TopPodcast.com
Menu
  • Home
  • Top Charts
  • Top Networks
  • Top Apps
  • Top Independents
  • Top Podfluencers
  • Top Picks
    • Top Business Podcasts
    • Top True Crime Podcasts
    • Top Finance Podcasts
    • Top Comedy Podcasts
    • Top Music Podcasts
    • Top Womens Podcasts
    • Top Kids Podcasts
    • Top Sports Podcasts
    • Top News Podcasts
    • Top Tech Podcasts
    • Top Crypto Podcasts
    • Top Entrepreneurial Podcasts
    • Top Fantasy Sports Podcasts
    • Top Political Podcasts
    • Top Science Podcasts
    • Top Self Help Podcasts
    • Top Sports Betting Podcasts
    • Top Stocks Podcasts
  • Podcast News
  • About Us
  • Podcast Advertising
  • Contact
Not in our directory?
Add Show Here
Podcast Equipment
Center

toppodcastlogoOur TOPPODCAST Picks

  • Comedy
  • Crypto
  • Sports
  • News
  • Politics
  • True Crime
  • Business
  • Finance

Follow Us

toppodcastlogoStay Connected

    View Top 200 Chart
    Back to Rankings Page
    Technology

    Deep Future

    Implementing Science Fiction

    Advertise
    • Apple Podcasts
    • Google Play
    • Spotify

    Latest Episodes:
    Sex on Demand for Women — Saundra Pelletier Jul 06, 2021
    Show notes

    There’s this kind of pattern you can see sometimes, when you dig behind very successful projects, a lot of times there is some woman who is dead set on making it happen. And for a lot of them, she’s working behind the scenes and you don’t find out until you get real close, what’s really going on. But occasionally you meet these women who are badass leaders that are so dogged that they’re going to make something happen by force of will. And I’m always honored to get to meet them. Today we get to spend some time with Saundra Pelletier, the CEO of Evofem Biosciences. This is a super fascinating company that is dedicated to creating medical and healthcare products for women. You don’t find a lot of companies focused on that, which is sad because women are the ones who drive a lot of the healthcare decisions for their entire families. So I don’t understand why the market hasn’t picked up on that one. I think you’re going to love Saundra. She’s created a product at her company called Phexxi. It is the first and only FDA approved, non-hormonal contraceptive gel for women. They can use it anytime on demand whenever they want. This is the kind of product that is really important to change the balance of power and determining who ends up procreating and when. We want that control to be in the hands of everyone, but in the past, a lot of the responsibility has landed on women and, they’ve been given, in some sense, relatively crude tools to do it. Most women in America at least are using a hormonal contraceptive, which has a lot of additional health side effects. As Saundra will tell you, she developed late stage breast cancer. She survived through a double mastectomy but the doctors told her the only real reason that she probably had cancer, in the first this place was being on a hormonal birth control for 20 years. Lots of stories like that, that you probably know and have heard with your own friends and family. So I think this is a very important project. This type of advancement in a technology that changes what humans can do, when they can do it, who has the decision-making power is important. We have a lot of options here where I’m at, but when you look globally at what’s happening with contraception in other countries especially in the developing world, there’s a lot of social stigmas that affect what women can get away with when they’re trying to find contraceptive choices. Giving them some options is paramount, not just because I would like to see population managed in a more thoughtful fashion. And hopefully create a few less humans that we don’t have a plan for, but also to give them the ability to choose when the time is right, who the right partner is, what they want to do, and not have to subject themselves to the entire weight of society’s idea about what they should do with their lives. That’s important, I believe for humanity as a whole. And so I’m really excited about Phexxi getting some support. Evofem Biosciences is publicly listed. So I certainly don’t want to give anybody investment advice, but these are some folks who could really use some help. And if they can get enough support for this company, they’ll be able to take Phexxi around the world and that’s gonna make a big difference for a lot of people. I hope that you guys love this very soulful conversation I got to have with Saundra, and I’m thrilled to be sharing her with you. Pablos: What I’m really excited about here is that I think the things that matter in the world for humans to do is how we’re gonna evolve as a species. How we are going to keep going? How are we going to make it possible for more lives to exist? And but also for those lives to thrive in some sense, right? And when you look at what has worked so far in all of human history, it’s humans inventing a new technology, bringing it into the world, solving a problem at a bigger scale, and being able to advance the species. That’s really how we got where we are and we’re not done…we might be done. But we might also be able to effect our fate go forward. And so it is super exciting to me because, one of the biggest problems in the world in some sense is that we went from millions of people on this planet just a couple hundred years ago to billions of people in the last 200 years. 7 billion in 200 years. And we’re making a lot of extra people. It’s not totally clear that we need them all, but I’m not going to tell you which people are extra. I just think that it might be smart for the species as a whole to figure out if we want to course correct on that a little bit and maybe in the future make a few less. And maybe less but better people would be a goal. But anyway so I know Evofem is…I don’t know if you are fixated on contraception. Is that the only thing guys trying to do or want to do, or is that just the main thing where you started? Saundra: That’s the main thing where we started. I will say this to your comment. I just want to tell you this, that not only do I find your opening statement provocative but I actually believe that one of the biggest levers to poverty elimination, as we evolve is for women being able to choose when and if, and how often they have children. Access to contraception that they’ll use is a huge poverty eliminator. So yes, contraception is our beginning. But we also are in late stage phase three development for the prevention of chlamydia and the prevention of gonorrhea with the same product. Which by the way, the CDC has said they are on the rise for the sixth year in a row. And gonorrhea, it’s an epidemic because it’s antibiotic resistant. So we’re really leaning into innovation. And that’s why it’s so cool. We’ll pick this all apart, but just to get the audience up to speed, why don’t you describe the product you have Okay. So the company Evofem Biosciences, the whole platform is innovation for women. And that might sound like great words, but we are delivering. So there has not been innovation in the contraceptive category in two decades. So our product is called Phexxi, not just because it rhymes with sexy which is a nice attribute. So here’s it works: it is a gel that comes in a pre-filled applicator. And I know your audience is hearing us, but I’m going to show you. A prescription is a box of 12 pre-filled applicators, and you put it in right before sex or up to an hour before sex. Now women have used tampons. It’s scary to guys. It might be scary to guys, although I will tell you… But the guys will get to use it. Not only that but guys really love the fact that this is very lubricating. So if any woman has vaginal dryness or pain with intercourse. But here’s how you see. So 5 mLs in each applicator. Is that the whole dose? That’s the whole dose. Okay. So what I’m seeing is like a size of three or four jelly beans worth of gel. Yep. And you can feel it. And it just feels like Vaseline or something. Yeah. And the gel is just so you know, it’s lactic acid, it’s citric acid and potassium bitartrate. And here’s how it works. So a normal vaginal pH is 3.5 to 4.5. When semen enters the pH goes to seven or eight, and a woman gets pregnant. When chlamydia enters and when gonorrhea enters, the pH goes up to seven or eight and a woman gets a sexually transmitted infection. So what Phexxi does is it is acid buffering. So it helps the vagina just maintain normal vaginal pH inhospitable to semen and inhospitable to STIs. It keeps it low. Correct, so there you have Phexxi. So just like men who have had condoms forever. So for example, you could go out with a condom in your pocket and can have safe sex, but women have had to use a hormone every day, every week, every month, year after year. And the side effects… Doesn’t it seem like a lottery winner for the few women who take the pill and don’t have a problem? Yeah. Without question. Want to hear something crazier? I say the worst trick played on women is that most hormones lower your libido. So they’re taking a drug every day that makes them not want to have sex. And they’re having side effects of headache and weight gain and bleeding. And the one crazy part is that I talked to a lot of young women and they say to me, they were put on an antidepressant or put on an anti-anxiety product. And then when someone really looked at their levels, they realized it was their hormonal birth control. And once they got off of this hormonal birth control, they felt normal again. Yeah, I’ve experienced that multiple times as a close observer. And by the way, women don’t have sex every day, which you may, or may not have experienced. But like seriously for example, would you take something everyday if you were having side effects that you didn’t even need to save your life. Well, men