflix does have -- I mean, it's the similar production value of a Netflix original, but Netflix is just going so much for breadth. The shotgun approach. They're spending way more money than everybody else. They have so many shows... If you pay close attention now, most of the stuff in my Netflix list is Netflix originals, and it's like every single niche they're gonna dive into and they're gonna actually fund production... Whereas HBO is more like "We think everything we're gonna do is a hit, we're gonna put a lot of money behind them", but it's more selective, less breadth. That seems like what Apple is doing, kind of like picking one show in each category, versus just replacing all your television channels, like Netflix is.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Obviously, developers watch TV, so how do we round this back to developers? This one in particular. This seems the farthest away from -- I mean, I watch a movie, you know...? There you go. That's it.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Do not subscribe to this, or you won't have any time to write code. You will just be watching Oprah and Steve Carell, and these awesome shows, all day. You can't develop anything, you're right. I don't know...
+\[47:43\] You could split up the Apple TV announcements into what we've just talked about, which is the content, Apple TV +, and there's also the Apple TV software. On that side, we see a few things going on... Remember there's the Apple TV itself, the product, the hardware, which has the tvOS, so there's the OS on which the apps run... Then there's the Apple TV app that runs on that OS - that's confusing - and that's really where all the announcements in software happened today, was in the Apple TV app itself... And they're really remaking it, in a certain degree stealing a lot of ideas from Netflix, by the way, with the Skip Intro and the trailers right there as you scroll, those kinds of things... And they're expanding it beyond the Apple TV hardware. So coming soon the Apple TV app will be on your Roku, it'll be on your Samsun Smart TV, it'll be on your Amazon Fire TV Stick, which is very interesting.
+So there's some software side there... I'm not sure there's moves that developers can consider with regard to that, unless you're writing Apple TV apps, but...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Or I guess working for one of these... Yeah, exactly.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** One thing they're promising with the Apple TV app - and as you said, it is confusing, because you've got the hardware, and then you've got the app, and then you've got the actual OS, which... Whatever. And you did mention in our notes here that Netflix, of course, was limited, or not mentioned. All channels, essentially, you can jump from within this Apple TV app; you have control over all of your different subscriptions within this thing, versus having to jump from app to app to app to enjoy this content, which I think is pretty cool.
+You know, the natural thing here is that in order to launch this sort of Apple TV+ move, it would only make sense for them to want to have the biggest and most widest distribution, so I'm really curious of the behind the scenes conversations that happen with Samsung and Amazon in particular, and maybe even Roku, because somehow they have to all play nice... And you're essentially letting the enemy behind the gate, to some degree. I don't know, is it a world where they can play nice together? I guess we'll see.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, we'll have to find out.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I hope so.
+**Jerod Santo:** Or is it more like Game of Thrones, where everybody's gonna end up dead at the end.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, the problem with this is we get into this "Everybody has to die in order to succeed", like there has to be somebody at the top of the mountain, and everyone else has to be scurried along the hillsides, dead... And I just don't think that's the case. You want competition, but you also want tact, I guess, in your approach towards it. I don't have to kill you, Jerod, in order to succeed... I don't think. I sure hope not. Because if so, then we've got problems, bro.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, when you're talking about people's time and attention, and you're talking about it at the scale that they are, Netflix wants all of your time and attention.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right.
+**Jerod Santo:** Apple is starting to want a slice of that. Amazon wants that. And Facebook wants it. So they really are playing a zero-sum game across these different areas of our lives, and it doesn't seem like any of them are happy to only have your -- we're here to provide you the best mapping experience ever, and we're just happy being the best map, or we're here to be the best TV channel, or we're here to be the best operating system. It doesn't seem like any of the big players in our space -- they don't have any tact; they're going for the zero-sum "We want it all", and that's... That's interesting to watch. I do think it's problematic on the long-term, but it's interesting nonetheless.
+\[52:01\] And yeah, having the Apple TV app on an Amazon Fire TV Stick, you can't help but think "If I want access to all my Apple stuff, but I don't wanna spend 200 bucks on the Apple TV, why wouldn't I spend $20 or $30 on a Fire TV Stick and just use the app?" So it seems like in that regard they're kind of shooting themselves in the foot on their hardware sales, potentially...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I don't think so.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...because why buy the Apple TV anymore, when you can just buy the Roku?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I've got two letters for you.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, actually two characters. 4K. That's why. I don't know if the Fire TV Stick -- I don't know it well enough to know if it does... That joke or that statement could fall flat on its face; somebody tell me if I'm wrong...
+**Jerod Santo:** Keep talking and I'll tell you while you talk here...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So I'll back that up with "If it does do 4K..."
+**Jerod Santo:** It does. I just found it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...then I imagine the Apple TV might do it better because of the firepower behind the software, and the hardware behind it. Because it takes a lot of megabits per second to -- it's a high-resolution, high framerate, all that good stuff... I would imagine it takes a lot of processing power.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, the Amazon Fire TV Stick - on their homepage, it says "HDR. The most powerful 4K streaming stick." So this is their $49.99 offering, literally one quarter the price of the Apple TV. Surely, we can go to Tom's Hardware, or the Verge, or these different websites and find out which one actually works best and which one actually gives the best quality and whatnot, but I can't help but think that Apple is losing in regards to this category... And moving their software onto the other devices seems like maybe a consolation that they're losing.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I think it's kind of a smart move, because... I mean, I've got a Sony TV in my living room, and the operating system behind it is Android, highly Google embedded into it... But at the same time, connected to that TV I have an Apple TV. So I would potentially opt for the app, if the user experience was just as good, and it was speedy and not laggy, and that kind of stuff.
+Now, the other thing with an Apple TV that we use a lot is - this is so cool; I don't know if that many people do this, and if you do, I wanna hear about it... We went to Monster Jam about three weeks back, we took our son there; I don't know if you know about Monster Jam. Do you know what that is?
+**Jerod Santo:** Is it a monster truck rally?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It sure is. Amazing.
+**Jerod Santo:** I guessed.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's a lot of fun. You've got Grave Digger, and my son loves this stuff, so he's really into it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh yeah, Grave Digger always wins, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes, and he's actually really good, too. He's a really good driver. So you've got these weird parents who seem to wanna record everything. Well, I've learned to record everything too, except--
+**Jerod Santo:** To be weird as hell... \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...except that I'm not doing it like take photos of my son, it's more like I capture our experience, and then I play it back... And as you know, you've seen my media room, upstairs. So I airplay -- that same night of that weekend we'll go back and we'll relook at all of our photos, and our videos... That's where I think an Apple TV really shines, because you can easily stream from your iPhone your photos, your videos, all that good stuff.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, airplay is awesome.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We get to spend the better part of an hour just re-sharing and re-enjoying those moments, and getting deeper into it. We were on the train at the zoo recently - I know this is going a little far, but this is super-cool... I pulled out my phone, recorded it, because I know we had fun in the moment, and it was too easy for me to stay engaged and be present; so I wasn't not engaged and not present because I was recording... I just held up my phone and got what we got, and when we got back to the house, I was like "Dang, we can actually re-ride this train", because I took the video of it, which was pretty cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[56:09\] How long was that video? Like 30 minutes?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** About two minutes. Two and a half minutes.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, okay.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It was a little zoo train, nothing major. Just a quick lap around the zoo, maybe two and a half, three minutes.
+**Jerod Santo:** Gotcha.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We got to see some city in downtown Houston, all that good stuff... You know it's just like micro-moments that you can capture and replay. That's where I think the Apple TV is a winner, to be able to cast stuff from my Apple devices. And even presentations - Heather does stuff at the house with Bible studies and whatnot, or her oil committee is coming in, and all that good stuff... We'll put the presentation up on the TV, and she walks through it, super-easy. That's what I love about the Apple TV's - it gives you an ability to broadcast stuff; they're not just simply consuming content, but also watching your own content.
+**Jerod Santo:** Let me say two really quick things about this and we'll call it a conversation... About the software specifically. We mentioned that they seem to be taking -- we'll be gracious and say they're taking some cues from Netflix as user experience, and they're building them into this central TV viewing experience on the Apple TV app. The big one is the Skip Into button, which is - let's just face it - the best button that Netflix has ever added to their UI.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So on the Apple TV right now - I don't know if you watch Amazon Prime shows, but the Amazon Prime app on the Apple TV is not anywhere near as good as the Netflix app; and it's not nearly as good as the Amazon Prime app on the iPhone, which is actually a pretty decent app. So the Amazon Prime app on the Apple TV does not have Skip Intro. So I guess my assumption - I'm not sure, but I think building this in at the Apple TV app level, and then having all these channels of which Amazon Prime is just a channel... I can still watch my Marvelous Mrs. Maisel from the Apple TV app - does that give me the Skip Intro button on other channels, that previously wouldn't have had it? I hope so... How do they get that done? Because you've gotta have some metadata to get that done. So that's a thought... I hope it does. That would make me very happy.
+And then my last thought, talking about the Amazon Prime app, because we're just software nerding out here for a moment...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes.
+**Jerod Santo:** Have you ever watched the Amazon Prime app on your phone?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Have you seen the X-Ray feature?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No...
+**Jerod Santo:** It is the coolest feature. At any point that you're watching something on Amazon Prime on the Amazon Prime app on your phone, if you just hold your finger on the screen, it will show you who's currently on the screen, the actors playing the roles...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Wow...
+**Jerod Santo:** And it's dynamic. It changes as they walk on and off camera. It's amazing. It's the coolest little thing, because you see somebody and you're like, "Hey, is that Burt Reynolds?" and you're like "I'm not sure." You hit that, and it's like...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Sure, it is Burt Reynolds.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. And it says who he's playing. Sometimes it'll say the location where the scene was shot, stuff like that... So there's all this little extra information that they surface when you turn on the X-Ray. It's just a really neat feature. I don't know how they accomplish it actually, because it's gotta be metadata on maybe like a second-by-second basis, because it changes based on who's currently on camera. It's super-cool, check it out if you haven't yet.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[59:52\] I wonder if it's a second pass on like, just a point Because you do this -- it's called tracking whenever you're doing stuff in After Effects or whatever, you can mark an object and attach text to it, or an effect, or whatever; you can track a subject. So I would imagine, similar to the way they do camera technology, when you pull out your phone (even your iPhone), it's got facial recognition, it can recognize the faces. I would imagine there's probably some (like you said) metadata attached to that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, that's one thing I was thinking at first - maybe there's metadata, but maybe there's facial recognition that's happening, computer vision, and when you pause it, it just scans the current image and matches them as fast as they can.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So you have to pause it to do that?
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, when you do hold your finger over the screen, it stops the playback and shows you this overlay. Then you let go and it starts again. It's like a modal - when you go into X-Ray mode, it does pause playback, and then you let go and it starts it again... Which is what you want anyways, because you don't wanna be missing stuff when you're reading about the location. So I thought maybe they're doing the current screen, and they're just really quickly applying computer vision to it, and then matching on what the metadata - maybe the cast metadata, with their face profiles, is part of the file, or something... I don't know.
+But then I started thinking, well, it actually even works when they're facing sideways, or having a mask on... Things where this person's barely even in the screen; how does it know this person that's on-screen...?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Does it matter which content it is, meaning like is it Amazon content, or third-party content?
+**Jerod Santo:** Good question. I think the one where I was really watching it - it's an Amazon show.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That might be it then.
+**Jerod Santo:** What's the show...? The one with the Nazis and the...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Man In The High Castle?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, The Man In The High Castle. That's the one that I was watching where I noticed it. And then Marvelous Mrs. Maisel, it also worked, but those are both Amazon properties, so...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It could be an Amazon thing, but... You got me curious now what the tech behind that might be if it's not the case. If it is content at large and they're doing that, then I really wanna know... Because if you can't see their face, how can you software-wise recognize...?
+**Jerod Santo:** Exactly.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...unless you know scene-by-scene, or at least between takes (I don't know) what characters are on the scene, you know what I mean? There's probably some layer of that data, but to have it ubiquitous, to offer that feature to everything...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, and I should try it in a few different circumstances; I bet it would be Amazon-only, because I think there's probably necessary metadata, but... Hey, how about this - if you do know how that works and you're listening to this, or if you work at Amazon in the Prime area, or know somebody, we would love to learn how this works... This is a very cool thing. If it is computer vision, it's a very cool use case, that kind of surprised and delighted me when I did it... Because you trigger it by accident. You trigger it by trying to pause the scene, and you're like "X-Ray... What is this?" So we would love to learn more about it, and maybe bring somebody on the Changelog... Just the technical details of how that gets pulled together - I think it's fascinating.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What's a good takeaway for developers for these announcements today?
+**Jerod Santo:** Just wait till the fall, it's gonna be awesome. \[laughter\] Privacy is important, and we should all have our own little platform that we can monetize and create services on. \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Create marketplaces, and then curate services on top of those marketplaces. Boom. Go do that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Boom. Go and do likewise.

Ten years of Changelog 🎉_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

The diff for this file is too large to render. See raw diff

The John Wick trilogy_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

The diff for this file is too large to render. See raw diff

The Pro Stand costs more than my first car_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

	@@ -0,0 +1,971 @@

+**Jerod Santo:** I missed the section on the Mac Pro due to prior commitments, but you guys didn't miss it, and now I'm looking at apple.com/mac-pro and I'm seeing a pretty cool-looking cheese gratery thing...
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So fill me in, guys - what did I miss? To me, it seems like the biggest -- maybe the only hardware, but the biggest exciting thing that I'd been waiting for, is the Mac Pro details.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I'm actually navigating to the Mac Pro page now, as I haven't seen it yet.
+**Nick Nisi:** Me too, and it's a really cool page.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I'm hard-refreshing it... It kept loading up the old trash can, you know?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, really?
+**Jerod Santo:** "When's it gonna happen...?" And then it was just a couple minutes of hard refreshes, and there it is.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Maybe we start with the surprises, I would say. The surprise for me was the form factor. I expected something slightly more modular, I guess, in design; but I guess it's not like it's less, it's just my visual of it was different based on people thinking that they would do a Mac Mini, where you could sort of stack them to create this modular system... But I like the idea that they brought back the PCI process, which is a huge thing. That's where you get a lot of speed, and where people really miss the ability to swap in cards, and pull in different external third-party manufacturer stuff that you sort of lost with the iMac Pro, for example, or even the latest Mac Pro, which was the trash can version. You totally lost all that. You had to go with Thunderbolt-friendly only components, and not everybody believed in Thunderbolt quite the way that Apple has... And Thunderbolt 3 is amazingly faster than Thunderbolt 2, but still, you were really stricken on what you can componentize with the older trash can Mac Pro; and even the previous cheese grater. This form factor to me seemed as a -- I didn't expect it to look like this.
+However, one thing I'll note is that whenever they -- it was late in the presentation of it, too. They were like "Oh, for you people who love to rack-mount...", which is me (I love to rack-mount things), they're like "Here you go, you can just turn it this way", and I was like "Whoa!" Right then and there my mind was like "Okay, this is an amazing form factor." I love it, because you can just turn it sideways, put some ears on it and rack-mount this thing.
+**Jerod Santo:** Really?
+**Nick Nisi:** Was it that, or was it like a special case, or a special configuration?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think it might be a special case, but either way, that means the form factor is there. You could probably maybe pull this case off and put a new rack-mountable case onto it, but either way, it's like attaching ears to it, rack-mountable ears.
+**Jerod Santo:** So it is modular, though maybe you were expecting it to be externally modular, but this is internally--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right, right.
+**Jerod Santo:** You can expand it, but it's all internal expansion, not external expansion.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. So the internal to me I think locks up maybe size. You have to fit it into the box... That is the unexpected, which I'm not totally against; it's just visually -- I'm watching YouTube, I'm watching all these different people who are predicting these things coming out, and this is not what was in my mind's eye. I was imagining what Apple might somehow come up with. Plus, it's silver. What happened here...? I mean, I love it, it looks amazing, but...