don’t have to do that, but I get your point. Okay cool. If I’m using this, can I also use lube? Yes. You can use lube. You don’t have to use a condom. Like any contraceptive it says it can’t protect you against HIV. But the wonderful thing about this product, are you ready for this? So in the United States, half of all pregnancies are unplanned. So I want you to imagine that the pill was introduced, even now. There’s 18 categories of contraception. They pill came out in 1960 and still all pregnancies are unplanned because 23 million women identify as saying, we are not going to use a hormone. We’ve tried pills, patches, IUDs . We are beyond hormones and they say stuff like, look, I don’t have hormones in my milk. I don’t have it in my meat. And I joke and say if chickens can be hormone free…come on! Why do women have to put up with hormones? So these women are saying like, I do yoga and Pilates and eat healthy and I care about my longevity. Why am I going to take a synthetic hormone? It doesn’t make sense. But 23 million women is our target audience and those women are without question very engaged. They are ready to go. Yeah. A of times these technologies, we take them for granted because it’s what we’re used to now, but that’s just the best technology we had at the time. Fucking with your hormone cycle was the best technology we had at the time. Now we can do better. This is an example of being able to do better. And it seems remarkably straightforward. I’m looking the box it has the ingredients listed. And by the way, I joke that like I could make this in my garage. I don’t, but it was originally developed by Rush University in Chicago. And when they developed it as a vehicle looking to do HIV prevention studies. So at the time in the early 2000s, there were a whole bunch of academic institutions who said, we need to find something for HIV prevention. But those studies are very challenging, like in South Africa with vulnerable populations. And so the majority of those failed. So what Rush University knew this product is considered to be something called an MPT, multipurpose prevention technology, which means has the capability to continue to look at areas. So contraception, sexually transmitted infection, bacterial vaginosis. So they knew getting to market as a contraceptive would be the quickest way to get it approved by the FDA. Okay. So we’re going to play all the legal disclaimers for this, but we’ve got this thing approved already as a contraceptive and it’s on the market. If you want to buy it, you can get it at a pharmacy or where? Yes, you can go to https://phexxi.com/. We have a concierge, or you can go to your doctor, and they can give you a prescription, but if you go to our website, you can it mailed to you within 24 hours. Okay, cool. And then the way it works is you install it using a tampon. Yeah. And throw away the applicator. Load it up and throw it away. Yep. You’re good to go to have sex and get started within an hour. Correct. Yes, as long as you put it in right before or within an hour. What if you’re an all night operational? Well, you got to use it again. Good for you by the way! Okay. And then you’re currently working going back and doing trials for some other benefits that it already provides, but aren’t already approved and aren’t already proven and phase three trials, whatever. So that’s the work now? That’s correct. And then what hope to show with those is? The prevention of chlamydia and the prevention of gonorrhea. And just to give you an indicator of how pervasive those are: in the U S there’s 1.8 million cases of chlamydia annually, and 600,000 of gonorrhea. And for the sixth year in a row, the CDC has said both of those are on the rise, is antibiotic resistant and literally there are no products approved for the prevention of either of these. And look, I want to tell you why some people say to me, why the hell, hasn’t a bigger company with a lot more money done this? And I say, look, number one, it’s easier for them to just come out with a lower dose of hormones. So they’ve got something and they come out with new ways of giving you hormones. And by the way all it is that women aren’t stupid. Come on. They understand that it’s still a hormone. Just because it’s in a patch, doesn’t mean it’s not a hormone. Just because it’s in an IUD, doesn’t mean it’s not a hormone. So they come up with lower doses because it’s cheaper and quicker. But we have really taken the heart painful work of developing this new innovation. But the good thing is that the year, the FDA has given us a fast track review for chlamydia and gonorrhea. So we’ll have a six month review instead of a month review. So we’re excited about that. I have to be honest right now we are getting so much positive response from women on this product and that is phenomenal. So let me ask a couple questions. If you get through all those trials, then the same product will be approved and could even be prescribed in some sense. Yes. If maybe if you don’t care about like I got fixed, but I am excited because I still get to use this product Yes. And women who cannot get pregnant, they can still use it to prevent chlamydia gonorrhea. Yeah. Or will be able to. And I think one of the things you mentioned that I think is important to point out is a barometer for whether something is worth developing, whether it’s a good idea or whether it’s gonna work or whether it’s any of those things is not whether or not existing medical technology companies who got around to working on it. That is not a good metric because, I think one of the things you alluded to earlier is the market, that they go after 23 million women in their minds probably isn’t enough. And maybe partly because it’s only 23 million and partly because it’s women. And so we’ve got to find a way to change those dynamics and show that this is a viable market. We’ve gotta be able to show that we can make products that are profitable in that market. And that seems like the more pioneering thing that you’re doing as a company. I have to tell you, I love you for saying that. Because you gotta think about it this way, right? When you really evaluate, women are really the healthcare consumers for themselves, or their husbands, for their children, for their parents. When they get older. If you can get the right positive lever in a woman’s mind as a company, right? A woman trusts you and thinks you really care about innovation: 1) They are the consumers and 2) to your point, they’re half of the population, but 3) so little innovation is introduced to women. I have gotten a lot of investors will say to me, if it’s not immuno-oncology, diabetes is man and women, heart disease is man and women. This is just and women and we don’t know if we’re interested. And I say, listen, I want to remind you’re here because of a woman. And at the end of the day, when a woman’s quality of life is better because she feels better. She doesn’t feel a little crazy because she has a synthetic hormone in her body and when she doesn’t feel that she’s suffering every day. You know that whole adage, when mama’s happy, everybody’s happy? This product is so important because women now are more empowered than ever. And they’re sayi…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Diving Deep into the World of Computer Hacking & Becoming a Hacker — Riley Eller Mar 24, 2021
    Show notes

    One of the things I get asked the most about is questions about how to be a hacker and how to learn hacking skills. And I think there’s a few people I know who really epitomized what that’s all about, and we’ve had pretty deep journeys and in their lives and their careers about about computer hacking. We talk a lot about the mindset of hackers, which is one of the things I’m super interested in and attracted to. I find to be very helpful way of thinking about things. But you know, when we’re talking about the technicalities of computer hacking, what that means, it really appeals to a certain kind of person and I think a lot of people just don’t know where to start. And so I wanted to share one of the folks that I find inspiring and who I’ve known for a long time. I think his life and his career sort of epitomizes what a lot of folks are thinking about when they’re asking about computer hacking. And so his name’s Riley Eller and Riley’s sort of a famous in the hacker community because he used to run the most popular party for hackers called Caesar’s challenge. And we’d have this party once a year at DEF CON and only the league got in. Riley has done a great job over the years of figuring out how to get hackers partying, and get us all connecting to each other and making friends with each other. I think that’s a really important and valuable thing for a community of folks who maybe having focused on social skills so much previously. And so Riley’s also known for being a member of the ghetto hackers, which was the first team of hackers to win the DEF CON Capture the Flag contest three years in a row. Then they took it over and ran that contest for a few years and really up the game. This was the notorious, you know hacking contest, cause it was the first big hacking contest. It was the place where that got started. And now of course you have hacking contests all over the world, but capture the flag at Def CON is where it started. The ghetto hackers were one of the first real teams to take that on and they advanced the game and really turned it into a spectator sport at DEF CON. And it’s, it’s gone on and evolved since then. We talk about that a bit in this conversation. We go deep into a little bit deep into talking about a wifi mesh networking at a company called CoCo Communications where Riley worked another one of our upcoming guests on the podcast, Jeremy Bruestle who was the founder of that company. You can listen to that to learn a little more about CoCo, but a lot of those inventions and those technologies are just coming of age now. And so I think it’s actually pretty relevant and interesting because mesh networking is one of these things that keeps coming up again and again, and the problems are hard and interesting. So that’s a cool conversation. And then later on, we talk about Caesar’s experience as a hacker growing up, how he got into it, what he’s learned, what he values about it as well as his ideas for how you can become a hacker. I am really excited to share Riley with you guys. He’s made a big impression on me and my life, so I hope you enjoy it. Pablos: This has been one of the conversations I’ve had in my mind as being important for the podcast and what I want to do. I’ve known you for more than twenty years. We have similar progression or timelines in our lives of getting interested in computers, hacking, and ending up in the social dynamic of the hacker community in those days. There’s a lot to learn from that. What I want to do with you is talk about some of those experiences early on and how we got into it. First, let’s talk a little bit about what you’ve been working on professionally because you spent a lot of time on the last company you were at. It was a company started by Jeremy, who was one of the founders, so it was started by hackers. I remember talking to him before he started the company about the ideas for trying to create mesh networks that were ad hoc mesh networks. That was, in those days, one of the hard problems with networking to solve. I’d seen lots of trial and error and lots of difficult problems in that. Jeremy was amazing because he was able to get further than anybody, as far as I could tell, technically. I was always interested in that company, and you and a bunch of other friends end up working there, so can you tell me a little bit about what the progression of that was like? Riley: Originally, we were doing a Business 2.0 article. Jeremy was explaining on the whiteboard in the Ghetto Hacker workspace how that all worked and I was trying to repeat it back to him to see if I understood his ideas, because it was difficult to grasp with what I knew at the time. There’s a photo of him and I talking over that particular moment right before the company was taking off. It was a pivotal moment in my life. Maybe the first thing to do is describe what the point of that was at that moment because this must have been about 2005, 2006 or something. No. The company was started in 2002 and I joined in 2003. They had about a year to go around, raise funding, talk about it and get their hands around what the problem was that they were trying to solve. What happened was a whole bunch of families who are proud of the country in Seattle, people with some money to invest, saw the communication failure on 911 as a critical infrastructure defense problem that could be solved commercially. It should be available so people who are busy doing things, running toward emergencies and disasters, will know that they’re not going to get cut off from the lifeline and the lifeline for those people is always information. Having that access to information or failing to have that access to information was responsible for about 10% of the deaths that day. It’s not solving all of the world’s problems they thought, but it was something that they could focus on, it was narrow. This was about a year after the dot-com crash, so they’d all been gotten used to investing in technology. They saw this problem and they decided to try to get somebody smart and they knew Mark Tucker, who was the CEO. Mark and Jeremy had worked together on a project before, so they brought Jeremy in and he took some initial ideas out of IEEE and what was available at the time and said, “We’re going to build the stack of these existing technologies.” He went around and talked to people who were in the upper echelons of communications, telecommunications, first responder communications, and military comms. He found that there was huge resistance on cost because centralized networks are much cheaper to operate than networks where all the smarts have to be in every device. The more decentralized a network, the more expensive it is, period, because like a smartphone, the phone part of it is low power, tiny little chip. Most of what we call phone now is a lot of other stuff. Adding anything, even communication technology that is constantly running, trying to help other people on demand, all those things that the first responder would need if the central communications went down, each of them is a real challenge. Jeremy kept pushing on invention after the invention and built a four-tier stack of pieces that would be needed. At the bottom layer, you need to be able to defend against denial of service attacks because that’s an easy way to knock down a network like this. It’s to send crappy messages, so we had to have link security and link identity but we needed to provide application communication concerns like police and firefighters have common missions. You may have police and firefighters on the same scene at the same time but they have distinct missions. You can’t get the communications crossed up. A firefighter can’t misunderstand that shoot comes from a police officer or firefighter. They need to know what their lingo is and their jargon is. They need to use their words their way and not have to double-check who’s talking. We needed to have a separation of communications as well, even though we had to have a common trust model, being able to join a lot of groups of people who have different interests in missions. Journalists, possibly even those who may need to talk to each other or send pictures back and forth to their cameras and so forth. All of these problems turned out to be tractable but complicated. It’s building up to pieces one at a time and working out how we can make a network that doesn’t have a central registrar. In the end, we found that we couldn’t create trust without some centrality. We had to have some trusted arbitrators of identity, but once you had an identity service, then the rest of it could be done purely decentralized. We saw in the 802.11p or 802.11r, whichever one is the automotive spec they ended up rebuilding almost the same technology stack. They came around and they’re like, “These vehicles are going too fast. We need them to be able to talk to each other. They don’t know each other. A Ford doesn’t know to trust a Toyota.” All these same problems came back out so the model proved to be correct and effective. The way we implemented it, and our desire to make the network scale to essentially infinite size, make it scale-free. That ended up being too costly for the amount of network resources available at the time, especially if you think about high-speed devices like airplanes or cars relative to bicycles and humans. Having that slow stability is great, but having those high-speed movers can shuffle the topology of the network quickly if you do any automated algorithms or if you consider those to be all part of the same network. There are good reasons that the military divides the universe up into upper air tier, middle air tier, lower air tier, ground tier, sea tier, undersea tier and cyber tier. These are all different dimensions and each one of them has a completely distinct communication technology. That was an opportunity for improvement and we didn’t see that. A lot of our designs were homogeneous. It’s a little over-engineered. That took us a long time to recover from. In those days, if we’re talking about 2002, 2003, 2004 or 2005, basically, we’re at a point in the world where the internet has completely taken over. TCP/IP 1, people, especially at that time, thought of it as this is a decentralized protocol, in a sense compared to centralized networks that came before us. The telephone network is a hub and spoke design where you have a switchboard in the middle and anytime you want to talk to anybody else, you go through the switchboard in the middle. TCP/IP, all you’ve got to do is find anybody else on the network and you can connect through them. We think of it as decentralized but in fact, for it to work the way you described, there’s a bunch of quasi centralized services like name service, issuing IP addresses and that stuff that has to be managed too. You have to have an identity database. You have to log into all these services. We have a whole bunch of different identity services but those are all essentially centralizing services. Even the IP address assignment is a central function. I remember we were first playing with Wi-Fi probably by ‘98, or something. It was for extreme nerds and nothing had Wi-Fi in it, so you had to plug a Wi-Fi card the size of an iPhone into your laptop to get on Wi-Fi. By 2001 and 2002, it’s getting normal. The first laptops with Wi-Fi were probably the iBook, Apple’s Titanium PowerBook, or something. It was one of those that had Wi-Fi build in. We were using PalmPilot or Pocket PCs, which were a phone board and PC board jam together with a serial port and stacked with it with a screen. The HP iPAQ and the Compaq iPAQ were the things because it had Wi-Fi and that Wi-Fi in the old days had to have ad hoc mode. Lately, that’s not supported on most radios. A lot of the companies wanted to put this communication technology into an employee problem rather than a job problem.Tweet They don’t even support ad hoc mode anymore. Ad hoc mode, I thought, were some descendant of it. It is basically what’s used when you do personal hotspot on your iPhone. It’s a descendant and it has a parent and a child relationship even then. The point being is all these networks that we use have that hierarchical relationship where, in Bluetooth, you pair to your other devices. There were occasional cases like airdrop as an example of an ad hoc thing where you could find devices on a network that you didn’t even