+**Jerod Santo:** It's bright silver, not the...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, exactly. And the apple seems to be proportionately bigger on the side than normal, so maybe they've expanded their design guides, or something like that... But I was expecting space gray, or this Pro gray that they've established with the iMac Pro, and other components... And I'm just like "Why is it silver?" But hey... You can't have everything. Matte black all the things, right?
+**Nick Nisi:** That was a big surprise.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Hey, it's matte black on the inside...
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, the inside matters, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right.
+**Jerod Santo:** The other thing that matters is the price, right? I missed the pricing. I know there's also a display involved, which looks amazing, but was also very, very, VERY expensive. I know these are particular tools for particular people who have those dollares, but... What are we talking about here?
+**Nick Nisi:** I think the starting price was -- was it $499? I'm sorry, $4,999.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[04:13\] That's a dream. $499 is a dream. \[laughter\] This is not a Mac Mini. Yeah, 5k basically, for the -- is that what the display sells at?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yes.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And then with the nanotexture, which was so cool... From a nanometer perspective, I guess, they etch texture directly onto the glass, to reduce its reflective properties, and that's an extra grand on top of that, so $5,999. But the actual Mac Pro starts out the same, $5,999.
+**Jerod Santo:** So 6k.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** 6k.
+**Jerod Santo:** Starting.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Starting.
+**Jerod Santo:** And then this Pro Display XDR, which is just gorgeous to stare at... The first 32-inch Retina 6k display ever; that's what they're saying on their marketing page for that. This is just stupid expensive, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I would say it's stupid expensive if you haven't been buying this kind of pro-level gear before. And I would say that people who care about the colors of their monitors, so people who are doing movies and a lot of color grading, they're spending several thousand dollars on monitors. For normal people like us who don't typically buy this kind of pro-level gear, especially a monitor, we're not looking at price tags in the $5,000 range. However, people who do, they're probably in the 3k-4k range, I'm sure; maybe even more than that, with the calibration kits you can get with it. There's definitely price tags out there similar.
+**Jerod Santo:** But this is 5k.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So... Several. Versus five.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I mean, an extra grand for the Apple logo of course, right?
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, I agree; like I said, these are particular power tools for power users, videographers, etc. But here's my problem with it. I want one of these... \[laughter\] Don't we all want one?!
+**Nick Nisi:** Can you imagine how good Vim is gonna look on that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I know, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, I don't disagree... I want one too, and I wish they would maybe give me a 27-inch version of it I guess, maybe, that's for people like me.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. Like, just bring it down to 3k. Let's have a $3,000 one. Maybe here's the question - is this a one-off to match the Mac Pro fit and finish...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think so.
+**Jerod Santo:** ...or is this the start of maybe a new line of Apple displays where there will be more consumer-priced options? They'll still be expensive in relation to the overall market, but maybe they're in the $2,000 or $1,500 range. Do we think that there will be a series of these, or do we feel like this is THE one that they're gonna offer?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I feel like this is a series...
+**Nick Nisi:** Hopefully.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...coming back into it.
+**Nick Nisi:** This is hopefully the edition model, and I'm waiting for the stainless steel model... \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, it's not coated in gold, so I don't know if it's the edition, but it's definitely priced that way.
+**Nick Nisi:** Some really cool things I did like about it though was the stand, which I think is $1,000 on its own, which is kind of the price point I was hoping that the monitor would be in...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Maybe you just buy the stand.
+**Nick Nisi:** ...but that stand is really nice, and it does allow you to flip into portrait mode, which would be really cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** Can you imagine two of these together, one in portrait and one in landscape?
+**Nick Nisi:** Oh, yeah... But they did say that the current MacBook Pros can run two of them together, and the Mac Pro can run six of them.
+**Jerod Santo:** So six of those, plus the Mac Pro... That's 36k. Easy.
+**Nick Nisi:** Plus the stands for each one.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, plus the stands. So it's 5k for the monitor, and--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Don't forget AppleCare.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[07:57\] So it's six thousand... Yeah, if you're gonna AppleCare that thing up, you've got a $40,000 workstation.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think you definitely wanna AppleCare that one. You wanna AppleCare it, you wanna get an IRA, you wanna ensure it...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** You know, life insurance on it, and everything. This display though - it's definitely expensive, but some of the tech behind it is super-interesting. The fact of how bright they've been able to make it. 1,600 nits max, but it can sustain 1,000 nits - which is super-bright - forever, indefinitely. Then she kind of paused and dramatically said "Forever." I thought that was pretty cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. So they'll have an SLA that says that this will be that bright forever, and they'll back it up, or what?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** She might. I mean, sure, let's put "Forever" in the SLA. I want it there. But apparently, you can leave it in this state - on, obviously - and it'll display forever, I guess.
+**Jerod Santo:** So what's the technology? Is it just OLED, or what?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There's blue LEDs, and I don't know exactly, I'm going from memory, because I didn't write this part down... But these blue LEDs in the very back of it, and several layers of this brand new breakthrough tech they've created to enable this brightness and this HDRness of it. That's as far as I can really regurgitate from what I heard... But the back of it is a super-bright blue LEDs, and then through each phase of it is algorithms and different things that reshape and reform the light to make it super-accurate, and then obviously bring that contrast ratio. A million to one contrast ratio here is what we're talking about. That's pretty huge.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's probably worth mentioning to folks out there that we are recording this less than an hour after the keynote has closed...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So these are very much initial impressions and hot takes, and not researched information, so... Your mileage may vary with the amount of accuracy in these claims that we're making here.
+**Nick Nisi:** The one thing that I didn't really see was a camera built-in, which I thought was kind of surprising, given how expensive it is.
+**Jerod Santo:** There's no camera?
+**Nick Nisi:** I don't think so. It definitely doesn't mention it on the marketing page.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They didn't mention it, you're right. That's a really good point. I did not even pay attention to that. Maybe they're gonna bring back the old bullet cam head back in the day.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Maybe we're turning back to old school Apple, since they've gone with the tower effect again. That'd be fine with me.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, bring back the Magic Mouse then.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I'm fine with that...
+**Jerod Santo:** Or the hockey puck mouse...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. 1,600 nits of brightness max, a million to one contrast ratio, over a billion colors presented with exceptional accuracy... Of course, I'm reading their marketing lingo here. They've got XDR - not even HDR - XDR, Extreme Dynamic Range, which is... Of course, leave it to Apple to go from something that was amazing to something even more amazing, right? There's always the cherry on top right there.
+I'm looking for the tech that was talked about on this page though, for their color, and stuff... Yeah, LED \[11:05\] true to life imagery requires an extremely high bright area..." So that's where they're talking about it - it requires extreme brightness, and this advanced LED technology, light shaping and intelligent image processing... Some keywords from that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, I have to say that the lack of a webcam is really the blocker for me. I was ready to pull the trigger on this guy, but... I'm out now. I'm out with no webcam.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. I think it's interesting too how it's counter-balanced. I don't know about anybody else here, but when I was seeing it, I was like "Oh, that's really cool", but I didn't imagine its weight, and I didn't imagine how you may want to change its configuration. And then when they sort of showed that silhouette or portrait perspective of that mount area, and they sort of showed the insides of this counterbalance system - that to me is super-cool. Have you seen something like that anywhere else, that counter-balance system?
+**Nick Nisi:** \[12:09\] Not that I can remember, really. It looked really cool.
+**Jerod Santo:** So let's dive for a second into some off-topic, but yet on-topic, because I'm on the actual page of the Pro Display XDR, and I'm looking at this picture of it in landscape mode, and it's got so much code on it, and I'm thinking "Oh, yes. This is why I need one. Look how much code I can fit on it." And then I right-click because I wanna share this image with you guys... So I right-click on it to copy the image address and paste it into the chat, so I can say "Look at this image...", and it's a video element. It's not moving, it's not animated; it's a video element where they're setting the data source to -- it's an mpeg4... Oh, here it says "Replay." So maybe it was animated, but it didn't animate until I scroll down. Oh, yeah. It shows it moving. Okay, so it's like an animated GIF, but they're doing it as a video.
+**Nick Nisi:** If you open the page in Safari on your iOS device or your phone, they do have an augmented reality thing that you can use to put the Mac Pro right in your room, and you can see how big it is. I posted that in the chat.
+**Jerod Santo:** With no other technology, just opening it on my phone? BRB, guys...
+**Nick Nisi:** I posted what it looks like in the chat.
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm gonna go try that... Oh, is that what you put in the chat?
+**Nick Nisi:** I didn't have a banana for scale, but my foot's in there.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Come on, Nick. Be prepared. Bring a banana. So that is super-cool. Here I thought they were just displaying video elements as images for some reason, but I take it all back, because that actually does animate in, so it's a good use of mpeg4 there.
+We had somebody on Changelog News recently, Adam, who was advocating for the use of videos in place of animated GIFs, and saying "Now is the time." One of the things that does stink about that is just the shareability of a video versus a GIF file, in terms of it being treated as an image by operating systems... It's much harder to share those in traditional ways, but anyways; like I said, super off-topic.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I've just put that thing on my desk, and it takes up the whole desk.
+**Jerod Santo:** Does it?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's pretty big. It's definitely big. Well, I would say it's probably 19 inches at least in depth, because that would be a rack mount. 19 inches is the width of a rack, and it goes 20-36 inches deep sometimes. It depends, but 19 inches is at least wide. So that would be its depth, because if you turn it sideways and put it into a rack mount, that would be 19 inches.
+**Jerod Santo:** Do we know how they're achieving this augmented reality via the website? Remember they announced those AR files last year?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** So you click a button, "See Mac Pro in AR", and it launches a specialized view, I guess, in Safari...
+**Nick Nisi:** Up at the top it should say "Objects in AR".
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. AR. There it is. Oh, my goodness, this thing is massive in my desk.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I had to move back...
+**Jerod Santo:** Like, stand away...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, I had to go back like three feet.
+**Nick Nisi:** I'm looking at the tech specs, and I don't know if they mentioned this in the talk or not, but it does start at 32 gigs of RAM, and it goes all the way up to 1.5 terabytes of RAM, and 28 cores.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Nick, let me ask you, how would you spend your 1.5 terabytes of memory?
+**Nick Nisi:** \[16:08\] Well, I'd have Chrome, and Chrome Canary, and Slack... Like, lots of Slacks, and... What else? What other Chromium things can I run? Yeah, I don't know. I can't imagine.
+**Jerod Santo:** Just go to GitHub and search for the Electron tag, and then just download all of the resulting apps and run them all at once.
+**Nick Nisi:** I wonder if I'd be able to run Docker without it lighting the computer on fire...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** One thing on the performance note was that they were talking about in Logic I think it was around 1,000, if I can recall correctly, at some point, like 1,000 instruments playing at once, in this composition inside of Logic... Which to those who don't use Logic or anything like that, several tracks start to block the system down, plus you've got some real-time effects on those things, a reverb, or different effects happening on each different channel and whatnot... So as you start to layer all those things, you've got roughly 1,000 instruments playing at once, with no beats skipped. Pun intended, of course.
+**Nick Nisi:** That was pretty amazing. And they had the...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you like that, Jerod?
+**Nick Nisi:** They had Final Cut running two 8K XDR videos, and one -- it was either one 4K or 8K standard video, all at once.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. Obviously, anybody who's in extreme video; anybody doing video is gonna love this machine, love the monitor. And those are also the people who tend to spend at least several thousand dollars on any one piece of gear. So for them, people like that, it may not be a welcomed price tag, however it's definitely in their spectrum. They're spending 15k, 20k, sometimes 50k just for a camera, sans lenses; not even with the lenses. Sometimes you'll spend 2k, 3k, 4k just on the lens... I mean, you can spend probably 20k, 40k, 50k on a nice prime lens kit. You've got your 35, 50, 85, 105, something like that... All these nice, prime lenses; you've gotta spend some serious coin on that kind of video gear. So maybe starting at 6k for them isn't terrible. For me, it's kind of terrible. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** I don't think anybody likes to do it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No, nobody likes to do it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Some people just do it, pull the trigger.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I wanna know how many people out there are gonna buy the monitor just because they wanna see it.
+**Jerod Santo:** I'll just go to the Apple Store and see it, and save my money.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, obviously I mean see it every day. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** See it in their house.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** See it in their house, sans AR kit. In the real. Because if somebody's got that kind of doe to put down to a monitor, that's intense... Especially somebody who just doesn't really need all of its features.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Nick Nisi:** I've just upgraded from a 27-inch Thunderbolt display, and when I bought that, it was $1,000, years ago. That was really expensive for a monitor, I thought.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, I think so.
+**Nick Nisi:** I finally upgraded, but I had heard rumors that Apple was coming out with one, and I was like "Maybe I should just wait..." Then I was listening to some Apple podcast, I'm sure, and they were like "Oh, it's probably gonna be at least $2,000", and I was like "Well, I'll just go with something else, because monitors are cheaper." They won't be as great as one Apple can make, but they won't be $2,000 either, so... I ended up getting one that was under $1,000, and I like it for the most part, but I'm definitely happy with that decision now.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[20:00\] What have you got?
+**Nick Nisi:** I have an LG 38-inch ultra-wide. I like it, for the most part.
+**Jerod Santo:** So is that Retina?
+**Nick Nisi:** No. I think it's like 3840x1600 resolution, and it works well. I have a 4k monitor here as well, but I didn't like it near as much as this. I have this vesa mounted onto my desk, and it's really nice being able to swivel it everywhere, and move it anywhere. It's nice. Not the greatest picture though, as I've learned. I'm getting bugs about not really being able to see subtle grays very well.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And that's the exact problem, I feel, with this monitor world. Just even at people like us, or just general consumers using computers, there's often a disconnect between the computer part of it... And this may even be evolving with the whole iPad era, and slates, or whatever you wanna call it... Most people I know who don't really use a computer generally just use their mobile phone as sort of their main compute platform. Folks like us, creators, need to have the components, and I think there's a huge disconnect between the screen and the machine itself, which is why I like the iMac Pro, or even just the iMac in general; not really much of a fan of having the two separate or an actual laptop and some sort of external display... Jerod, you've had some issues with yours over the years.
+**Jerod Santo:** I have issues with it today, and I'm angry at the world because of it.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It shouldn't be that hard though, right?
+**Jerod Santo:** No. I keep thinking it's gonna be a software update the next time macOS to a dot release; somebody finally patched it for this circumstance, which is an LG 27-inch Retina...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Is that the one that Apple was even promoting as sort of like "This works best with our gear" sort of thing? Or was it a different one?
+**Jerod Santo:** No, it's not that one. I can't remember the decision-making process. I've had it for a couple of years now. I knew I needed to go high-res though, because I was getting serious eye strain by the end of the day... And I had my laptop, so I go in dual display mode, but I go top-bottom. So my 27-inch is up top, and my laptop is down underneath. I used to go left-right, but now I go up and down. So when I kept looking down at the laptop and had the nice display, I looked up at the low-res one - I'd do that all day long and I was getting eye pain, serious headaches...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Wow.
+**Jerod Santo:** So I thought it had to do with that. I was like, "Well, the easy fix I guess is go get a Retina display." So I did that, and I haven't had those problems. So it definitely was eye strain. But the problem I have now is every time I unplug or plug back in, I'm afraid that it's just not gonna detect the display. It's using a very typical -- there's no convertor, or anything. It uses the USB-C port on the new MacBook Pro from two years ago, or last year.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So what's the fix or the remedy whenever it doesn't detect it? You've gotta power something down, or restart your machine?
+**Jerod Santo:** I've found out that I can log out and log back in. So it's all in software. I used to restart. Logging out is just as bad, because it's gonna kill all my terminal sessions etc.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** But that fixes it. And it actually works maybe 70% of the time without having to do that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I wonder if there's a keylist you can refresh, or something like that.