know about before and talk to them for a little bit. I remember those days. As computer nerds, we were all fantasizing about how to build the next generation of the wireless network to be an ad hoc wireless, we call it a mesh network, meaning there was no centralized authority in the network. What we imagined was you would be able to go anywhere, devices and all find the other devices around them. As long as one of those things was on the internet, everybody could route through them. It ended up being intractable because largely, the overhead of managing routing tables and those things. What I saw with the company that was called CoCo at the time, what Jeremy had come up with was a more practical way to solve that routing problem. Did it not end up being a big deal? It did but what it ended up doing at the scales we wanted to achieve was creating a lot of ongoing or zombie connections. It wasn’t even the routing that was complicated. It was keeping all the devices leashed together. The big problem for multi-party or multi-security domain mesh networks is that we give them to the police and the firemen. We want to keep the comms separate. The big problem is to track a firefighter who has moved through and past the end of the police area. We have to hop that firefighter’s connections through those policemen and back to where the other firefighters are. That is such a core conceptual model that your workgroup stays together as long as you exist and you’re connected to the mesh. You have this constant application layer concept of group communication or a group connection. When you have that, then it’s cool because you can have an IP subnet in your mind or your machine. You can represent a group of any nature that you’re a part of in the whole world with an IP range and use all your standard TCP/IP applications. The problem was to keep that real, then there needs to be a path for people in, for instance, that big group of firefighters that have one of their own orphaned out and at the end of the police network. They need to have a live connection in tracking where other firefighters are moving, so when messages come for them, there’s a path selected.It is a routing problem but it’s an online routing problem and it turns out that, even though nobody cares, except for your people and that was our goal. It was to make it lightweight for everyone else. Everyone still has to pass along updates about destination locations as you move. It’s got this whole mobility problem and nowhere to send the mobility information so it can be permanently routed in a central place. Mobile IP doesn’t have this problem, because mobile IP does not allow two mobile devices to talk to each other ad hoc. It’s not mobile. It’s both of them. Each of them has a static IP somewhere and they proxy through that. Only that one device needs to know about their location updates and everyone else can forget it. In a truly purely ad hoc mesh, you can’t do that. There’s a connection overhead, a connection load. Where did you guys land? I know that you build various iterations of this product to try and help emergency services and in those situations, what did you end up with? We ended up with the first high res audio USB audio digitizer that was pluggable for firefighters or emergency response radios. We went down to Katrina as soon as Hurricane Katrina happened in the aftermath. We went down and we hooked up a lot of the radios to each other and created multi-discipline talk groups to help them out. That…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Into the World of Genomics & Entrepreneurship — Adina Mangubat  Mar 17, 2021
    Show notes

    Today we get to hang out with Adina Mangubat, a friend of mine that I know from a salsa dancing, and also hanging out with computer hackers. She’s probably the youngest founder that I know. And she’s been running her company for almost a decade since starting it in college at age 22 called Spiral Genetics. It could be considered probably the most advanced bioinformatics technology for population genomics. And what that means is DNA sequencing, massive populations, hundreds of thousands of people, if you can, and then correlating that data to see what can be learned about it. And it’s a huge frontier there’s so much that can be learned from doing this kind of work. And Adina is really at the forefront of that. And so it’s a really fascinating conversation where she breaks down all that stuff: What it means, what DNA sequencing is about, the potential for bioinformatics, the potential for population genomics etc. So, this is the perfect episode for you. If you don’t know anything about it, because I’m asking Adina, a lots of dumb questions, you’re going to love it. She’s also a super entrepreneurial and hustler which is very inspiring. Adina has built this company. She actually sold it to a large biotech company and then spun it back out on. And so she’s been through a lot as an entrepreneur and we’d talk about that a bunch. And the other thing about Adina that’s super interesting to me is that she’s really committed to figuring out how you can create these transparent, high integrity, mission driven cultures in startups and small companies, and that’s pioneering work. It is really important and difficult work. It’s unproven. We don’t know if it’s even going to work, but it’s so necessary to figure out how we make better companies. Some people have to be the ones to try that. And so we talk about that and I think there’s a lot to learn at the end of this episode. Adina and I talk a little bit about adoption and parenting and I am kind of deep into that, having adopted a child and raised her to age 14, so far seemingly successfully. Adina is kind of early in that cycle. And so if you’re interested in that sort of thing at the end, there’s a conversation about that. I hope you guys liked this episode and get a lot out of it. Pablos: You seem to be possibly the youngest Founder/CEO that I know. I know other people who are young. You might not be the youngest now, but when you started, you were the youngest. Adina: 22? I know some people that are younger. It’s not common. I know people who started younger but they did not succeed at keeping it going for very long. You started at 22 and you’re still at it, which means you’re tenacious. Maybe also stupid or crazy or all three. I’m curious about that. First, I want to know how that happened for you. I don’t know if the track you’re on now is what you had planned. When you were a child, were your parents trying to convince you to be an entrepreneur? No, definitely not. My family had planned on helping me out with grad school if I wanted to do that. I was like, “I don’t want to do that. I want to start this company instead.” My dad wrote me a tiny check and he slid it across the table. He’s like, “This is going to be the hardest and most educational year of your life.” I was like, “Really?” He was like, “Yes.” My mom was supportive but worried. She would call me every couple of weeks and be like, “How’s it going? Are you thinking about applying for a normal job?” After a while, she figured out this was clearly not a phase and that I was going to be okay. I gathered later that the reason why she kept on asking is because she had started a company when she was young. She ran up a CPR business, a training business, and trained a bunch of the Secret Service. Back then, she had connections and you could roll up to the White House at midnight and be like, “Can I get a tour?” They would be like, “Yes.” She’d had to go through the entire process of starting a company back then. She knew that it was going to be hard. Were they right? Yes, it’s hard. Do you think that you believe them or you didn’t believe them? I didn’t. The blessing and the curse of being a newbie is that you’re so naive that you don’t know what you don’t know. If I knew everything that I know now if I were given the option of starting this particular company, I don’t know. I wonder about if I move on to another company someday… If you’d have the guts to take it on? It’s a big one. I’m clear that I have a reasonable business acumen. There are a lot of other companies that I could start that would be easy by comparison like stuff that is not this complicated. I have fantasies about easy companies. The reality is that I get bored after running a festival earrings company or something like that. That’s an idea that has been sitting around for a long time. One of the things that’s missing in our vernacular is a way of describing the difference between entrepreneurship and tech entrepreneurship because you could start a Taco Wagon or a festival earrings company or something that will be entrepreneurship but it’s something that’s been done before. There might even be more fine-grain definitions because I think that we have something to describe that there are “lifestyle businesses,” which is the Taco Wagon or the festival earrings company or whatever where the intention is to build a company that is going to feed your lifestyle and be fun generally. There’s then tech entrepreneurship, and it’s tech entrepreneurship of stuff that is hard but not bonkers hard. If you want to make enterprise software or a Fitbit device but for your animals or your pets, things like that. Things where you’re basically you’re taking off the shelf technology and you’re retooling it to a particular vertical or something. You’re doing some innovation but it’s not hard and never ever been seen before innovation. I call the hard stuff deep tech now. All that other stuff, I call it shallow tech. If it’s iPhone apps or enterprise software or modified Fitbit’s, shallow tech. I don’t know if that’s going to stick but that’s how I’m thinking about it. It’s unlikely because a lot of people feel like, “My tech isn’t shallow.” It’s revolutionary and it’s sprinkled with blockchain. You went to college and you finished college. It’s nothing related to this. I got my degree in Psychology with a focus on Bio Psych. Do you feel like you know about the brains of people? I do. At the time people were like, “What on earth are you going to do with that?” It turns out that a lot of things in life have a lot to do with humans that have brains. Understanding how humans work and how they tick and all of that stuff is ridiculously useful. That’s why I like computers. I just reboot them if things go wrong. They mystify me. You finished college for your parents. Was that here? Yes, at UDub. The plan was like, “I’ve got to find something to do and I don’t want a job.” How did you end up deciding to start a company? I’d been involved in two companies while I was in college as an intern. One was a smart grid company that was looking at like, “How can you optimize the usage of energy that come from green sources like wind energy.” Essentially, it was how can we use big buildings as batteries? If you know that the wind energy is spiking at a particular moment, you can overheat or over-cool your building a little bit. If it’s a large enough building so you can use that. Did it seem it would work? It seemed it would work. They had a good run but didn’t end up making it in the end. It turns out that the tech for building control is ancient and terrible. When you’re trying to integrate with that, that’s more complicated and there were a variety of reasons. I was involved in that company. I did a bunch of marketing related stuff for them, initial business strategy sales. How big was the company at the time? Seven people, maybe. The curse of being a newbie is that you're so naive that you don't know what you don't know.Share on X That’s cool though, as an internship, especially because you get to see pretty much every part of the company. If you go be an intern at Microsoft, you get to see one dime and you don’t get to see the whole operation. You learn about management, what works, what doesn’t work and all of those pieces. I was involved in that company and before that, my first job was an internship with a company that did home automation. Turning your lights on and off with a control panel. This is before cell phones. They were in direct competition with Control4. They did pretty well up until the housing crash. Nobody was looking to outfit their homes with cool smart techs. I had a lot of friends because lots of my friends are nerds, especially when one of them leaves the company or sells their company or ends up with some free time, they dive into home automation and they try and install everything and they tell you all about it. It’s all amazing. They’re spending full-time integrating their home automation stuff. A year later, I’ll ask them about it. They’ll be like, “I had to tear all that shit out.” You’re going to be a sysadmin for yourself for your home light switches. At some point you’re like, “I’m going to open the blinds by myself like an adult and it will be fine.” Another very interesting experience, they were larger, probably 30-something people. I learned a lot about what worked and what didn’t work. Back then, I was doing video creation for them, teaching people how to use the product and stuff like that. I took it to see the whole operation and have direct contact with all of the “upper-level management.” I was involved in those. After that, it seemed like, “It’s easy to start a company. I’ll do that.” No. It was cockier than that. It was like, “These guys are doing it wrong.” I had a whole thing about how people were managed. Especially as a psych person, I was like, “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Some of these people aren’t fulfilled.” I feel I could do that better. It turns out that that’s hard and complicated and they were doing it for the best that they could. There are definitely best practices but that stuff’s hard. That was part of it. I took an entrepreneurship course at the UDub Bothell because UDub Seattle wouldn’t let me into the normal course because you need prerequisites like accounting and stuff like that. I wasn’t going to do accounting for taking one class. Do you wish you had now? No. Accounting’s not that complicated. If you need deep accounting, you can call somebody that loves that, which I don’t. Somebody else can do that. That’s cool. I need to know how much money do I need in order to get to X and make sure I don’t run out of it before then. I commuted 40 minutes each way 2 to 3 times a week to take this class. Bothell is a very interesting campus because it’s got a lot more diversity in terms of its student population. One of the people that was up there, her name is Becky Drees and she was a non-matriculated student, Molecular Biologist, PhD at Berkeley. She had been the industry for years and ran one of the labs at UDub. On the first day, the way the entrepreneurship course works is you get up there and you either picked your skillset, which is what I did, or you pitch your idea because I didn’t have an idea. She pitched this genetic analysis company that was very similar to a 23andMe style company these days. Her ultimate pitch was if we are going to be able to impact disease, we have to understand the code of who we are. For me, that was compelling both from an intellectual perspective but also from a personal perspective. I’d had people in my life that had been significantly impacted by things that are entirely genetic in basis. Cancer is quite literally the disease of the genome. I’d had my grandfather pass when I was thirteen from lung cancer. I remember at the time when that was happening. Mine too. I was eleven. Where was he located? Was he in Seattle or no? No. I grew up in Alaska but he was mostly in California. That doesn’t seem that much in the way, but it was still my grandfather and it was hard. It was the first person I lost. What was striking for me at the time was like my dad is a doctor. He’s a surgeon but when you’re thirteen, you don’t differentiate between surgeon and oncologist. You’re like, “Doctors should be cool,” and it wasn’t. As I got older, I learned that in large part it was because they didn’t know what to do. Even now, to a certain extent, if you get diagnosed with cancer, there’s a super over simplification. They’re like, “You have this, we have X number of drugs that could be used to treat that. We’re going to try this first one. If that doesn’t work then we’re going to try the second one and we’re going to try and hope that we get the right one before it’s too late.” Becky’s basic pitch to me was if you could see what’s going on in there, then you could pick the right one the first time. That for me was far more interesting than any of the other companies that were being pitched. I didn’t want to do Fitbit for your dog or any of that stuff or a concierge service. It sounds like I should go pitch my crazy ideas to the entrepreneurial class and I can pick up people like you to run with them. People have a very interesting relationship or opinion about young students because I was 21, 22 at the time. I went back. I’ve maintained a good relationship with the professor that teaches it, Alan Leong. He now teaches at the UDub proper, the Seattle campus, but I’ve gone back and helped to judge classes and etc. Frankly, the younger they are, the better. I’ve even been in classes where there have been MBA students and freshmen and then they’re competing in a competition, a business plan competition together. I’ve got to tell you, the freshmen kick the MBA’s butts every time. The vast majority of the reason why, in my opinion, is that the older we get, the more we fall susceptible to thinking, “This is that way. This is possible. That’s not possible,” whereas the freshmen, they don’t know. They’re like, “Let’s try this thing.” There are probably two escape hatches, either personality or naiveté. Have you ever hired anybody from one of these? We’ve had bunches of them as interns. We’ve definitely hired some pretty young people sometimes. I want to dive into the problem with genetics. What happened to the woman who had the idea that you heard pitch it? Did you end up working on it with her? We were cofounders. She and I won a business plan competition and that’s how this whole thing got started. It’s 2009. If you recall back then, the economy was not so hot. Here I am graduating with a Psych degree. My options are stupid, boring, shitty job or go to grad school but I’d come to the conclusion that I didn’t want to get a PhD because it turns out that I’m impatient enough that research doesn’t appeal to me or it was like start this thing. It seems like a very similar risk profile at the time. Find a job, make a job. I was like, “How hard could it be? That was my naiveté speaking. We went for it and we found our third cofounder Jeremy through a Japanese tea ceremony, which is how you usually find cofounders. I worked for Jeremy for a long time. Maybe you should start with what you guys thought you were doing. At the time we thought that we were doing essentially what is 23andMe now. 23andMe then came out and pro tip, don’t go head-to-head with essentially what is a Google-backed company. This was in 2009. Was that when 23andMe came out? They were even maybe right before 2009. I’ll have to look but they weren’t so big at that time. There were large enough announcements where it was like, “Somebody already doing this. Maybe we should pivot.” At the time, the plan was to do exactly what 23andMe is doing in terms of snip chips. There are lots of ways to look at a genome. One way is to look at the whole three billion base pairs. Another way is to only look at certain markers that you’re…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Video Games: Optimized Learning Environments — David Edery Mar 10, 2021
    Show notes