+**Jerod Santo:** I spent some time back in the day trying to do all the things, and there's just nothing... So mostly I'm just like "I feel like I need to just change it." I don't know who to blame at this point. I feel like it's macOS, or some sort of LG driver thing. Nobody else that I can find on the internet has this problem, so it's one of those un-googleable things.
+**Nick Nisi:** Ain't that the worst?
+**Jerod Santo:** \[24:01\] Yeah. So I've been living there thinking I need to change something in my life, but I just don't know exactly what I want to do, so I haven't done anything. But it seems like it's getting worse lately.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you happen to have $5,000 just lying around? \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Maybe we should take out a small business loan... \[laughter\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** "You're gonna get a monitor! You're gonna get a monitor! We'll just give them out. Sure, why not."
+**Jerod Santo:** Why not.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's what I'm saying though - you asked the question earlier, "Will this be a series, or will this be a future product line?" My hope is yes, because wow, we have some terrible scenarios... So either fix the software, Apple, to not deal with Jerod's problems...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Come on, guys...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** ...or just create lesser expensive versions of this super-awesome Pro Display XDR. I mean, thank you for taking care of all the pros, but you kind of went a little too far on the pro.
+**Jerod Santo:** Give us a semi-pro.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, dial back for the semi-pros, the farm club...
+**Jerod Santo:** The farm league, exactly.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. We can hang there.
+**Jerod Santo:** Display for us minor-leaguers.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We need a monitor that works better, that looks good, that has the same kind of Apple-esque or Apple tried and true attributes of amazingness, but without this amazingly high price tag, $4,999. And of course you want the nanotexture, right? Who wouldn't. I want the nanotexture.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, if you're gonna spend the money, you might as well go for the...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** The question is can you even see it? Maybe... You can see the effects of it, but not see it. Anyways.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, let's move on to things that we're --
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Wait, one more thing. Nick, did you hear the boos, or what I thought was boos when they mentioned the prices for the display and the stand? Did you hear that, too?
+**Nick Nisi:** No, I don't think I did.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I swear - and maybe someone in Slack can say this, but when they announced the prices for it... Because they went through all of it, and at the very end they're like "This is gonna cost this much, and that is gonna cost that much", and when they were like "The Pro Display is gonna be this much, and for Nano it's gonna be this much, and then also the stand is a separate thing you have to buy", I swear I heard either surprise, or boos, or just unhappiness, it sounded like. Maybe it was just grumbling, or something. I don't know.
+**Nick Nisi:** I might have been keying in on something else there... I was very surprised when they started going through the prices for literally everything, because I think they even mentioned if you wanted to put the vesa mount on it, it's $199. They mentioned that on stage, and I was very surprised by that... But I guess that was the "Here's our $1,000 awesome thing, and then don't worry, if you can't afford that, here's a $200 thing that you can plug into any other crappy vesa mount." \[laughter\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Keep your vesa mount. I want counterbalance only. Counterbalance, rotate to portrait, give it to me now. Alright, we can move on, Jerod.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay. So I don't think we wanna cover every single aspect... This is a two hour and fifteen minute keynote, and they were moving pretty fast, and Craig Federighi was just ripping off things; so there's lots to talk about... So maybe what we could do is hit on things that we think are most impactful from the software developer perspective, and then also maybe things that we've found to be the most interesting, or features that we're the most excited about. There was "Hey, there's the new Memoji mumbo-jumbo!" I don't think we need to go into all that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's actually what I wanna talk about...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, okay. Well, if that's what you're most excited about, then please...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\] I was just gonna reference your note, actually... "More Memoji mumbo-jumbo." When I saw that, I was like "Oh yeah, Jerod is not exactly excited about that."
+**Jerod Santo:** \[27:58\] I'm not excited about that... \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right beneath that note though, however, is in all caps "Video rotation", which I think has got to be mentioned.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's a huge feature.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't know how often you take videos... And I often keep my device -- I don't know, what's the feature called where you can rotate it, or you can lock the rotation of it; what is that called?
+**Jerod Santo:** Rotation lock.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** So I always leave mine mostly in locked, and then sometimes I'll move it to unlocked if I'm gonna watch some videos, so I can just turn it. I don't always keep it there, because it's sort of painful... But when you have it in that mode, that means that you're -- I never know if my video is gonna be portrait, or landscape, and always somehow... The other day I took a video and I had to literally flip my phone the opposite way, upside down, because somehow when I started recording it, it locked to that perspective, and that rotation... And I was like "Wow...!" So I noticed it, and I'm like "Well, I'm not gonna stop this video. I'm just gonna rotate my phone" and kept going. But back in the day, prior to today, you could not rotate your video otherwise. You were stuck.
+**Nick Nisi:** That's gonna be really nice.
+**Jerod Santo:** That one got a huge applause, because I think we've all been feeling that pain.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I mean, how many videos have you taken, or shared, or wanted to share, that you couldn't because it was locked in the wrong rotation? Then you can maybe go buy a third-party app and then you've gotta save two videos, and all this... Why can't you just, like a photo, change its rotation? I don't know why. Is it that hard, do you think? I guess it's frame-by-frame; 30 frames/second, 24 frames/second...
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, they haven't ever had editing tools on videos, aside from the clipping. You can crop...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Change its length, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** But that's not affecting the actual video frames; that's affecting which frames are used. And the photo editing has always been more robust in iOS than the video. So this comes alongside more advanced video editing tools, which is nice to have too, but video rotation being the pain that everybody has been feeling - I think that's why you all-capsed it appropriately.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Of course.
+**Jerod Santo:** So that's a consumer thing that we're all excited about because it makes our lives a little bit better, but from a developer perspective, I'm curious what you guys think is the biggest news with a developer focus. I have one thing I'm eyeing that I think is probably the most impactful for us developers at large. Of course, there's other things that are specific to people developing for Apple platforms, but I'm curious what your thoughts are on big announcements that will affect more that just Apple platform developers.
+**Nick Nisi:** I think the biggest thing -- because I'm not an Apple platform developer, the biggest thing that I'm excited for, and I'm trying to weigh if I'm excited because of the consumer side of it, being able to actually use it, or being able to implement it, but it is something that from a website you'll definitely have to implement, and that is the Sign In With Apple. I'm really excited about that, and the focus on privacy with that. Specifically, they give you garbage email addresses that are completely random for every single app, and you can enable or disable those at will, so that you have much more control over what you're actually receiving in terms of spam... And I think that you can trust Apple a little more about what kind of data they're going to provide to whatever you're trying to sign into, over Facebook or Google.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, that's what I was thinking of, for sure. When I saw that, I thought "Okay, this might actually change the web to a certain degree", because it is a universal sign-in across all platforms that Apple uses... And it uses face ID, which is incredibly compelling from an end user perspective, because it's just so easy and fast. And they're actually making face ID 30% faster, which was another thing that got a huge applause... But it's something that's gonna be implemented maybe in Apple Pay, where it's gonna take actual developer adoption to get it out there on the web... Because it's gonna be instead of, or in addition to all the typical social sign-in options now.
+\[32:20\] So I assume there'll be some sort of JavaScript SDK or something that you'll have to integrate, but I think it's a very secure and private way to get authentication out there in ways that seem like it's better in almost every way than what's currently on offer.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What are the reasons why you use a third-party sign in like that? The reason why you ever sign in with Facebook, or Twitter, or others - what were the reasons, typically? Was it simply for the authentication process, or was it for the network, or was it for the "connected to the network and friends", and being able to connect to different identities? And how does this differ?
+**Nick Nisi:** I think the only time I ever use it is when I need to sign up fast, and I'm on my phone, and I don't wanna fill out their sign up form. I can just push this button, then click Approve, and I'm in.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. Magic. Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I will never use it unless I'm given no other options. I will always look for the "Or use email" option, because I just like to have those things siloed and not all talking to each other and following each other. That being said, once I'm signed in and I'm liking a service, if they're like "Hey, you can give value by adding this account", maybe like you said, for the network side, like find people you already know, then I will (on a case-by-case basis) allow that. But I'll never choose those. I'll never sign in with Google, or Facebook, or Twitter, or GitHub, unless I have to.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Has it become generally frowned upon to offer these third-party authentication processes? I still see people doing it with GitHub and others, especially in developer tools...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I mean, we do offer it as an option for our website, so I don't think it's -- I'm not against it, like "This is immoral to do." I think it's not frowned upon either. Even new websites, you see them rolled out and they have these options.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think if it's the only way, sometimes, it's kind of like "Really...? Because I feel like you're trying to get something from me."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do they name this service, Apple? I missed this part of it, actually.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think it's called Sign In With Apple. That's the button they put...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's pretty novel.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I like that.
+**Jerod Santo:** But the cool part of it is what Nick was talking about, where in addition to the actual sign in -- so what's cool is when you do the sign in with Apple and then you Face ID, it brings up this dialog box on your phone (or, I'm assuming, in your Safari web browser) that the website can then request access to certain aspects of your profile. So kind of like an OAuth kind of thing, where it's like, you know, they want access to this, that and the other thing, and you can click on a button that provides whatever level of access you want to grant to the website...
+And one of those things is obviously your email address, but like Nick said, they have right underneath email address another option, which I think is called Random Address, or I can't remember what they actually called it in the button... But they generate for you a unique, random address for that website, that then forwards to your actual email address. So it's like an iCloud address hosted by Apple, which forwards to your email address that Apple knows... And it's on a website-by-website basis, so it's not like you get one of these obfuscated addresses; you get one for each site, so it allows you to toggle them off and on, and cut off their access down the road if you really want to.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Nick Nisi:** \[35:46\] The one thing that I'm really concerned about with this, potentially -- obviously, we don't know how it's going to actually be rolled out, but... The way I'm picturing it in my head right now, with that dialog that pops up, that looks like a very OS-specific dialog, and I'm thinking "On my Mac, is this going to be like Apple Pay, where I only see Apple Pay if I'm using Safari? And will I not be able to use the Sign In With Apple if I'm using Chrome, or Firefox, or something else? Will that affect adoption?" Not very many people use Safari on the desktop, so that could be a limiting factor.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. That's a good point. I didn't think about that. My guess/intuition would be it works, just like Apple Pay, and it's probably gonna be inside Safari... Versus an OS-level thing that Chrome and Firefox etc. can use.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I'm wondering if we can speculate of their motivation for doing this. Would it just be a shot across the bow in terms of this whole focus on privacy in comparison to, say, other competitors or other large companies in the world? They're constantly saying "Hey, you're frowned upon for the way you're treating people's information and privacy." Let's speculate on the motivation for this.
+**Jerod Santo:** For Apple's motivation versus the user?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Apple's, yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think most of Apple's motivations with these things, unless they have a subscription service to attach to it, I think then you fall back to the motivation being vendor lock-in, Apple ecosystem lock-in. This is yet another place where your Apple ID is now important to you.
+**Nick Nisi:** And it's also, I think, a good marketing thing for them, because I think they do try and focus on marketing themselves as the privacy-focused giant tech company, as opposed to Google or Facebook or Microsoft.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And this Apple Sign In would work with any platform; it's not Apple-specific, right? We were just speculating which browsers would support it...
+**Jerod Santo:** Any Apple platform, but then you also have on the sign inside any website, or -- I'm sure there's probably third-party apps that could use it in a similar fashion to create iCloud-based lists of users, or whatever; it would work anywhere there, but I wouldn't expect it to have Sign In With Apple working on Android OS. Because you have to do the actual Apple authentication dance on the client side, which they wouldn't have there unless they had kind of like a 1Password-style Apple app for Android, which seems like a stretch for what they're willing to do.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** On the Tech Crunch article I'm reading here it says "What's the difference between other sign-ins and Sign In With Apple?" Apple says it can authenticate a user using face ID, as we've talked about, on their iPhone, without turning over any personal data to the third-party company.
+I think if Apple's vested interest is in secured users, or secure users in general, that would be a good motivation, not just simply lock-in. I guess it's a version of lock-in. It's like "Hey, if you trust us, you're loyal", which is a variation on lock-in I suppose, right? Loyalty.
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure. And not to mention, every time they secure an Apple Sign In, they're removing a Google Sign In or a Facebook Sign In, which each of one of those is valuable to their competitors.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's true. That's a good point.
+**Jerod Santo:** But for end users, it's that random email address that I think is the real carrot for that, and just the fast face ID.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That random email address is kind of interesting though. I don't know how it's getting routed back, but there's times when the application you sign in, the email address you give them becomes very important to them; sometimes in display, and sometimes in communications, and other Reply To kind of scenarios, with support... So if it's this random email address, it's not a known standard for how to utilize an email address in a system; these random email addresses might actually be harmful at some point.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[40:02\] It definitely obfuscates it for the end website owner. If you look at it from our perspective, with Changelog.com, we have people signing in and we know their email addresses well. That's also nice, because at times we can cross-reference that with an email address on their GitHub account, and be like "Oh yeah, we know who this person is." And with this, it's gonna be like User475349@apple-whatever-whatever-obfuscated-leave-me-alone.com.
+Even Gravatar, for instance. That's a feature, right? I have to give my email address, and now you can use my Gravatar. That would no longer work, because it's gonna be some ridiculous email.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Totally true.
+**Jerod Santo:** So definitely it's better for the end user in most cases, it's better for Apple, and then for this website implementing it there's a slight removal of information there.
+**Nick Nisi:** Do you think that that will affect adoption from developers?
+**Jerod Santo:** It's hard to say. Would it stop us? I don't think it would stop us, necessarily. It'd make us think twice. It probably depends on each circumstance. Probably bigger websites, especially on companies that actually are selling and reselling your data, they're not going to want to do this, because they don't get your data.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, then again, if they connected some sort of Gravatar kind of scenario to it too, where these obfuscated email addresses still point back to the Apple service, and it's gonna be Apple serving these images, instead of Gravatar... That would be one scenario solution for that. And/or just knowing at the account level what the Gravatar might be, and actually use Gravatar, and just use this obfuscated email address to point back to the account, and the account knows the Gravatar, the actual email address to associate with, you know?
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, there was a feature that they announced with regard to messages that kind of plays into that, which is when you message new people, and you're both on the iOS platform, you can now basically broadcast our contact info with the message. So when I message somebody new, they're like "Hey, here's a random phone number who's messaging you." They can actually send "Jerod Santo's messaging you", along with my avatar, and I'm not sure what else information. So in that regard, they're kind of pushing that data to the other iOS device before it's being requested, so they're representing that person there, so maybe they could do a similar thing with whatever this SDK is for signing with Apple, and provide an avatar URL, or...
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah. I suppose it's possible that that could be related, what information you decide to publicly share when texting someone new, for example. Maybe that's similar information that a website would get when you're signing in with Apple. So maybe an avatar would be built in.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I like that... I often text people when I meet people, rather than exchange business cards. I'm like "Just give me your phone number. I'll text you right now." I say "Hey, this is Adam Stacoviak", and I might even follow up with all this information manually. It would be nice to be able to send an introductory text with a known iMessage user, and share some particulars with them in the process.
+**Jerod Santo:** Can you share a contact? Can you share your own contact without prompting?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Prompting? How do you mean prompting?
+**Jerod Santo:** So I say "Hey, nice to meet you. I'd love to meet up later", and then... \[laughs\] I don't know, this fake conversation we're having. "We just met" and then you say "Oh, give me your phone number, I'll text you." So I give you my phone number, blah-blah-blah, and you type it in. Couldn't you just send me your contact right then, without any sort of prompting? Like, I'm not requesting... As a rich object.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, you could.
+**Jerod Santo:** I know I would consider that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think you might need to send a text first, and then go to your contact and then say "Share it", and then share it with the phone number. Or go through the process of learning their name and associating their contact that they just gave you...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[44:00\] No, but it's your name. It's your info.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah, you can do that with the "share it".
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, I know, but you have to say who to share it to, and it's just a number they display.
+**Jerod Santo:** Just the phone number. They give you your phone number, and you just share your contact to them.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** But then you find out they've got a green bubble, and you're like "Oh..."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** It's gotta go blue. It's not gonna work.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It's gotta go blue.