    David Edery is a buddy of mine who I think you guys are really going to love. Dave is one of the co-founders he’s the CEO of Spry Fox, which is a unique game development studio here. They’re based here in Seattle, but they have people spread out. They made Alphabear, Steambirds, Triple Town, and Realm of the Mad God. These are games that all together have 50 to a hundred million people playing them worldwide. Dave is a very successful game developer making really delightful games. They’re trying to make the world a happier place. You should definitely play their games on your phone. Dave used to work at Microsoft and and he wrote a book about transforming business with what can be learned from video games. The book is called Changing the Game. I think even now a lot of those lessons can be super relevant. I think of games as like the future of almost every industry. Video games are an industry where there’s a lot of competitive dynamics. Unlike almost everything else, no one’s paying you to play a game. If you get bored, you’ll quit. And nobody wants to read a manual to play a game or take a class to play a game. So the games have to teach you how to interact with them. And there’s so many things that can be done with video games. I’ve seen so many other industries learn from games. We also talk about the capacity of games to be used for education and learning. I’m really interested in that topic and have thought a lot about it over the years. Dave is a guy that you would want to talk to about that. He also has a really unique culture in his company that he’s tried to create. As well as a really unique view of developing culture in online communities. He has a lot of experience with this. I think anybody in the game industry knows Dave by now because he’s also involved in creating a community out of game developers. There’s a lot to learn here and I’m hoping that you guys really enjoy this episode. Pablos: I have a zillion questions for you. This is going to be fun for me. At this point, you had a super interesting and maybe not extremely long but long career in building video game companies. Video games are the glue or something that connects a whole bunch of people to computers, computation, coding and all this stuff. People don’t realize how responsible they are for scaling the interest in personal computers. That’s important because it attracted a lot of people, money, investment and even things we take for granted, especially like the obvious ones like GPU’s are almost entirely made possible by the demand from the video game industry. To some extent, ramping up the scale, reducing costs on hardware, all the things that exist in the CAD industry, for example, for making 3D models and designing stuff on computers, that industry can pay $10,000 or $20,000 for a workstation that’s top of the line and super-fast to render models. They don’t have economies of scale. They’re never going to get the custom hardware they would want. They’re never going to get the price down to the point where a lot of people could use it, but video games did that for everybody. The industry itself is the first entertainment-related industry that got computers connected up to real people. David: I don’t think it’s a coincidence that when you look at systems that are being put in place to teach kids how to program, a lot of them have a big focus on, “You can make a game this way.” Even when I was a kid, we didn’t quite have video games or the ability to make them, but we had things like logos, which was like, “You can make this thing move on screen like a video game.” It’s trying to make it accessible. Now that is how kids learn. The starter drug for coding is Minecraft mods or making a game from scratch. It’s an important part of the history of personal computers. You probably know better than me, but my understanding is that the scale of the video game industry is bigger than movies, TV, music and books combined. They include hardware sales in that. I’m pretty sure that includes the sales of the console themselves and stuff, but still it’s a lot. You wouldn’t count the cost of your television and the cost of the TV industry. We’re not including that either. We’re all sharing the TV. They’re including the stats for the Xbox and the PS4. Even if you take that stuff out at this point, I don’t know for sure, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we’re beating movie revenue even with the hardware taken out. That seems pretty easy to substantiate. It’s a massive industry and super influential, and has gotten past high school nerds. Something like 99% of kids under the age of eighteen play games. A lot of middle American housewives. They don’t count themselves as gamers, but then you ask them, “Have you ever played Candy Crush?” They’d be like, “I play it all the time.” There you go. Apparently, that’s a significant market too, casual games, all the PopCap stuff. Unfortunately, PopCap is not a big player anymore, but there are various Saga S games. It’s a huge market. Maybe another way of thinking about is like who’s least likely to be interested in any video games? The least likely will be someone like the elderly. The older you are, the less likely you are, to some extent. There are plenty of older people who are playing solitaire or whatever, it’s how they pass the time. Even for them, it’s an unfair generalization. First of all, people who didn’t grow up with games tend to be less interested. It’s not a thing. They’re like, “This game thing, what’s that?” That’s a stereotype, but that applies to a bunch of people. Additionally, even if you did grow up with games, and this is funny, it’s even happening to me. I loved the damn things. As people get busy with work, children and stuff like that, they start to be like, “I don’t have time for this.” They’ll push most games aside. What’s interesting is they don’t push them all aside. They’ll still have that one game on their phone that they pull out of their pocket when they’re stuck in a line. It’s different contexts. The point I was trying to get my head around the industry because there’s a lot of other industries related to computers that are not nearly as fun, accessible, compelling or something to people in general, but video games are the biggest that go everywhere. It’d be interesting to know how you found your way into this industry. I grew up playing games. I loved them. Your parents didn’t suggest, “You should be a doctor, a lawyer or a video game developer.” I got into medical school and then decided not to go and break my dad’s heart. People who didn't grow up with games tend to be less interested.Share on X You have parents that want you to be a doctor. Why is that? My parents aren’t doctors and they didn’t specifically try to get me to be a doctor. I have no interest in it whatsoever. The doctors I know are some of the most abused people on earth. I don’t know why anybody would want that job, but people who have it seemed all want their kids to be doctors. What’s going on there? I can’t speak to anyone else’s experience. For mine, it was very simple. My dad has this very strong belief that is based in part from growing up without very much. He used to say it all the time. He’d say, “They can’t take away your degree.” Doctors will always make money. They will always be in demand. He would hammer that into me over and over again. You grew up at a time where employment options were slammed and you had to dedicate yourself to being employable. Bear in mind, he didn’t grow up in the United States. He grew up in Colombia, South America so even more so. It’s a higher reliability career. Shortly after graduating from medical school, there was a requirement at the time that you would have to travel around the country doing national service. He has stories of like, “I was riding a donkey to this isolated town or whatever.” He would tell me. He’d be like, “Everyone is happy to see the doctor.” You’d have instant respect anywhere you go. For him, it’s like a thing. It’s like guaranteed respect, guaranteed money. Why wouldn’t you do it? It’s the right career path. It makes sense for someone who grew up without the resources he was hoping for. The thing that all good immigrants do like, “I grew up with nothing and now look at everything I’m going to give you. You’re going to give your kids even more, but you’ll have to be a surgeon to do that” or whatever. I’m not trying to get my kid anything. She takes more than she deserves. You ended up getting into medical school. Why? I’d only ever been doing it because I hadn’t ever thought it through. This medical school program was very interesting. I got in early without having to do all the requirements at Mount Sinai. One of the requirements that you do instead of taking whatever course I was able to skip is, “You have to spend eight weeks with us over the summer and shadow people in the hospital.” It sounds awesome. I went and did that. The first time I saw a substantial amount of blood, I fainted. They were like, “Don’t worry. That happens a lot. It’s normal.” A few days later, I saw a substantial more amount of blood, I fainted again. They’re like, “It’s not that normal for fainting twice.” I wasn’t particularly enjoying any of this either, it wasn’t just the fainting. I thought, “That’s okay.” I was always interested in psychiatry. I thought, “That’s going to be the thing that will save me. There’s no blood in psychiatry. It’s a doctor who still needs an MD. I’m not going to be seeing a lot of blood as a psychiatrist. It’s going to be fine.” I spent a week in the psych ward and it was the most depressing week of my entire life. It was horrible. I had a lot of pity for them. That was part of the problem. I had this tremendous empathy for the people who I was seeing there. All the people who were treating them were horrifically jaded. I understand now, as a mature adult, you have to be on some level because the people you’re treating many of them will almost certainly never get substantially better in that context. At the time, I didn’t know that. All I knew is that this one thing that was the saving grace for me for medical school seemed horrible. I was like, “This is not for me.” I always wanted to be an entrepreneur on some level. The dot-com boom was happening then. All my friends were talking about the startups they were going to make. It seems so exciting. I love computers. The heck with this medical school stuff. I’m going to go teach myself programming and do that. That’s what I did. This is a total aside. One of the things you said about the jaded people working in a psych ward, the patients, lots of them will not likely to get substantially better, empathy not being a functional cure for whatever else then. I wonder if that’s true in other contexts too. Maybe they’re not in a psych ward, but people in general, in daily life, a lot of the time feels like they’re not going to substantially improve. You have to temper how much effort you put into them. Do you ever feel that way as a professional nice guy? It’s hard. My personality is such that I’m willing to bang my head against a problem for longer than I probably should. I’m generally not willing to give up, but if you’re running a company for long enough, sometimes you learn that you have to. Whether it’s on a project or an employee who’s not working out or whatever. Sometimes it’s like, “I’ve spent two years trying to make this work. It’s not working, I got to cut and run.” I do think about it a lot. This is one of the reasons why I like games. When you think about what a game has the capacity to do. A game has the capacity to chip away at someone for thousands of hours if they’re willing to give it that much time. This is perfect. It is trying to teach you and it’s ultimately patient. Think about what you can accomplish. That one of the reasons I got excited about games in the first place was the realization that imagine there’s a person who’s bad at X but they like your game. That’s cool. They might be willing to spend 1,000 hours getting better at X, whatever X is. That’s one of the things I think about a lot. We often are fixated on a lot of things with robots right now. Robots are amazing because you teach one robot something and they all learn for free. With humans, you got to start over from scratch with every single one of them. You teach them something, you’ve accomplished nothing that scales. You have to start from scratch and teach the next one. It is work every time. The problem with education is nothing about it scale. The video games to me are these extraordinary optimized learning environments. A video game has got to assess where you’re at, put a challenge right in front of you. If it’s too hard, you get bored and quit. If it’s too easy, I get bored and quit. Nobody’s paying me to play video games. Nobody’s paying my kid to play video games, but yet they do it all the time and people do it all the time. That’s what a good teacher would do. If you could afford to have a one-to-one student-teacher ratio, your teacher would understand your level where you’re at, what your interests are, and know how to put a challenge right in front of you. It’s not too easy, not too hard. The games are doing that. People disparage video games all the time, but they don’t realize that these are optimized learning environments. They’re outperforming schools, all of them. My kid would go to school for six hours, come home bored having learned nothing. She plays video games on her iPad for 45 minutes and learn a ton. It’s mostly stuff we don’t care about for learning, but it’s a learning environment that is compelling. It’s funny when you were talking about how teachers aren’t scalable. Another thing that’s typically considered highly not scalable is therapy. Therapy is a one-on-one like you and a $200 an hour therapist or whatever it costs, going back and forth for years until you are a slightly happier and better person. Talk about something that’s super not scalable. I was watching a webinar. I have a guy I know in Boston. He’s created a company called Mightier. They’re creating games that will help children with emotional self-regulation. I was particularly interested because my daughter has mild anxiety issues, nothing like crazy, but enough so that we take her to therapy because we want to help her with this. When I found out that this guy I know had created a suite of games that are designed to help kids with anxiety, I was like, “I have to check this out.” We haven’t gotten it. I’ve only watched the webinar. I should be receiving my package soon, but they had one thing that was clearly a knockoff of Fruit Ninja. The way it was working is there was fruit falling down from the sky and the kid had to cut it. As they’re playing, the kid is wearing a watch or something that’s measuring their heart rate. If their heart rate goes up because they’re getting excited about the game and the game is getting more intense, the game purposely starts to obscure the screen so that it’s even harder than it already would have been to play. This is a feedback thing and your heart is getting up even faster. The obscuring of the screen is linked to your heart rate. At some point, you can’t even see the screen. You have to tap the thing and say, “Stop.” It prompts you to use deep breathing exercises to lower your heart rate. Once you do, the screen obscurity stops and you can go back to playing it. I thought that was such a cool idea. I’m excited to try it with Arian, which we haven’t had a chance to try it yet. It’s a perfect example. I don’t know if this will work. It’s based on research that came out of Harvard. It’s got sound research backing, but assuming that it works, imagine with a piece of relatively inexpensive hardware and a set of digital games that can be distributed for free to any iPad, all of a sudden you have a way to help millions upon millions of kids with emotional se…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Building the Right Thing at the Right Time - Jeremy Bornstein Jan 22, 2021
    Show notes

    One of the things I really like to be able to do is go track down some of the friends that I’ve made over the years who have grown up with technology and grew up with computers as kids hackers, computer programmers, people who eventually became engineers and just pick apart their experience. A lot of us had similar experiences and I think there’s a lot that can be learned from that. And sometimes it’s just learning that there are parallel experiences that led us into very technical careers. But but also I think it is important to look for the things that worked like what were the things in our backgrounds that got us good at something? And what is it that turned us into hackers and what is it that made us learn to think differently? And so anyway, today we have Jeremy Bornstein who is one of my all time favorite people. I had the good fortune of meeting Jeremy training Aikido back in the nineties. We were training with with Frank Doran, who at the time, was one of the senior Aikido instructors in America. Jeremy had started a company with his brother and another friend of ours in San Francisco called Xigo. Xigo was trying to do in the year 2000, essentially artificial intelligence to trade on the stock market. And and I ended up going to work for Jeremy and though the company, unfortunately didn’t work out and got shut down in the.com bubble, we still had amazing actual technology and actual customers and actual revenue, and we were doing great. We were a victim of a sock puppet attack ended up having to shut down the company. Jeremy and I became great friends there and have been friends ever since. There’s not a lot of people who are as friendly as he is and with his diverse interests. And so we got to spend a couple of hours talking, I’d say about the first half of this is about our backgrounds, his background growing up with computers, how he got into it, how he learned the things he did. Jeremy had a super interesting career back at Apple in the Advanced Technology Group back in the nineties when there was really interesting things going on there and he invented some cool technology. In the last half we talk about artificial intelligence, where it came from and where it’s going. Also some of Jeremy’s other interests in addition to Aikido, archery, Japanese and Western style, languages like Japanese, French, Mandarin, Spanish, and Latin. He’s learned to play the shakuhachi and the didgeridoo. He’s a guy who’s built massively multiplayer online games, automated trading systems, cryptographic systems and a wide variety of other things. I hope you have a good time listening to two friends have a long chat. Katia Capprelli, the former Italian race car engineer also joined us for this conversation. Pablos: I’ve worked on projects that in and of themselves didn’t have important world-changing merit. I built websites for car dealerships and bed and breakfasts in the ‘90s. These weren’t important but the experience of that, and learning about those industries, the tools and all those things led to being able to do other projects. For me, I always steered toward whatever the coolest project I could find at any given moment was, and I worked on that. Jeremy: A lot of people don’t even do that. On one hand, I don’t understand that. I don’t understand it. Why wouldn’t you? You asked me what my new ideal job was. It turned out to be founding Xigo. When I started that company, I didn’t care about the idea of growing an organization or managing engineers. We didn’t have anyone else to do it. At the end, they didn’t want to do it. I was like, “I’ll do that.” It turns out it was fun and I was good at it. I had so much fun. I began to view it as instead of I had to write all this stuff myself, I could find somebody who could help me do it and then tell them