+**Jerod Santo:** What happens if you try to share something like a contact with a non-iPhone user?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think it still works...
+**Jerod Santo:** Does it?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, vCards is just standard I believe, right?
+**Jerod Santo:** I don't know... I mean, I know vCard is a standard, but will they just send the vCard object or data?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think so. I would assume so.
+**Jerod Santo:** Would that be an MMS then? Because SMS is just text-only. Unicode.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** You're speaking a whole new language for me, man... I'm tracking you, but I don't follow this--
+**Jerod Santo:** If you don't have the iMessage transport facility, you have to use a transport format, so SMS is simple messaging service, it's Unicode text. Well, if I'm trying to send something that's Unicode text, it's rich data. They used to have MMS, which was multimedia messaging something-something, and I think that still exists... Do you guys remember when text messages used to cost different based on if there was a picture on there or not?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes...
+**Nick Nisi:** Those were dark days...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, the dark days before iMessage... Well, I'm just wondering, if you did that to a green bubble, if it would switch to an MMS, and then it would charge you 50 cents, or something.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Let's speak about something new.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Who is excited about the support for Xbox and Playstation controllers on Apple Arcade?
+**Nick Nisi:** It makes me more interested in gaming on--
+**Adam Stacoviak:** We can't see your hand raised, Jerod.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's partially up... Go ahead, Nick.
+**Nick Nisi:** It makes me more interested in gaming on Apple TVs, but I'm not a huge gamer to begin with. The only game I have ever tried is Alto's Adventure, and that's easy enough to play with the simple Apple remote...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Nick Nisi:** But I'll try it. If there's a game that comes out, I have a Playstation controller and I would try it. But I could take it or leave it, I guess.
+**Jerod Santo:** I don't think it's gonna sell any subscriptions.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah...
+**Jerod Santo:** Or sell any Apple TVs either. I think it's a nice-to-have... This goes back to the last time we talked, Adam. We talked about Apple Arcade.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's why I'm bringing it back up.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, you're bringing it back. Well, what I was asking for then I'd still ask for.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** First-party controller support...
+**Jerod Santo:** I think it's fair to say that Apple's not taking gaming seriously with the Apple TV until they actually ship a controller with the Apple TV. And this is not that. This is saying "Well, you can use your Xbox or your Playstation for controller." And to that -- first of all, I'm Nintendo guy, so I don't have those, but let's set that aside... To that, I would say "Well, I'm just gonna play my Xbox or my PS4 then", because there are better systems for this, and also these Apple Arcade games are designed for phones. So are they gonna have rich controls, like you would have on a console game when you play them on your Apple TV? Or is it just the up, down, left, right, that you can now use... It's nice that you can use a nice controller for that, and it did get some cheers from the audience, because it's definitely a better circumstance than they're currently in with the Apple TV... I just don't think it's gonna really move the needle much.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I was wondering if -- because why recreate the wheel, if there's already good wheels out there that have mass adoption already, right? That was my thought, was why they chose that direction. It was like "Hey, you've probably already got one of these systems, and it's a gateway. You already know the controller, you're already familiar with it", and maybe there's some games that are coming out on Apple Arcade, or the future of Apple Arcade, how you can subscribe etc. that you can easily move to this system - in addition to maybe, not even replacement of - and be familiar with the controlling system already. Because hardcore gamers are really attached to their controllers.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[48:09\] Right. Which is why I don't think they're playing games on Apple TV necessarily anyways, but... My answer to that, why I think it's a bigger deal to ship a first-party controller as part of the package - not even as an optional part - is because as a game designer, I can't design my game around a controller, unless I know it's gonna be there.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's true.
+**Jerod Santo:** And the best games take full advantage of the input devices.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's so true.
+**Jerod Santo:** So you water it down, because you're like "Well, they might have an awesome controller, or they might be using their sideways little Apple remote, so all I can do is these four buttons, because it's the lowest common denominator."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's true, and I didn't even consider that, honestly. Inputs are a really big deal.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's true. As a game designer, you're gonna have a real tough time, because you're essentially designing a responsive game, with layers of complex user play on top of whatever input device or control system you have. And without that knowledge, you're kind of limited in your dream.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yup. And so you're never gonna make the great game for Apple TV. There's not gonna be the game that you have to get an Apple TV to play this game, because it's the lowest common denominator games, so...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's why I wanted to bring this back up, because I know that for you, the last time you were saying that, this first-party support, I was thinking "I wonder if Jerod is gonna be excited about the fact that they're partnering with two of the best controllers out there."
+**Jerod Santo:** It's definitely better. Like I said, it's a step up from the current scenario, but I don't think it's ultimately gonna make the Apple TV a gaming platform, all of a sudden.
+**Nick Nisi:** Do you think that this could be kind of a stopgap solution until they come out with maybe their own gaming platform? Because it seems like that might be the way that they're going with the game subscription...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Nick Nisi:** But then also, it seems like it's a similar thing to what they're doing with AR. AR is not that interesting when you're playing Minecraft and having to hold an iPad up in front of your face for the hours that you might play it, but it's really compelling as a way to get people familiar with the technology, so that you can build glasses later.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, if that's a progress that they're moving, then I think that is a good strategy. It also allows them to not invest as much as they would need to. Because when you build a controller for a console or for a gaming device, you are stuck with that controller. That controller will define that unit even. Especially if you look at the Wii, and the Wii U... The Wii U was defined by its input device.
+**Nick Nisi:** Dreamcast...
+**Jerod Santo:** So maybe this is the way they can maybe let the market play out a little bit while they're designing it, and not maybe dive in too fast and make a mistake... Because we know Apple is perfectly capable of building bad remotes. The Apple TV remote is not a good remote. Sorry... I like Apple hardware, but man...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What's the number one thing you hate about it?
+**Jerod Santo:** I never know if it's the right side up or upside down. I've gotta look at it every time.
+**Nick Nisi:** And if you grab the wrong side in complete darkness, and you tap the wrong side, you're pausing your video, or you're swiping and going, you're scrubbing too far...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Unexpected gestures take place.
+**Jerod Santo:** Unexpected gestures... Or it slips down into the couch cushion. I understand the desire for small and thin, but on my phone or my watch, when I'm mobile. I'm sitting on a couch, watching TV. Do I need to have the smallest, thinnest piece of gum to control it? I just think it's a wrong goal.
+**Nick Nisi:** But you know what was smaller and thinner? The previous Apple remote. And I loved that one.
+**Jerod Santo:** Did you love that one?
+**Nick Nisi:** I didn't have accidental gestures, so yes.
+**Jerod Santo:** It worked much better, but I never had love for it, because I could never find \[unintelligible 00:51:58.10\] \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[51:59\] What drives me crazy is latency. I don't know about you guys, but I have one -- so I have a couple Apple TVs in my house, and one of them, the latency drives me crazy, from the gesture to on-screen. It's unusable. I have to literally open up my phone and use the app instead, because that's more reliable.
+**Nick Nisi:** I end up having to pull the plug out of it and the restarting the whole Apple TV, and then it kind of gets back to normal.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. The latency just gets so terrible with that... It's Bluetooth, right? Yeah. You're obviously gonna get kind of far away; I might be 20-30 feet away, but it's still within its limit, so I don't see why... It's not like it's a complex gesture either. It's not like three or four fingers, and there's lots of compute, and then the gesture on the screen. It's just one finger trying to move to the right; it seems basic. Very basic.
+**Jerod Santo:** Speaking of latency, the Siri dictation on the Apple TV I think is one of the most latent of all interactions. You hit the button and then you sit there and you're like "Hm..." Then you're like "Maybe it's working, but the UI doesn't refresh, so I'll start to talk", and then you start to talk and it comes in right in the middle of you talking, so it gets the second half of your sentence... It's terrible. It's really bad.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I don't really talk to that remote very much. I will say however I loved Xfinity whenever they had their talk. I don't know if either of you guys have ever experienced Xfinity's X1 platform, or whatever...
+**Jerod Santo:** Nope.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It is amazing. It was the first time I had ever actually used a voice-to-something on a remote... And it was amazing. I don't have Xfinity anymore, because it's so expensive - we now have DirecTV - but I really miss that talk feature. It was the best of all talk features, and it never failed. It was always right.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, speaking of top features, we've failed to mention the top feature for iOS, which got its own video and everything, which is Dark Mode. That's the headliner, right?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes...!
+**Jerod Santo:** Who's excited about Dark Mode?
+**Nick Nisi:** I want everything dark, all the time.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I hope my Dark Mode excitement here doesn't get drowned out by the execution of it like it did on Mojave... Because I was not extremely happy with Dark Mode on Mojave.
+**Jerod Santo:** I don't rock Dark Mode on Mojave at all.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No... What I don't like about it -- so I don't like the Dark Mode because it doesn't look that good, on macOS at least, and then they took away this option too, which is why actually on my main desktop I'm still not on Mojave; I'm gonna wait. So under the general settings you can make your appearance graphite, and then also select the option to use Dark Menu in Dock. So because that feature is removed in Mojave, because they assume if you went dark, you're in the Dark Mode... Well, what happens if you went dark and not in the Dark Mode? I don't want all my apps to be dark mode, I just want my bar and my buttons to be grey tone; not all bright red/green/yellow, for example. So I didn't move to Mojave on this machine, long story short.
+**Jerod Santo:** Nick, you were very excited about Dark Mode on Mojave... Are you still using it?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yup. Haven't changed. I really like it. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Turned it on and just kept it, huh?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Nick's out there saying "No, Adam, you're wrong. I love it." \[laughter\]
+**Nick Nisi:** I don't know, I just -- I mean, most of the time I have a full-screen iTerm window that's dark. So that's what I see. And then when I switch over to Chrome, or whatever, it's usually blinding... But I'm actually using extensions now to make a majority of the sites that I go to, like GitHub, for example - I make that dark now. I like the look and feel of Messages, and... The only thing that sticks out like a sore thumb right now is Slack.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[55:52\] Yeah... So that's exactly it... Which doesn't exactly make me not wanna use Dark Mode on an iOS device - like my iPhone, or whatever - but you do have to pick and choose which apps you may or may not use, because like you said, Chrome has extensions that do it... And they don't even do it that well. They're okay at the Dark Mode portion of it, and then Slack is behind... I mean, slack - more puns for me; thank you.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's two now.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They're slacking in this Dark Mode era... And I think that everybody has their own unique ideas, but what gets dark mode well is not only the fact that it's dark, it's the right tones of dark, and the right usage of color to represent the things that need to be color. I think that's where you go from -- I was gonna try a couple of analogies, but I can't. Basically, the nuance between good and great. Somebody's good at it, and somebody's great at it; and I only wanna use great Dark Mode apps. YouTube, for example, is pretty good with the Dark Mode app. I like their Dark Mode, it's not bad.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** But I think that's where I kind of wanna choose Dark Mode and get the best, if I can, and if I can't, then I'm just gonna go back to what I was using.
+**Nick Nisi:** I think it will be a different thing on iOS, too. There's a lot of apps that already have Dark Modes because they're taking advantage of the true black OLED display. And I think it was the latest Accidental Tech Podcast - it was talking about the design challenges of a truly black display. You can't really show shadows with that, because those pixels are off. So it'll be interesting to see that... But I'm an Apple Music user, and I like it; I don't like the white in it, so I'm excited for that to be black. Everything that I use day-to-day... Messages is one. That'll be better black.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yes. I'm in a similar circumstance there... Dark Mode on Mojave - I turned it on so I could talk about it in Apple Nerds Chat, and turn it right back off again. \[laughter\] I didn't like it at all, and mostly it's because it's like the uncanny valley of darkness, because a lot of stuff is still light; like you said, the Safari browser, Slack etc. It's like "Why go halfway if halfway not really doing anything for me?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** On mobile I do prefer dark mode at night time, so I like it dark at night and I like it light during the day, and I get that with a lot of the apps whose developers take the app very seriously... Which all happen to be a lot of the apps that I use at night time, or the early morning app, where it's still kind of dark out, but I wanna check a few things. Tweetbot goes dark mode, Overcast, if I'm listening to a podcast at night, goes dark mode, Apollo, which is a Reddit client, goes dark mode... And these are really good on the eyes at night time, when you don't want something super-bright... But then I'll be like "Well, I'm gonna check my email", and I switch to the mail app, and it just blows me away with how bright it is. So I'm excited for it, especially if I can set it up to work on a timer; so if I can have it be dark mode when the sun's down in my locale, and light mode when it's up, I'll be a happy camper
+**Nick Nisi:** I would assume that that's the case.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Would you want it to swap on you mid-use?
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** For example if you're in an app, and you're just like "Oh! Dark mode..."
+**Jerod Santo:** That happens sometimes, and it's kind of cool.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** You're like, "Oh, I must have went outside... How did I end up out here?"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\] "Gosh! Where are my steps taking me?"
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] "I should really look up while I'm walking. I guess I'm outside now..."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah... What were you gonna say, Nick?
+**Nick Nisi:** Um, nothing.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Nothing. So Dark Mode is cool, and to recap my expectations, I sure hope they do it well.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think on the phone it's probably easier than on a desktop, but I could be wrong... A lot more real estate, a lot more -- I don't know. I feel like the iOS design style has -- they're similar on macOS and iOS, but not the exact same... It's also a much more rich experience too, when you're on desktop. So on a less rich experience, or at least from an interface perspective, it might be a little easier to execute.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[01:00:05.11\] Obviously, there's lots of little things in the iOS side which are somewhat interesting... The HomeKit secure video, they're doing more with HomeKit... There's HomeKit-enabled routers, which I didn't understand even what that does, but they name Linksys and Eero as being HomeKit-enabled in the future... And I'm not sure if they expanded on what that even implies...
+**Nick Nisi:** I think I could be wrong, but I thought it was something about more securely exposing HomeKit devices outside of your network through those routers.
+**Jerod Santo:** So that they aren't compromised if they do a port forward, or something...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Say that again, Nick? What is it trying to do?
+**Nick Nisi:** I think it said that you can access HomeKit stuff outside of your home network. The router will be in charge of intelligently opening ports when it needs to, for those HomeKit devices.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Oh, right.
+**Jerod Santo:** They definitely mentioned security, but I didn't actually pick up on what it was doing... But I guess that makes sense.
+**Nick Nisi:** Well, they added the secure video stuff, which it was unfortunate that -- like, I have some Arlo cameras and I don't think they're part of it... But they'll be able to do processing and detection of things in those videos by sending that off to an iPad in your house, or a HomePod in your house (some other computer that can do it) and then send the data back, so it's all being done in network, which is pretty cool. Again, marketing for "We're the secure platform."
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, exactly.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I also see that my favorite - you mentioned Eero, and what else, Jerod, as the options for it? Cisco, or...?
+**Jerod Santo:** Linksys.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Linksys, yeah. My preferred platform is Ubiquiti, and I use the UniFi platform, and they're also HomeKit-ready. I don't know if they have the router available to them, but that'd be pretty cool...
+**Jerod Santo:** So on the iOS front, the other big news (I think) is they're now splitting it out to iPad OS. So there's no iOS and iPad OS, which seems reasonable; I always liked the idea of one OS to rule them all, but it definitely showed the iPad was the one that was lacking in features, and all that... So this was the part where I saw the announcement of Switch, and I saw they were doing some new UI widgets and stuff for iPad OS, but I had to hop out at that point, so... I'm not sure if you guys have details on what iPad OS is that's different than iOS, or if it's just a rebranding of a fork, or something...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I've got two notes for this - shared folders, external drives. That's all I've got. I look at iPad OS -- I'm not a developer on that front, so I don't know what the nuanced difference might be, but what I can see from their UI changes is that you definitely have things that are very iOS-like, that need to be special iPad ways on the iPad. So I think in that regard it makes sense, and I'm wondering if maybe there's just some sort of known iOS core that adds an iPad thing on top of the iOS core, for example. Maybe that's how they actually came up with iPad OS. I can't imagine why it would be a completely separate OS.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There's some shared libraries, obviously...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, I'm sure it isn't completely separate. I just wonder codebase-wise, if it's a fork, or it's a dependency... Like, is it layered on top?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Interesting, yeah.
+**Nick Nisi:** What it has that I saw as big features over iOS was the -- a little bit of a change to the home screen. Not as drastic as I think some rumors were leaning towards, but you can put widgets on the home screen now, which makes widgets usable to me, because I never swipe over to that widgets view, on the phone or on the iPad. But it has that, and then it has some more advanced controls for multi-windows support, which looks pretty cool, and will make that much more usable.
+\[01:04:13.07\] Then the other big change that I saw was you have more control over the on-screen keyboard, and you can move that around and shrink it down, so that you can just use it with one hand or one finger, and they support swipe now, so you can literally just use one finger to type, which is really nice.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That was actually a good feature, shrinking the keyboard down and moving it to either left or right, so that you can just one hand to thumb, or single-finger, holding the iPad... Because it's a two-handed device. I would even argue that the iPhone can be a two-handed device, but it's a different show... You know, that's really cool that they've actually come up with that. I guess why would it take them so long to do something like that? You would expect that to be like "Hey, you plan to use this with two hands, and you're not gonna be able to type with two hands if you're holding--"
+**Nick Nisi:** Older versions of iOS had it where it would split the keyboard in half and you'd have half the keys on the left and half the keys on the right, so you could use both thumbs. I think this will be much better.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. I used that one time and I'm like "What is this perversion? This is crazy", and I just never used it again. I've actually gotten rid of the iPad and no longer have one... And ever since the phone got bigger, I haven't missed it. Every once in a while I'll be like "Oh, that'd be nice...", when I see somebody reading something really big and beautiful, on a really nice screen... I'm like "Oh, I should get one of those again."
+**Nick Nisi:** I think this is the exact reason why they're making the switch to iPad OS, is because they don't want it to just be a big phone anymore; they want it to have these more distinguished features that they can sell to you.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah. So here's a feature they can sell to me - and they're trying to, via this thing called Sidecar...
+**Nick Nisi:** Yes...!
+**Jerod Santo:** ...which is an integration between iPad OS and macOS. You can use your iPad as a separate display or as an extension display of your Mac. There have been third-party apps that do this, and I think some do it pretty well... I remember way back -- I had the iPad 2, and I used one back then, and it was just too slow for it really to work, but... I know there's some software that does this, but now it's just all integrated. So that could get me to buy an iPad.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** What would make this be a selling thing for you? Why would you use it?
+**Jerod Santo:** Because now I can use it as just an extension of what I'm already doing, so I can just have another screen on my Mac, without any sort of -- it's just another use for the device, you know?
+**Nick Nisi:** I actually do this right now. I have the Luna Display, which is a third-party -- it's actually a USB-C dongle that you plug into your Mac, and then it does it over Wi-Fi or over the cable to the iPad, and then you can just use it as a second display. I love this when I'm getting away from my 38-inch monitor and go to a coffee shop, I can at least have my 15-inch, and then I have the 11-inch iPad... So I can throw a Slack over there, or throw something, and it is very fast. There's hardly any lag with that device, and you can use your finger or the Apple Pencil to move around.
+I've actually used it to stream a website that has a whiteboard that you would use your mouse to draw on. I just used the Apple Pencil on that, and it worked fantastically. But I'm just wondering, if Sidecar will eliminate all of the lag, or maybe have better features, because it might have more built-in OS abilities.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** One of the examples they gave was actually somebody doing rich things on the Mac via the iPad, so I can imagine that your wishes will be granted.
+**Nick Nisi:** And they mentioned something about like any apps that have tablet support and they put up icons for Photoshop and others - they just automatically would work with that, and I was wondering if by tablet they meant like Wacom tablets, like they just automatically will work and you'll be able to use that, or what...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[01:08:10.17\] Probably, but I'm not sure. So the other big news around macOS that also has to do with the other OS'es is the formalization of Marzipan, and the naming of Marzipan; this is the teased framework and UI kit, cross-platform thing from last year, and the junky macOS apps that came to Mojave because of it. I think it was stocks, news... I can't remember the other ones.
+**Nick Nisi:** Home...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, home \[unintelligible 01:08:43.12\] Anyways.
+**Nick Nisi:** I don't know. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** They're so inconsequential... Was it the calculator?
+**Nick Nisi:** Voice memos.
+**Jerod Santo:** Voice memos! Has anybody launched Voice Memos on their Mac since that happened?
+**Nick Nisi:** I do actually use News, but that's about it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Do you? I use it on my phone, but I don't think I've launched it... Because I just use websites.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Even the iOS app is clunky.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah, it is.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, it's not great.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I mean, they're expecting you to name it... There's just no swift user experience.
+**Jerod Santo:** Anyways, they're calling it Catalina. Or is that the name of the OS?
+**Nick Nisi:** That's the OS.
+**Jerod Santo:** They're calling it Catalyst. Sorry. Those are very similar. Catalina is the new macOS. Catalyst - that's the name of what was Marzipan, right?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yup.
+**Jerod Santo:** And again, I didn't see this part, which is why I'm asking questions... Did they add to it? Did they make it better at all? Or did they just say "Hey, you can use it now." What's the state of the world with non-Apple developers using this framework Catalyst?
+**Nick Nisi:** I think that's what it is. They might have internally called it Marzipan, but nothing public-facing was ever called Marzipan.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Nick Nisi:** This was announced last year, with the addition of those four apps to Mojave, but it wasn't something that you could actually use. I've seen developers on Twitter who have gotten apps to work by figuring out the APIs and getting it to work, and really forcing it in, but this is the official introduction of the SDK for developers to port their iOS apps to macOS.
+**Jerod Santo:** Gotcha. So we're probably gonna see a whole bunch of half-arsed macOS apps coming down the pipeline, maybe the most desirable of which is gonna be Twitter, right?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yes! That was the one that they touted.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It seems like the process of getting there too is pretty easy - just open up the project and then check the Mac checkbox, and "you'll get a huge headstart on transitioning an iPad app to the Mac." So maybe it's like scaffolding, you know? Good to get started, mostly replaced.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah. It'll be really interesting, and I really hope that we don't have just these terrible apps that are decent on iPad, but look terrible on the Mac, because it is really a whole different paradigm. You have right-click menus, and you have a menu bar, and you have all of this stuff you can do; probably more things in the background. There's a lot that can separate a good Mac app from a good iOS app. But at the same time, I'm excited for apps that probably would never come to the Mac, to maybe come to the Mac... Specifically Overcast, I'm thinking...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And you're saying Catalina is available today? Not to download, but is there a beta available, today, or something?
+**Jerod Santo:** The public beta of Catalina, or of all this stuff, I think is this summer.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Okay. So they're saying it's available to developers right now.
+**Jerod Santo:** Catalyst is probably available, too.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[01:11:54.04\] But going back to motivations, why would Apple do this? They're trying to rejuvenate the Mac? Are they trying to fight off Electron? Both? Those are my thoughts, but it seems like a whole lot of work, and a pretty big bet.
+**Nick Nisi:** I think you're right on both fronts, and it's unfortunate, because I think that they could have a whole other platform in the forms of PWAs, like what Windows has been doing... But it seems like they're very reluctant to have any kind of support for that whatsoever on macOS. They have it on the iOS, but it is not very great, and they did not mention anything about it in the keynote, so I'm fearful that nothing new has changed.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's ironic that the company that first said "We have a really sweet solution for you in terms of running apps on the phone, and they're web apps!", the company that said that initially, a decade later (or 11 years later now) is the most web-hostile -- I don't know if "hostile" is the right word, but they're the least excited about web apps. They're the more native apps to this day.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you think it's because of the marketplace that the iPad has offered developers that they're just trying to give those developers useful applications on the Mac? Sort of like almost reviving the indie Mac developer world, which seems to have kind of -- I'm not in that space well enough to know this perfectly, but it seems like it's not quite as lively as it was 6-7 years ago.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think a lot of indie developers are going to Electron, because the fact is that they already know how to make websites, so the technologies are familiar, even if they do know how to write against the Cocoa frameworks. The Cocoa frameworks are very old; AppKit and all that is very old, and so it has a lot of cruft (this is the Mac UI frameworks). And if I can use technologies that I'm pretty good at, because I already build websites, plus I can get cross-platform support, it's kind of the Easy button.
+And the thing about indie developers is that we're indie, we don't have big budgets, we don't have lots of time; we need to actually optimize for platform, with the least amount of work possible. So there's less incentive than there's ever been to build a native, Mac-only application, and especially put it in the Mac App Store, which has been kind of a flop, at least in comparison to the iOS App Store. So yeah, I think they're grasping at straws, trying to say "Hey, come back...!"
+**Adam Stacoviak:** There's a lot of people who are even making Mac apps that have actually removed their applications from the App Store.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** I think 1Password is potentially one of them. I think they're still in there now, but they kind of had this weird "in there/out of there" scenario. There have been several that have actually bought from the App Store, that have then emailed me and said "Hey, we're no longer in the App Store" for whatever reasons they had blogged about... Which were always something that was akin to the support of the indie developer lifestyle and the payment process, etc. All this extra red tape, basically... And have said "Here's how you can migrate back to a just simply installed application.
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah, and I think that that was one of the themes of last year's WWDC. I wanna say that it was Transmit by Panic that famously left the App Store because they just couldn't do it..
+**Jerod Santo:** Right, and they're coming back to it...
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah, they announced last year that they were coming back to the Mac App Store because things have changed. They've been wanting to point to you and say "Hey, we are listening and we're putting in improvements, and making things better", and overall I think that it has. Definitely the Mac App Store that launched with Mojave is much sleeker and better. I open it occasionally to see what's updated, but things automatically update in the background, whereas I don't think that they really did before for me...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. You had to launch it to get the updater to run back then.
+**Nick Nisi:** \[01:16:04.17\] Right. So hopefully they keep listening and doing this, and this is a way to maybe help developers who have been developing successful iPad and iOS apps, and just say "Hey, bring it back to the Mac", and once they see the potential usage that they could get off of this platform, maybe they build better support for it. Or maybe it's like a way to easily hook you in, and then also allow you to really build a compelling app that can work across all three platforms.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, the danger here is that the Mac historically has had a reputation - and one that I think it's lived up to - of having software that was a cut above. There was less software, so on the Windows side they had the numbers. There were just millions of programs - that's what we used to call them back then...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's true, we used to call them programs.
+**Jerod Santo:** Now they're apps... So they had millions of programs, and the Mac didn't. But the ones that the Mac did were very polished, very personal, usually by people with design skills and sense... And you could just tell there was a lot of care put into those, because the people were very passionate about the platform... Because you had to be, because there wasn't as much money over on this side of the fence, right? So the people really wanted to be there.
+So maybe their thought is "Well, some software is better than no software, and right now no one's writing new Mac apps, or not enough people, so this will get us some new software that we already have on our other platforms." But there's a real possibility - and we see it with Apple's own app so far - that these catalyst apps, when they come to macOS, are not gonna be high-quality software... So it might actually backfire.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Maybe one last mention on software... Was anyone excited to hear about this separation, which seemed like it was even under-stated, about iTunes being broken up into Music, Podcasts and Apple TV, or Apple TV+? It's three different apps, and now when you plug in your phone, it won't open iTunes anymore, it will just open Finder in a tab - which is cool - and you can do whatever you want with it. It seems like iTunes is dying, basically...
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, as podcasters, we should be excited that Apple Podcasts is gonna be promoted as its own first-class citizen on the platform. I think that's good for podcasters.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, I agree.
+**Jerod Santo:** I couldn't tell if this is a -- I came in when they already were announcing this... I know the Reminders app was a ground-up rewrite for iOS. Is the Apple Music for macOS a rewrite? Did they skin the old hog and put lipstick on everything else, or what?
+**Nick Nisi:** That's what I'm curious about. Is this the Catalina version, or the Catalyst version of the Music app from iOS?
+**Jerod Santo:** Exactly.
+**Nick Nisi:** That could be really interesting. I don't think it is, probably, but we'll see.
+**Jerod Santo:** We're gonna have to wait until the developers get their hands on the Catalina Beta, so they can start to look at the header files and pick things apart and find out what is this new Apple Podcast - is it the old iTunes with some stuff hidden, or is it a Catalyst version of the iOS Music, or is it its own thing? To be determined...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** To be determined. I was excited though to hear that the Apple Podcast is getting a dedicated experience. They mentioned syncing with other devices etc, so every time somebody asks me -- maybe they're in software and they don't even listen to many podcasts, and I have to explain the podcast world to them, which seems so hard, by the way...
+**Jerod Santo:** What do you say, normally? I just say "It's like radio, but you get to pick exactly what you want to listen to."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** They're like "Well, can I listen to it on YouTube?" "Well, technically some you can... Not all..." So it's like "Well, how do I get access to this great information?" "Well, you have to know somebody, and get through a secret door... \[laughter\] Use a special application, and..."
+**Jerod Santo:** \[01:20:13.28\] "The password is "new england clam chowder."
+**Adam Stacoviak:** \[laughs\] Yeah, exactly. It feels so archaic to explain that. At least maybe if Apple leads better in this front, on the podcast front, they can really put podcasts as they are, like Spotify has been doing, as better first-class citizens in their worlds. And I think that just by nature, you'll start to discover, because the operating system will market an application to you (for a lack of better terms), and say "You should be interested in things on this platform. Here's some good things", and that's how you get into podcasting. Right now it's somewhat that way, but the podcast app isn't that great, and... I don't know, it's just not the best experience. So I'm excited to see them put more love and attention into that experience.
+**Jerod Santo:** Speaking of love and attention, one feature they mentioned -- I can't remember if it was on the iOS side, or maybe it's Catalyst, so everybody gets it, but they said that they're going to start to index the audio of podcasts, and allow it to be searchable. Did you guys catch that?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yes, that was really interesting. I was actually wondering, are they actually behind the scenes transcribing somehow everything that goes through iTunes? How do you think they're doing that?
+**Jerod Santo:** I think they're gonna have to, unless they're just actually running their models against the audio files... But my guess is that they would go speech-to-text, and then they would make the text indexed. But I don't know, we'll see how well it works. But what do we think that would do? I mean, it seems like an awesome feature, but I guess if you searched for the word "Catalina", instead of finding a podcast that had the title "Catalina", or the description - we talked about Catalina; you would just find all the episodes that we actually said the word Catalina, and then it would pull that up, I guess...
+**Jerod Santo:** There would be a lot of results.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** It might do like inner text, or... Yeah, I don't know. It's interesting.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's super-cool if you're searching for very specific topics, you know?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah. This actually mirrors something I want almost to a t. I was thinking - I listen to a lot of audible books, and I read a lot of actual books, so I'm never really sure where I get my information at, in terms of where do I \[unintelligible 01:22:25.27\] and especially with audible books, you can't really earmark it or go back to it... But I would love it if all my physical books and all of my real books had some sort of search. That would be amazing. And then this is basically that for podcasts.
+**Nick Nisi:** It would be cool, because it would all be in one spot.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Because you've read the book - all you wanna do is keyword search across physical books you have. Why isn't that there? It seems like it should be there. Even audiobooks. They all have manuscripts... How hard is that? Somebody give me some search on the book...
+**Jerod Santo:** Just keep asking for it. Just keep saying it over and over.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, let's recap a little bit. We've got some Apple TV updates, obviously, we've got some watchOS updates... We didn't even talk about Apple TV, but there's not enough there--
+**Jerod Santo:** We didn't talk about watchOS...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** WatchOS... I was actually excited about the new faces. I like to see new, unique faces, and maybe I'm missing this, but are faces available too developed by third-parties, or they're still just first-party? Because if they were third-party - gosh, man... I can only imagine it'd be like ringtones; sell those things. I would like to get somebody to make watchOS faces for me. That would be amazing. If we had a Changelog watchOS, Jerod... Dang! You know what I'm saying?
+**Nick Nisi:** I think it's one step closer, because the watch has its own App Store now.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, it's one step closer.
+**Jerod Santo:** Independent apps, own App Store, streaming audio API - these are a few of the...
+**Nick Nisi:** \[01:23:58.11\] That's what I'm most excited about.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's gonna get you to be able to listen to podcasts on the go.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** That's right. I wonder if that meant that you'd have to have the GPS+cellular version of the watch...
+**Jerod Santo:** I'm sure you would... Otherwise how are you gonna get that stream?
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Right. So for those who...
+**Jerod Santo:** Like me, who did not get the cell version...
+**Nick Nisi:** I have it, and I love it. The only thing I don't like is it's very unreliable to sync things to it, like syncing an audiobook. Audible tells me it'll take 277 hours to do this. But if I can just stream it, that's much better.
+**Jerod Santo:** That is much better.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Yeah, that's true.
+**Jerod Santo:** Is your cell plan capped, though? Are you gonna have overages on your watch because you're streaming Audible?
+**Nick Nisi:** Potentially...
+**Adam Stacoviak:** No. \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** \[unintelligible 01:24:45.10\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, it depends -- who do you use?
+**Nick Nisi:** AT&T.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Well, you might then.
+**Nick Nisi:** I don't have the unlimited plan... I have like 20 gigs a month.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Do you have the super old school unlimited plan?
+**Nick Nisi:** No, I can do tethering, and stuff. The super old school one you couldn't do that.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Gotcha, yeah. I use Verizon, and all they do is have you add a device. So if you had your iPhone out and you had it in tether mode, and you had a different device tethering to it, using it as a hotspot, well that data is capped. But a device directly using its cellular connection to get the data doesn't have a limit if you're on unlimited... For most of the plans that I'm aware of at least. So I could be wrong about yours... But usually it's when you're going through another device to get the data, that's when you're capped; hot spot data.
+**Nick Nisi:** As far as I know, I have 20 gigs that I can use, and it just counts towards that. My iPad actually has cellular too, and it's the same.
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Lots of iOS updates... Signing in with Apple - we talked deeply about that; some HomeKit stuff, video rotation (OMG yes, thank you), iPad OS new and improved... That's cool - shared folders, external drives, SD cards... I mean, finally, right? I think Android has been doing that since '99, the year before it was born.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think Dojo even did that back in the day... Didn't Dojo already do that? \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** Dojo pioneered it. That Mac Pro is sweet. The Pro Display is unattainable. The Pro Stand is a nice add-on that costs more than my first car.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Adam Stacoviak:** And of course, macOS, doing some cool stuff. Swift - that was pretty cool, though. Some cool stuff happening in Swiftland. I wonder if the Catalyst stuff will be open source.
+**Jerod Santo:** I doubt it. Swift UI does look really cool, so let's touch on that before we call it a show... This is a new framework written in Swift, for Swift, for developing user interfaces. Akin to the old interface builder, this is a Swift interface builder. It's a declarative UI framework where you can, of course, just write the code, and they showed how little code you need to write to do all of the fully fleshed out, feature-rich table views, and all the different widgets that they have in the OS'es... But they also have this Xcode view, where it's kind of like a split screen; on the left-hand side you have your code, on the right-hand side they have what they call Playgrounds cranked to 11th, where you can basically drag and drop things into a view of a phone, basically.
+The cool thing about it is if you ever used the old interface builder, when you drag and dropped things there, it would create a zip file or a nib, which is this clunky XML file behind the scenes that you'd have in your code. This doesn't work like that. When you drag and drop your widgets into the split-view of the Playgrounds, instead of it having an XML config that your code references, it's actually splatting code into your code as you're doing. You'll have to check the video to know exactly what I'm talking about there, but it seems like a really cool new tool, and this Swift UI seems like a really nice framework, especially for people just getting started... Again, maybe another reason to develop for Apple platforms.
+**Nick Nisi:** I'm really excited to look into it. I think I'm happy that I haven't looked into it before now, so I can just start fresh with this.
+**Jerod Santo:** We've got potentially a new coder over there, in the background?
+**Nick Nisi:** Yeah, my son came home from school, and he's not very happy.
+**Jerod Santo:** I think that's our queue to go right there.

To GraphQL or not to GraphQL？ with special guest Mat Ryer_transcript.txt ADDED Viewed

	@@ -0,0 +1,387 @@

+**Jerod Santo:** Alright, you are backstage with Jerod and -- who's that there, on this episode with me? It's only Mat Ryer...
+**Mat Ryer:** Oh, hello.
+**Jerod Santo:** Hi, Mat. Thanks for coming backstage.
+**Mat Ryer:** Oh, thanks for inviting me back here. It's cool, isn't it?
+**Jerod Santo:** It's very cool, yeah. Kind of comfy, there's a fireplace, there's chairs...
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, it smells a bit strange...
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, that's mostly me...
+**Mat Ryer:** \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, I wanted to get you backstage -- first of all, for those out there listening, maybe you've come to this episode because you are a Mat Ryer fan girl or fan boy, and you're wondering what is this Backstage thing... It's a show we like to do, kind of going behind the scenes of the Changelog, talking about the inner workings, stuff that we don't like to navel-gaze too much on our proper shows... And also just a chance to hang out, talk about John Wick trilogy, talk about Plex, what have you. And you can only get it on the Master feed. So if you are a fan of Go Time, or if you're a fan of the Changelog, or maybe you're a fan of JS Party or Practical AI, and you don't realize that we have a Master feed - well, Master is the place where you can get Backstage.
+So there is one feed to rule them all, it's called Changelog Master Feed (changelog.com/master), and it's the only way you can get these Backstages into your podcast apps. Now, of course, you can go to the website, listen right there on the web page, but if you want to subscribe to Backstage, subscribe to Master. We think you'll like most of our shows. If you like one of our shows, we hope you'll like the others.
+So that's Changelog Master... And I'm joined by Mat, as I just said, one of our Go Time panelists, and really the guy who so far on the newly refreshed Go Time is the one that makes me lol the most, as I'm listening to the episodes... Mat, you have a good sense of humor, and also that accent just makes lots of things you say just hilarious to me, and I'm just so happy to have you on Go Time, on the regular.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, thanks. I love doing it. The accent makes me sound a lot more sophisticated than I actually really am. If I speak to a British person, they know I'm not sophisticated; they can tell. But the rest of the world - yeah, I just sound intelligent and sophisticated, so... I'll take it.
+**Jerod Santo:** I know, it has to be nice. It's almost like a super-power. Maybe it's like the next level of privilege we just start talking about - the British accent privilege. Because you have like an advantage on all of us in life. At least those of us on the other side, right? Like you said, over there it doesn't help you at all. And maybe an American accent helps, or maybe it hurts... I don't know, depending on your thoughts on Americans. But the British accent over here - we definitely give extra credence to those words, for some reason. It's odd.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, I've seen that, I've witnessed it, but I just caution against it, because you shouldn't do that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, exactly. So the reason for this particular episode is because we've been talking a little bit, and I'd like to talk to you more to get your thoughts, about a Changelog API I had mentioned in the Gophers Slack months ago, as we were adding yet another ad-hoc endpoint for some one-off request to our platform, that I would like to have a proper API at some point... And I think you were at the time nudging me towards not solving a particular solution in the ad-hoc fashion in which I was solving it at the time... And I said "I consider doing a proper API. This is just kind of for now", and I wanted to use GraphQL, and you said "Hm, can I talk you out of that?", or I can't remember the exact words, but you definitely had opinions about that thought... And so I would love to talk to you more about that, and just kind of riff and ideate on what Changelog API might look like, on how I might build such a thing, why or why not to use specific strategies or schemas...
+\[04:06\] But first, Mat, I'd love to get to know you a little bit. You jokingly poke and prod at JavaScript quite a bit, but as you were telling me before we hit record, you don't hate the language; in fact, you've written a fair bit yourself, and you used to be a JavasSript developer... So maybe just tell me and the folks how you came to Go, and how you came to be on Go Time.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, as I said, I was a JavaScript developer... And I was a JavaScript developer because I learned quite early -- I've worked with some great designers and some great tech people in London, and I learned from them that actually the user experience turns out to be way more important than I had previously given it credit for. So working on that user experience and delivering something that users love to use - it's not just making it usable, or making it hard to abuse, and all these things; it's actually I like applications where people are excited to use it, whether because it just looks good, or it does things in a way that makes sense to them, or whatever. And of course, rich web experiences are all sort of powered by JavaScript, so... Yeah, for many years, that's what I did. And I love doing it.
+I used to love the fact that you could just do anything with JavaScript. You can change the prototype on a string and add methods to strings, and now all strings can have these extra methods, and things...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right.
+**Mat Ryer:** So I got very excited about all that. And Go is kind of the antithesis of that. They went completely the opposite way, for some quite good reasons, but it's an interesting dichotomy to see. The Go philosophy is you can't do things like that - you can't add methods to any built-in types, you can't overload operators... I know you can't do that in JavaScript either, I don't think... And they do that because then the code is easier to read, essentially. So if in JavaScript you've added your own special extensions or methods or whatever, if you've been playing around with different prototypes and changing things, it's possible to get some code which isn't familiar. You don't know what this is gonna do just by reading the code; you'd have to dig in and probably find out where that thing came from, where it was set up, and whatnot...
+In Go, they prioritize readability, so you can't do any of that magic stuff. And some people think that that makes the language quite boring, and in some ways it does... But it makes it extremely readable, so there's a lot of benefit that comes, really.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I would tend to agree. My experience with Go is that it's readable, and it's very straightforward, and I appreciated how quickly I could learn -- I didn't learn the entire API of the core language, but pretty darn close, on one project; one small API that I built in Go. And I like that. I liked where I could hold most of the language in my head at once. As a regular Go developer, maybe you have the entire thing in your head at all times, including some of the standard library, but it just has such a small surface area that I really appreciated that.
+One aspect of it that did kind of strike as not as readable as all the if err!= nil checks that seem to be sprinkled throughout the code... Maybe they just shake out as white noise over time, but it felt like it was more noise than signal because of that error checking. Is that just a thing that newbs think, and then over time you just get used to checking that often?
+**Mat Ryer:** \[08:11\] Well, it's definitely something that if you're not familiar with Go, it's definitely something you notice, that's for sure. And it does get a bit tedious for people, because they're used to languages like -- whether it's Java, or C\#, or even JavaScript you could say, where those exceptions are thrown; things are thrown if something goes wrong. Go doesn't do that. Instead, it's usually the second argument or the last argument returned. You can return multiple arguments from functions and methods in Go... So usually the last thing is an error type, which is just a value like a string or like an int, so you can then just check to see if that's nil. If the error is nil, you know that it succeeded, and you just kind of carry on.
+So it's very common to have these early checks of if err!= nil then do something. And people report that tedium, and that is something -- the Go team were actually trying to solve and address this "problem", because they hear about it again and again, and in the surveys this is always that ranks quite high, that people complain about.
+Two things I'll say on that. One, just because in previous or in other languages you have exceptions, and in Go you have to explicitly do it, it doesn't mean that things are that much different, really... Because if you're doing it properly, you have to handle exceptions as well, and it's easy to not. It's easy to just write your code, ignore any possible exceptions, and then if something does go wrong, it's just a crash of your program.
+In Go, since you're checking these values all the time, you actually think more about "What's gonna happen then if this particular thing fails?" And you might make the decision that "Yeah, okay, this is program-ending. That's the end of the world. There's no way we can carry on if this doesn't work..." But sometimes you think "Hm. Okay... If that thing failed, maybe I could retry it." Or maybe it's okay that it failed. Like if it was getting something from a cash, or something like that, then it's okay that that failed. You can carry on still kind of optimistically. But you get to think about it and make those decisions, which turns out to be very valuable.
+**Jerod Santo:** I can definitely see that. I know as a developer I tend to think along the happy path, first and foremost... And then maybe circle back. Or sometimes I don't circle back, because I'm moving on to "What could go wrong here?" or "What do I do if this doesn't work out so well?" And I know in the Erlang and Elixir communities they have kind of a "Fail early and fail often" -- I can't remember exactly what that maxim is, but it's similar here, where it's like "We should be thinking about these things right upfront." This is part of your system, how to deal with these scenarios.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, especially if you think about building services, and things... If you're using a network to access a service, then that can fail.
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure.
+**Mat Ryer:** Absolutely. In fact, you should assume it will fail. And that's kind of the point... It was interesting that you mentioned that you thought this was kind of hurting readability... And in a way, I know what you mean about it being noisy. But actually, as far as being expressive goes, it's literally telling you everything that's gonna happen. If this error doesn't equal nil, then either we'll just return the error - and that's the very common case, where your function returns an error too, so you're just sort of passing it up the stack, and then you may deal with it in one place in the main function, or something like that... That's perfectly acceptable, but you've kind of done that explicitly.
+\[12:08\] So if you look in other people's code and you go and jump down and you're looking at a method somewhere deep in the system, it's extremely clear what's gonna happen, because there's no magic. There are no hidden exceptions, you don't have to know that things are being caught elsewhere, and things like this... You're just returning an error type from this function. I think that helps readability, and it helps see just literally what's gonna happen if something does go wrong here.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's interesting. I think there's a balance to strike with readability in terms of verbosity. I agree with you that explicit when it comes to readability is better than implicit, because you can't read something that you can't read, right? If it's implied, if it's tucked under the covers, it's not readable by definition, because it's insinuated, so to speak. So explicit is better. And where it starts to -- I think it's a balance, because you can move overboard from explicit to verbose. Not that the if err!= nil is verbose, but over a certain level of repetition, you can either start to scan quickly over that verbosity and miss something, which reduces readability, or -- well, I guess that would be the only downside.
+But I agree that you are telling a story -- if you compare it to prose or storytelling, if you say the same thing over and over again, it tends to become diminished. So it is a balance. I think it's a fair trade. And with all programming languages, these things are trade-offs; there's not one true way. And I appreciate the different languages for the different trade-offs they make... I think that's just one that the Go team made, and it has its benefits. I think explicitly handling those things is a benefit, but I can definitely understand the people who submit to surveys and say "Hey, it'd be awesome if I could not do this every single time."
+**Mat Ryer:** Yes, and that was the try proposal - a way to make that simpler. But it was actually too magic, I think, and therefore it didn't get through the proposal phase. But you're right about that - being explicit is better, because there's so much already that's implicit in our code, that we can't help... So yeah, if the language itself helps us be a bit more explicit... But you're right, there is a trade-off, and sometimes it's probably just personal taste. If you just get really good at Java exceptions, and you've done them for years, and you love them, and you've been able to use them very effectively, and hopefully not using it to control flow too much (things like this), and followed good practices, then you probably would feel like this is too much when you come to Go, and I've definitely heard that, too.
+My experience was in the beginning it was kind of quite strange that I had to do this... And it was a little bit strange that I had to explicitly create every structure that I was gonna use. It was kind of a similar thing where it was odd in the beginning, and then once I got used to it and started to feel the benefits from it, it got easier, and now it stops being a problem. But yeah, it does come up occasionally.
+**Jerod Santo:** And most likely now that you're used to it, it's almost odd on the other side of the fence, right? Now, when you can just willy-nilly create an object out of thin air, like you could in JavaScript for example, and it was no guarantees about the keys, or values, or any of the content inside of that struct or that object - does that feel like cowboy coding to you, to a certain degree? ...just in comparison to the "explicitly define everything upfront" style.
+**Mat Ryer:** \[16:06\] Well, I definitely now program in a Go way in other languages... Because you don't have to have -- say you have an array of objects; in JavaScript, they could all be a different type, and have different fields, and things. So you can do that, but I probably wouldn't do it. And that is something that I learned from Go, the fact that Go would limit you there... And I saw the benefits of why those limits were good. It's clearer, it's simpler, and everything's the same. That has some cognitive benefits. So now when I do JavaScript -- I take some of the lessons from Go when I'm writing in other languages. That's quite nice...
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, that's an advertisement for just learning other languages, even if you're not going to switch ecosystems or languages... Because you actually pick up styles, and you can move interesting ideas or better ways of doing things even in the current way that you're doing. I know as I started to pick up Elixir, I started to write my Ruby code more in Elixir fashion over time. And even with a few of the things I learned in functional programming in JavaScript, which is very much optional to a degree... JavaScript is one of these strange languages that's kind of both functional programming AND object-oriented, depending on how you use it... But I started to write more functional style Ruby code. Still writing Ruby, just I got exposed to these new ideas over here, and I curate them over there, and I felt like my Ruby code got better as a result.
+**Mat Ryer:** It's funny, that's the same thing that happened to me with Rust, because Rust is kind of a pure functional programming language... And Go is kind of like JavaScript, as you described. You can be somewhat functional, you can write functional code in Go. You can certainly follow some of the patterns like pure functions - a function that will return a new object. It will never mutate anything passed into it... Or even if it's on a struct, it will never mutate the fields in that struct. They are pure functions, and you can write them in Go... So yeah, it does get you thinking like that, and you might decide "Yeah, this should be a pure function", and hopefully you're deciding that based on what the user is going to expect to happen... The user of whatever it is you're writing, whether it's an API, or package that's going to be open sourced, or something. But yeah, you get to use some of those benefits.
+I do recommend that people are playing around with other languages. It feels like it's too much work, I think, to a lot of people, especially if they're new to programming. It just feels like learning a whole other language, because to learn the first language is such a big task. It feels like subsequent languages would be as hard, and they're really not, because you have all those foundations that you got from the first language that apply in most cases... And if they're different, then that's usually where there's something interesting going on.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, I liken it to learning spoken languages, especially if they're along the same route origin. So if you learn Spanish -- like, if all you speak is English and you learn Spanish, that is a heavy lift; it's a lot of work, even though those two languages do have some common roots. But once you've learned Spanish, picking up Italian is quite a bit easier, because they have so many cognates, they have so many similarities. They're both based on Latin-Roman languages, and there's so many similarities that the second language is much easier than the first. And then you go and grab French or something, and you become a linguist all of a sudden, because you are able to learn those other languages -- you wonder how these folks can speak six languages... Well, it's because it does get easier. You become good at learning languages.
+\[20:09\] A similar thing happens, I think, with programming languages, especially when they're in the same kind of realm... But I think the real advantage, or the real benefit, is to go completely outside of your comfort zone. So if you learned Spanish, go learn Chinese, or something. Some completely different language. So if you know Go, find something so different than Go - Lisp, or something - and it'll really expand your mind. It'll be harder, but beneficial.
+**Mat Ryer:** Great. Great advice.
+**Jerod Santo:** So let's turn to you giving me some advice here. We have been talking about a Changelog API, and GraphQL is the new shiny... And I've never built a GraphQL anything. I've used GraphQL somewhat; I've played with it as a client... Really only doing queries, not even mutations, on for instance GitHub's API. I've built REST APIs, plenty... And my statement was "Hey, if we're gonna build an API for Changelog, why not make it a GraphQL API?" and it seemed like you had some caution against that, or just some thoughts on the differences, and the benefits and the drawbacks... So I'm just curious of your thoughts on APIs in general, and then on those two styles of APIs - the rise of GraphQL, and all that.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, well there was a recent Go Time episode we did with Francesc Campoy on graph databases. That may not be out yet, or is coming out soon... That's a very interesting one, and we kind of talk about this. And really, to me it comes down to the fact that graph data and graph databases are perfect if that fits the problem space that you're using it for.
+For example, relationships with people is kind of perfect for that. If you have other types of data that models in a natural way as a graph, or as a tree of data, if you can imagine that - there's different ways to think about it - then I think a graph database and a GraphQL interface and all that stuff really make sense.
+For me, the question is around having a GraphQL interface over a relational database or other type of data store, where the data either doesn't live in that kind of format or structure, or whether just storing it in that way wouldn't be very natural. That's really where the question comes from... Because I've used APIs which were essentially GraphQL -- and by the way, there's a lot I like about GraphQL. Especially if you're a front-end developer, you get to be really specific about the data you get back, so you can in theory ask for less, if you're not gonna use it... So that's nice, it feels nice, and at scale probably that matters. For most people, that probably won't matter, because the scales we're talking about are just much smaller...
+I've used APIs that are essentially GraphQL interfaces over relational databases, and it's too easy to abuse it if you ask for -- because it's very natural in GraphQL to ask for "I want these objects", and then I know that there's some relationship where these might be parents or children, so you might have groups, and there might be songs... Say that we've got some kind of music library. These songs are in genres, so we could actually get the genres and maybe get the top five songs from each of those genres. That's very easy to describe in GraphQL.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[24:16\] Right.
+**Mat Ryer:** But that might turn into something very expensive on the back-end.
+**Jerod Santo:** Gnarly. Something gnarly.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, and a bit unnatural... Versus - you might wanna denomarlize that data if you're gonna be using it often, that kind of query... And you don't have much opportunity to do those kinds of operations, where you're like "Okay, we're gonna specifically maintain this index, or this view of the data, because we knew that the homepage needs this, and it's there, ready to go." If it's just GraphQL, it's almost like -- not as bad as, but it's almost like exposing SQL to the JavaScript developer, where they can just ask for anything and do any joins they like, and it can be very expensive.
+**Jerod Santo:** Interesting.
+**Mat Ryer:** So it's that, where it doesn't quite fit the problem space.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, let me say that in our specific case it would be exactly that. It would be a GraphQL API on top of a Postgres database filled with tables, which are related to each other, with foreign keys... Very typical relational database schema. Now, we have podcasts -- you've been in our admin, so... I don't know, as a developer, I can start to decipher people's schemas as I use their admins at least... So you probably know some of the nouns and relationships in our system. We have podcasts, podcasts have hosts, podcasts have episodes, each episode has guests and hosts, as well as other data directly attached to it, like transcripts and whatnot... Very simple, relational thing.
+In fact, I even used... There are some tools out there - I can't remember the name of the one, that will just take your Postgres database and just turn it into a GraphQL API... And I toyed with one of those. PostGraphQL maybe it was called? I don't know. And it literally exposed everything; it was a GraphQL access to our entire database, at the time. And I was like "Well, I don't want that. I wanna at least be able to craft it a little bit, and expose what I want, and hide what I didn't want..." And you could do all that -- I don't wanna berate PostGraphQL; I think that was the name of the project. The author of that - his intention is that you define all of your access, and your public/private stuff for your GraphQL database inside of Postgres, really leveraging the features of Postgres... And we don't do that. We put a lot of our business logic in our application layer in Elixir. I didn't wanna duplicate efforts there, so I was like "Well, this isn't really for us." But there are other options in implementing it.
+**Mat Ryer:** That's an interesting one.
+**Jerod Santo:** That being said, it's exactly what you describe - it's a relational database, and it would have a GraphQL surface area.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah. There's another point here which I think is important. When we built Machine Box, one of the key things that we spent a lot of time on was actually the APIs. Machine Box, for anyone that doesn't know - it's machine learning technology inside a Docker container, and then it has an API which lets you do things like... We have Facebox, where you can teach it faces and ask it to recognize faces with images, and things like this. And the API talks in terms of faces, and talks in terms of images, and people. It has this language... And that's because it was handcrafted for that problem space. That's kind of the opposite of this approach of using tools to generate and just automatically expose things, like you talked about... It's a different approach.
+\[28:11\] It feels like you're gonna get a big saving by these automatic things, but whenever you go too far that way, you end up with an API that doesn't tell the story. It's just everything. And also leaks a lot of the internals, too. You're literally leaking your database structure... Which might be okay, because like you say, you've got hosts, you've got podcasts that have hosts, and there's episodes there, and I suppose the episodes have lots of hosts, one or more, and it also has guests...
+So yes, maybe the public model of your data matches, and that's okay, but sometimes that won't be the case. Sometimes there will be internals that you wanna either keep secret, just because they're messy, or maybe even give yourself the option of changing it later. And if you've just exposed this sort of raw GraphQL interface, your hands become tied. You can't change things around internally, because your API has already made promises.
+**Jerod Santo:** Don't we find many REST-style or Recess-oriented APIs also fall into that trap? I've used many REST APIs in my day, and it's like "Oh, here's their users table, here is their tweets table..." For example, it feels like many REST APIs do that same thing, which is basically "Here is our internal structure exposed for you to query."
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, yeah, absolutely. You're not protected from that just because you're using a REST API, or something. It's more about handcoding it, handcrafting it, and telling those stories, versus automatic tool that just expose data.
+But to be honest, again, it's just really what you care more about in that particular case. Because like you say, often you have a table of whatever, and there's some kind of relationship to another table, and that's what it's gonna look like in the API as well. So maybe in those cases it's okay.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, the cool thing about Backstage and being able to talk about use case is that we don't have to speak in abstracts. I can tell you exactly what our goals are. I do know what the goals would be for a Changelog API. I wouldn't just build one to check a checkbox. My goal would be to -- first of all, it'd be mostly read-only. We have very little user-generated content on Changelog.com. We have comments on episodes and on news items, we have submissions, so you can submit a news item, that we may or may not feature on the newsfeed... You can submit a request, to request an episode... That's basically it.
+Now, we do extend our admin to certain hosts and editors etc, but mostly the API would be a read-only API... And I guess the goal for that API would be to allow our listeners and those interested to consume our content in a programmatic way, and create their own tools, perhaps, for consumption, or do analysis... I know there's been interest in ingesting our transcripts for maybe some fun Machine Box style things...
+And so ultimately, I would want it to be -- the thing that's cool about just putting an API out there in a situation like ours, where we're not trying to monetize its use, in the regard of like transactionally, is that we really want it to be consumed in a way that is empowering to the end person, and very much in that old mash-up style of web 2.0, like "Hey, let's take this API, and that API, mash them together..." I don't know if you were around during those days, but I just loved how open all the APIs were. It's like "Hey, take our data and use it." That's very much the spirit of what we would be doing.
+\[32:17\] So my goal would be -- and that's why I was thinking GraphQL, because it feels like that would provide more flexibility for those front-end devs, or for those end people, to just kind of feel like they're creating... I wonder if it's more ergonomic for a front-ender or for an API developer than a REST API.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, it might be... And one of the things that you get - I'm not sure how easy this is to provide, but I know that every GraphQL API I've seen has it - is this discovery that you get, and the documentation that gets generated... And you get this kind of web-based IDE that lets you -- you can actually craft your queries in it, and it gives you autocomplete...
+**Jerod Santo:** Which is pretty slick, yeah.
+**Mat Ryer:** Very cool, yeah. So from a discovery point if view, that is probably very valuable in your case... Especially when you just wanna expose the data and see how people can be creative about that.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah.
+**Mat Ryer:** And I could imagine people building visualizations, and processing the transcripts... Even if not for machine learning training data, you could process the transcripts and detect sentiment, and things like this, for example. So you might be able to then have a filter that says "I'm only interested in positive podcasts..."
+**Jerod Santo:** Right, right.
+**Mat Ryer:** ...where a certain threshold is met. Things like that. And also, how about a for-adult filter; you'd be able to find podcasts automatically that were suitable for children.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, well all of our shows are suitable for children. Mat, come on...
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah... \[laughter\] You must edit out a lot when Mark Bates is on the show though...
+**Jerod Santo:** We do have a heavier edit on Mark's shows, for sure. Well, similarly, you could say "I only wanna listen to Go Time when Mat Ryer is on the pod." Or when you talk about sentiment analysis - and I'm sure you're much more of a machine learning expert than myself... All I know for machine learning I've learned on Practical AI, whereas you've built a successful company around these things... A sentiment analysis is interesting. It seems like it's very achievable in the positive/negative fact, but what about the more difficult things to extract? Where are we -- I'm thinking like with snark, for instance. Can sentiment analysis pick up sarcasm or snark? Because a lot of stuff that you say on Go Time I think would be triggered by a snark sentiment analysis tool. Is that something we can do these days, or is it still difficult? Because humans get that wrong all the time.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yes, yes... That is true.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Mat Ryer:** You know, it's all about the training data. This is something that was the big revelation when we were building Machine Box. We had in our head that the models would perform to a certain accuracy, and Facebox happens to be one of the most accurate face recognition technologies in the world, believe it or not. It still beats Google and Amazon and some of the others in some of our testing.
+But what we thought was that we would be continually working on these models to make the models better, and in some cases that is what we do, but what was a surprise for us was that actually improving the training data had a much bigger impact... So we didn't spend that much time on the models themselves, we spent a lot more time on training data.
+\[36:11\] So to answer your question about sarcasm and things like this - it really comes down to the quality and the amount of training data, and then it would be able to detect it.
+**Jerod Santo:** Gotcha.
+**Mat Ryer:** We built a fake news detector that worked surprisingly well. You take a news article - and I think we took the title and the body - and you run it through the model, and it could just say "Yeah, this looks like fake news." And fake news was just like this sort of obviously fake...
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh... Not that grey area, where it's fake to one person, but not to the other person... But the obvious "This is a spam, an outright lie."
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, exactly. Junk science was one category, and satire also... The Onion - it noticed that "Yeah, this is satire." And we don't really know how it knew these things, we just knew that in our tests it did well, because of the training data. So we throw loads of examples of Onion articles in, for example, and loads of BBC articles, and at that point we're making a decision that Onion is satire and BBC is real news... And we might choose another news outlet that we consider to not be brilliantly accurate news. There's some examples in the U.K. and the U.S. of that.
+So yeah, it's really our opinion that's encoded into this model, but it was able to look at a news article and tell you with quite a high level of accuracy whether you should ignore it or not. And Facebook were actually interested in -- obviously, Facebook has this problem, because stuff gets shared around the world extremely quickly, and there's so much of it; it's very hard for them to manually police that, and check that people aren't being misinformed... So there's hope for machine learning to do that, but of course, it's not perfect. We still have to decide what goes into which bucket in the training data.
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. That's fascinating. It reminds me - there's a Subreddit called "Not the Onion", and it's where people post news/headlines which are so far-fetched that you would think the Onion wrote the headline, but they're actually reality. Obviously, you have to read each one and decide whether it's true or not, but... It'd be interesting to try to trick a machine learning algorithm with - I'm sure you could - just with bad data, and it would be pretty much useless. So the data is really what it's all about.
+If you just put a bunch of Onion articles, and a bunch of Not the Onion articles into a model, it would probably have a hard time deciphering between the two, because they are hand-selected as being Onion-esque... Right?
+**Mat Ryer:** Yes. Well, you see, we don't know for sure, but we suspected that there were people that were using our model to make their fake news-writing better...
+**Jerod Santo:** Uuh...
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, that's another way to use the technology, to say "Okay, we're creating fake news. Does it pass this test? Can this model from Machine Box suss us out and figure out what we're doing?" And I suppose if it can't, then they might publish it with some confidence there.
+**Jerod Santo:** Wow.
+**Mat Ryer:** \[39:51\] Yeah... So we don't know for sure that that was happening, but we had a strong suspicion that that was being used for that reason... Which is very -- it's interesting, we're building machine learning technology, and it is so new... There is a lot to think about from the ethical side, and some cases came up where we were thinking about this, and whether it's something that we thought -- as we like to be ethical in the work that we do, there were some areas where it was quite difficult.
+One example was Facebox -- there was a conscious early decision for Facebox to not work on children's faces. There are some good use cases for automatic face detection for children, like if they're missing; if a young person has gone missing, and you could just process all the CCTV and find them, and save them, then it's great.
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure. \[unintelligible 00:40:51.20\] When somebody goes missing, that face goes out. Well, if you could already have that systematized, you could be searching before any humans would have to or be able to.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah. And even build systems that coordinates across cameras and tracks, notices the timestamps of where someone was spotted, and all this... That, of course, can be abused in lots of ways.
+**Jerod Santo:** Massively.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah. But not being able to detect children's faces - that was something that we decided early we just weren't gonna try and do that, for ethical reasons. And I think that's something that programmers should think about. If you're working on something, do you feel like the ethics are okay with it? And there are some examples - I have friends that work around town on various projects where that really is a big question for them. It's an interesting one.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, it is. So if you're out there, and if we've developed our Changelog API and you're gonna use machine learning against our transcripts to find every time Jerod says something dumb, don't do that. It's not ethical, you know? Ethics, come on.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, you don't need a machine learning for that, mate.
+**Jerod Santo:** No... \[laughs\]
+**Mat Ryer:** You just have to find the episodes you're on.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's the easy button.
+**Mat Ryer:** \[laughs\]
+**Jerod Santo:** So what's the state of Machine Box? Because you made this fun Go Time promo the other day, which I'll put in the show notes... We've memorialized it on YouTube, so it'll last forever. On Twitter things come and go, but on YouTube they last forever... This fun video... And on the tweet you said "I really do need to get a job." You are "funemployed", I believe is the term, so I'm assuming Machine Box has been sold, or...? Tell me that story, where are you at?
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, I call it "punemployed".
+**Jerod Santo:** Punemployed?
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, because it's a pun, isn't it?
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] It is.
+**Mat Ryer:** So yeah, we actually sold Machine Box.
+**Jerod Santo:** Who did you sell it to?
+**Mat Ryer:** We sold it to a company called Veritone, which is a California-based company. They're a big AI operating system kind of massive platform, running AI at series scale, and all these things. Machine Box was a small, little developer tool that we wanted to just put in the hands of developers, so that they could use machine learning in their own projects, and build classifiers, and solve other types of problems. But if you needed to deploy that at scale, or run it in any serious way, you kind of had to do that yourself. We just shipped Docker containers.
+A lot of our early customers had their own Kubernetes running, or other similar platforms that they were already maintaining, so it fit nicely into that. And then Veritone - they were an early customer and they said "Look, we have lots of demand for this kind of technology." And one of the things that Machine Box allows is, since it's a Docker container, you can run it anywhere. You can run it on-prem, you can run it in various clouds... You have this sort of flexibility which you don't get for the other machine learning APIs. You don't have that same flexibility for the other machine learning APIs... So it made sense to join together and provide that technology at that scale, for their customers.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[44:25\] Yeah. Well, congratulations. That's awesome.
+**Mat Ryer:** Thank you.
+**Jerod Santo:** Quite a rewarding experience. I mean, you've built something from scratch, and it has so much value that it's acquired... That's really neat.
+**Mat Ryer:** No, it was. It was a very interesting experience... And surprising, in some ways. I think for the whole of my career - and for a lot of people - the dream is you make a little startup, and then you sell it... And that's almost like the startup dream, really.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, for sure.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, and once you've done that, you then -- I mean, we stayed and worked for the company for a year... But once you've done it, it's kind of "Oh, okay..." I thought that was gonna be the thing that you do and then you're just happy forever.
+**Jerod Santo:** You're done, yeah. Mojito Island, as I call it.
+**Mat Ryer:** Right. Yeah. It's not that.
+**Jerod Santo:** It's not that?
+**Mat Ryer:** It's not that, no. That was the surprise. It's kind of somewhat underwhelming an experience, because if the thing that drives you is suddenly gone, you have to find something else to drive you, and that was a surprise that came out of the whole process. But I'm still obviously glad we did it...
+**Jerod Santo:** For sure.
+**Mat Ryer:** And the tech is in good hands, and it's really where it belongs, because it's now being used at scale to solve some really awesome problems.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, it's an interesting take. I was speaking with my kids the other day about success and achievement... And my son, Wes, his baseball team last summer - I was coaching them, and we won the 9U Summer Baseball League Tournament.
+**Mat Ryer:** Oh, congratulations.
+**Jerod Santo:** Thank you very much. I didn't get any hits... But it was fun. And of course, it was an exciting thing, and it was a lot of build-up, and there was stress, and pressure, and all the things that you feel as you go through a competition... And we went to through the championship game and we won, and we jumped up and down, and they threw Gatorade at me, or whatever... And then I asked him "How does it feel? You won" and he said "It doesn't feel as good as I thought it was gonna feel."
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah...
+**Jerod Santo:** And I said, "Oh, now you've learned one of the lessons of life - achievements, for some reason, there's less satisfaction in them once you achieve than you thought there was going to be..." It's hokey, but really, you look back and the thing you appreciate most was the season, the run-up to the championship, and all the work that you've put in, and the actual accomplishment is somewhat unsatisfying, and leaves you wanting more, which is the definition of unsatisfying.
+If you're satisfied, then you don't need any more. But it leaves you wanting more, and there's an emptiness there... And it kind of is surprising... But it's a shared experience; you're not alone in that. That's why a lot of people are serial entrepreneurs, because they have that success and then they think "I need to go get that feeling again. I have to get back to that point", and so they try again.
+**Mat Ryer:** You mean a serial entrepreneur like the guy who started Kellogg's?
+**Jerod Santo:** That's right. He had his lucky charms, and then he's like "I need to invent Cheerios."
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, that is so true. It's an interesting lesson. And it actually highlights the fact that working these 12-hours days that people do, and more, and all putting all this work into the projects - which I do still, because sometimes you just love something that you're doing, and that's what you want to do...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[48:15\] Yeah.
+**Mat Ryer:** But actually, making sure that you're happy and it's sustainable along the way is so important, and that's more important knowing that -- because I've been through that thing, where we had this success. So now I sort of realize, "Okay, there are different things that might matter more, and you should watch out for those along the way this time." So that's a lesson that I've definitely taken... Although I was still -- I mean, I was recently building a little blog for myself, and I was just obsessed with it... I get a bit obsessed, so I was just up early, working on it, forgetting to break to eat... These kinds of things starting to creep in, so I have to be very conscious about it and go and try and take deliberate breaks, go for walks, try and do some exercise... All these things, they are important, and they help sustain it.
+And the amazing thing, of course, which I've heard a lot of other people say, is you can't solve a lot of problems when you're not thinking about them... Whether it's while you're asleep, or just doing something else.
+**Jerod Santo:** Absolutely.
+**Mat Ryer:** And similarly, you can get inspired that way, too. In fact, you probably need to be out in the world, interacting with people, with different people, and probably the more diversity you can get, the better. The inspiration that can just find out in those situations, which you then can translate to something that you're working on, that you wouldn't have... They're so valuable. So that's another reason why people should turn the screens off and go outside, go and meet friends... They should do these things. It's good for your work.
+**Jerod Santo:** So what's next for you then?
+**Mat Ryer:** Well, David Hernandez, who is one of the co-founders of Machine Box - David Hernandez and I are very interested in project management and the way that teams work, and also we have strong opinions about how to run dev teams... And we think lots of people are doing this wrong. So we may build some tooling, and we may write about these sorts of things, and see if we can help teams be more sustainable and happier, but also more productive as well. There's a lot of bad practices around, which people don't know that they're bad practices. Often people are sort of running a bit on autopilot, it seems like.
+Tools like JIRA and Slack... I mean, Slack - the fact that you can just interrupt somebody in Slack is kind of insane, from an engineering point of view.
+**Jerod Santo:** Well, for sure.
+**Mat Ryer:** And especially features like that @here, where you can just -- in a channel you can just write @here and then send a message, and that will alert everyone who happens to be online and in that channel... Which can sometimes be -- I saw one the other day, 85 people were alerted because of this thing. Imagine that. Imagine walking int a room and there's 85 people, and you just go "Here!" and scream it, and everyone has to look at you... And then you say "Has anyone seen that document that I need?" People wouldn't tolerate it, but we tolerate it on Slack, for some reason. So that kind of thing...
+**Jerod Santo:** \[51:54\] Yeah... It's funny you say that, because while we talk, Adam is slacking me right now, and trying to distract me while I'm on this call with you, which is incredibly rude. And then also, reminds me of slack you're gonna bring up JIRA. Surely, Slack is not the only one to blame here, because -- I mean, the infamous Reply All on email has been going on for, I guess, decades now. I won't name names, but I've had some friends who work at large corporations and will talk about some email chains which would be going out to literally thousands and thousands of people, and be concerning like two or three of them... And it's just insane, the inefficiencies there.
+**Mat Ryer:** I think Gmail hides Reply All now, but you have to kind of dig into the menus to find it. So the default is it would just reply to the one person.
+**Jerod Santo:** That's good.
+**Mat Ryer:** So yeah, they're trying to sort of use the tooling to help you make better decisions, or just the default become the better, healthier decisions... And that's the sort of thing that we may build in our next project. We started to sort of prototype some things... We've come up with a name already, which is very important...
+**Jerod Santo:** That's the hardest part.
+**Mat Ryer:** It's the hardest part, but it's very fun, and when you get the right name for the project, it's just amazing.
+**Jerod Santo:** Are you ready to reveal it right now on Backstage?
+**Mat Ryer:** I might have to come back and do it.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Well, come onto a proper show if you're going to do a big reveal...
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, okay.
+**Jerod Santo:** Yeah, looking forward to that, looking forward to your writing, as well, and of course, looking forward to Go Time. Anything Go Time-related that you'd like to maybe wax poetic about? Maybe future episodes, things you're interested in doing with the show, or taking the show places, or anything along those regards? Because we haven't mentioned Go Time much, and really it's the linchpin for how you and I even get to hang out today.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, well Go Time is a lot of fun to do. Everyone that comes on the show, they always report after they had a really great time... So it's very fun. For anyone that hasn't heard it, you don't have to be into Go to listen to it. Often, we talk about things around the language anyway. Like I said, graph databases recently...
+And yeah, I think we want more live engagement, we want more people to listen live, and whether that's Twitter, or in the GoTimeFM channel in GopherSlack, where we're happy to be interrupted, because we're asking for it, so it's okay...
+Yeah, we want more of that, for sure, because it's so great when someone in the community just has a question about something that we're talking about, and otherwise we may not have thought of it. We get to discuss it, we get to answer it, sometimes we fight over it... You know, it's great.
+I wanna do an episode on the defer keyword in Go. I wanna do just an entire episode on defer, because --
+**Jerod Santo:** It keeps getting pushed off?
+**Mat Ryer:** \[laughs\] Yeah... We've already done it, actually. It's just gonna happen at the end of the series.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\] Beautiful.
+**Mat Ryer:** It should be the last one we do.
+**Jerod Santo:** It should be. It has to be.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah. And I thought it might be fun -- Go Time used to have people, popular projects... Free Software Friday used to have that. I do wanna do that again, so that we can talk about current projects, new projects and things that are around. And I also like the idea of doing a little quiz where we ask a question one day and get people to tweet in, and then the week later we can answer that question and ask the next one. We could get like a chain -- it's kind of a blockchain of quiz \[unintelligible 00:55:57.12\] It's not about blockchain, it's just a--
+**Jerod Santo:** It's an immutable quiz that is append-only.
+**Mat Ryer:** \[56:06\] Yeah, and you reference the previous one \[unintelligible 00:56:07.00\]
+**Jerod Santo:** Once you ask a question, you can't take it back. No take-backs.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah... \[laughter\] Yeah, we could do that.
+**Jerod Santo:** One thing we used to do with the original trio of Go Time, which was a hit, was our AMA episodes - the Ask-Me-Anythings. That would be another cool thing to bring, now that we have a larger and more diverse panel, and new faces, new voices, it'd be cool to maybe bring back once in a while an AMA where people can submit questions beforehand for whoever the panelists happen to be, and take those up. That'd be cool, too.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah.
+**Jerod Santo:** Those are always fun.
+**Mat Ryer:** We could always do that, every time even, at the end of the show. Or I suppose you do a dedicated show to it?
+**Jerod Santo:** We have, yeah. It could be a segment. But Go Time doesn't really do the segment thing as much as -- like, JS Party, we have three segments each show, and we mix and match. We have some recurring segments, sometimes we'll have a guest on, so they'll take two of the three segments... So we're a little bit more segmented. So we could work in an AMA as kind of like a third of an episode. Same thing with Free Software Friday, or we call them shout-outs. It's just like one third of an episode. But Go Time seems like - at least for now, and... Of course, the cool thing about podcasts is - hey, it's our show; we can change and experiment and do all those things. We're not stuck into a time slot. But if you segmented the show a little bit more, then it'd be easy to have an AMA segment, versus an entire episode.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yes. So here's why it doesn't get segmented then... It's because, for whatever reason - this is just a personal thing of mine - I like to improvise. When I do my talks at conferences - and for anyone that hasn't seen them, head over to YouTube, search "Mat Ryer", have a look. You can watch them... And I talk about things in Go, usually, and other things. But they're improvised, mostly, because there's too much pressure, I think, when you have that strict plan of what you're gonna say.
+And by the way, some people in the Go community that I know of - and I assume elsewhere - will have written out verbatim their talk. If you transcribe a Dave Cheney talk, it's beautifully written. It's like a blog post. That would be, I think, too much pressure for me... So my approach is have a general outline, but be so free within that that I actually can't go wrong. There's nothing to go wrong from. And the freedom that that brings really sort of just takes the pressure off.
+So if we got somebody on Go Time that was better at organizing and planning and all that, then I think we could have those segments, we could have those special little recurring -- you know, special features...
+**Jerod Santo:** Right. Well, let me just say, as a word of encouragement, I'm very much in the same boat as you. I like to improvise, I like to change things on the fly, or right before the fly... So far, JS Party's segments hasn't been too much of a challenge, because sometimes -- basically, you make a plan... With the Mike Tyson comment - you know, "Everybody has a gameplan until they're punched in the face." Once the show starts, you get punched in the face, and whatever happens, happens. And sometimes we throw a segment out, sometimes we reverse them in order, sometimes we go completely off the rails and just let the show be what it is... It's like a framework for an episode, but it's not like "Well, we have to do shout-outs, because it's segment three, and we said we were gonna do shout-outs for segment three."
+**Mat Ryer:** Right.
+**Jerod Santo:** So there's a lot of wiggle room in there, but it does require more forethought, and some teamwork. And of course, it's a team show, so you have a panel. If your panel is not as by the seat of their pants as you are, then that might rub some people the wrong way, and it may not work out. So yeah... Worth a try, worth mixing up a little bit, but yeah, I agree - if everybody... A lot of people prefer to have a plan and stick to the plan, so maybe that boxed you in a little bit.
+**Mat Ryer:** Right.
+**Jerod Santo:** Alright, Mat... Well, hey, thanks for coming backstage with me. Nice to get to know you a little bit more... I feel like I know you because I do listen to Go Time on the regular. I do not write a lick of Go, I haven't written any since that API project I did a couple years back, and yet I immensely enjoy the show... Not just because it's a Changelog show, but because like you said, there's lots of different topics, there's lots of things to learn, and for me there's just lots of just laughs and camaraderie in the Go community. So I really appreciate you, and I appreciate Go Time, and thanks for coming Backstage so we can get to know you a little better.
+**Mat Ryer:** Yeah, thanks for having me. I look forward to listening to more Changelog podcasts. Did that sound too inauthentic? \[laughter\]
+**Jerod Santo:** I hadn't judged it yet. I was trying to find the Stop button on my recording.
+**Mat Ryer:** Okay, well spoiler alert - it does. It's too inauthentic. Let me do it one more time.
+**Jerod Santo:** Okay, well we'll just leave this part in, and then everybody will know that you were concerned about it.
+**Mat Ryer:** That's what it's always like, mate, to be honest.
+**Jerod Santo:** \[laughs\]
+**Mat Ryer:** I always want bits that I've said taken out of the Go Time, and it never happens.
+**Jerod Santo:** Oh, I know. I've heard you make jokes about it. You're like "The editors don't edit anything out of this show."
+**Mat Ryer:** They edit out other people. Other people sound brilliant on it.