about it. They would do parts of it by themselves. I could look at it and say, “That was better or whatever.” That was a revelation when I found out that I could do that. For me, I don’t write any code. The closest I’ve come is send an email to somebody and they write some code so it’s easier. A lot of them love that because they don’t know what to build. If you have somebody who can think about what’s the right thing to build at the right time, what fits together, what’s going to sell, and what makes sense. That’s coming back to exactly why I started. I discovered as I was hiring people for Xigo, they’re all software engineers but some people are good at the beginning parts of a project. Some people are good at the middle parts and at the end. They are different orientations and personalities. I’m much more interesting and useful at the beginning. I can handle the other stuff but it’s not my native competence. If I could get somebody else to do that, I will get somebody else to do that. Give me a room full of people who are looking for something to do and I will make sure that everyone has something to do. Having done it all helps you to be better and trustworthy as a person. I remember at Xigo, you guys must have started about ‘98 or ‘99. In those days, computers were getting to the point where we could start to do very early machine learning type of situations. The stock market had all this data that affected the market. There was technical data, which means all the trades on the stock market, but then there was also the news. By analyzing the city, you could sometimes figure out if things were going well or going poorly, and this kind of thing. A hundred percent of the stock trading in those days was done by humans, reading the newspaper, and looking at the stock price in the newspaper like cavemen. This was the first company that I know of that was using computers to analyze all that data. We were doing a couple of things that part of the product was letting you know things went south or things are about to go south or vice versa. The cool thing was we did two things. We built systems that could run arbitrary algorithms against that technical data, which meant that you could say, “Tell me what’s happening with this stock over its 30-day moving average and let me know if it gets too far out of bounds.” It could watch that in real-time and then alert you. This is before smartphones because this is 2000 when we shipped. We had piles of computers that could read the news. This is an early artificial intelligence project. With 100% of the trading being done by humans, we have computers that could read the news and figure out what company is this news about. Is it good news? Is it bad news? Is it likely to move the market? We weren’t using this to do our own automated trading but we were doing all of the work you needed to be able to do that. I’m sure that’s at the same time as brokerage houses and were doing this internally. Maybe not with the news reading aspect but with the technical aspect for sure. I’m talking technical data. Not necessarily the news or the way we looked at the analyst changes. One of the tricks I remember we did was we had computers. There were television broadcasts about stock market news. There was a transcription of that for deaf people. We hooked up computers to take the transcriptions of the TV broadcasting, run it through our system so we would know in real-time what was going on. Jeremy, his brother, and this buddy of ours and Lenny started the company. At that time, Xigo, being a prototypical Silicon Valley startup. There were startups for a decade before that, but a lot of the practices at Xigo ended up becoming standard practice for startups here. The one that sticks out to me was in the year 2000, we were hiring the smartest people on earth. Every company says they’re doing that but we did it. You’re paying them six figures and most companies doing that let everybody leave work for lunch. What Xigo is doing is bring lunch in every day. I went there, “That’s amazing. Lunch is being delivered every day for free.” We had fridges full of Odwalla and stuff. It looks extravagant but the fact is the cheapest hour you get out of people is to buy them lunch. You’re already paying them $100,000-some a year, buy them lunch and you get an extra free hour out of them every day and if you buy them dinner then you get several more hours for free. The fact is that they’re nerds. All they’re going to do is go home and sit on their computer anyway. You might as well let them hang out at work. Things like that look like bad optics, they look extravagant, people make fun of Silicon Valley. Xigo is prototypically obnoxious. We had a chill room with every video game console you could get. We had a massage therapist coming by. There was yoga and Aikido at work. What was cool is it made it an environment that you wanted to be at. Another big issue and the barrier is a lot of transient people who moved here for work. People all moved here. Some of them for the gold rush. But some of them for the place where you get to work on these types of technical projects with other smart people, and you can have a community of that. The problem with that is you don’t have friends and family around. So, having a work environment that meets more of those needs is important. Now, we mock Facebook for having volleyball at work and Google for having a ball pit or something. Anyway, I learned a lot at Xigo. Specifically, it’s funny because it goes back to some of the things that you said. Jeremy and I knew each other from Aikido. When he hired me, he said, “We’re looking for generalists.” I’d never heard anybody say before. I’m like, “I could be a generalist.” That was the first time in my life I had heard anybody explicitly express an interest in generalist. Normally, that would be seen as you’re not good at anything. I went to work at Xigo and I had this interesting role which was program management. It’s managing the software development. We had about 40 or so coders. I don’t know if I ever explained to you, there were two of us doing this job. Me and this girl named Leah, who I believe was a former massage therapist. I’m a computer nerd who has a lot of interest in everything that we’re building all the way down to the nuts and bolts and the 1s and 0s. I loved it and I love knowing everything about it. I would sit there with engineers. I would ask them what they were up to and how they were doing it, and what their plan was. I would say, “What if we did it this way? What if we did it that way? Could you get squeezed a little more?” I was always trying to pack more into every release because we managed releasing software. Leah knew nothing about coding. She had almost no interest in computers. Not to disparage her at all, she was great. What she had was a clipboard with a giant list of to-do items. Every one of them had a name and a deadline by it. She would go to every coder on the project and she’d say, “What are you doing next? When are you going to have it done?” She would write that down. The next day she’d come back, “How is it going? Are you going to have it done on time? What do you need? Who do you depend on?” She would follow the to-do list. She was arguably a better project manager than me because that was an effective methodical system, whereas I was introducing a lot of risks. I was like, “We can take the flux capacitor and cram it in here and we run it upside down.” All these kinds of things. We’re on a two-week release cycle which in those days was aggressive. I love that. I’m like, “Rapid iteration. Let’s release.” We get to release. Has it been through QA? It’s been through QA. Has it been through operations testing? They took a look at it. I’ll be like, “Let’s launch it.” We’d get halfway to launching it. The database had fallen apart and we’re like, “Let’s roll it back.” It turns out almost every time it was my fault because I was trying to cram more code. I loved advancing things. I wanted to push things. We got a lot more stuff out sooner because of that. That lack of risk aversion came from growing up with a computer. I learned everything by rebooting. I learned everything like crash it and reboot it. It was a safe environment to do that which isn’t true for everything. Biological stuff, there’s no reboot. I’m thankful for Xigo because it was a unique experience for me. I learned a lot. I was never built to replicate that kind of environment again in my career. It was special and unique. That was a company whereas a casualty of the time, even though we weren’t like the other companies in the so-called dot-com bubble, we got shut down because of that frenzy. We were a victim of the crash in the brokerage bubble. That happened six months or however many months before the general crash. That’s why they stopped paying us. It’s with the alacrity which we needed. In some sense that’s unrelated. I don’t know. My customers were brokerage firms. When I think about Xigo now, I think of it as an early and in some sense successful AI product. We’re using AI to build systems that could trade on the stock market. That was 0% of the trading then, and 75% of trading now at least. It falls off on any markets, at least 75% of trading. Computers are automating that for better or worse. It’s important to think over because that was an expert system, meaning we took news. We had humans read it and tagged the news to use as training data for an expert system, which is a machine learning system that can learn from that data in its own way automatically tag the new news. Did we have humans tag stuff and have it learn to tag? We had to make training data. We also bought news that was tagged because there were companies that would tag the news for other humans. That gave us some training data, but some of it we had to tag ourselves because there were things that humans didn’t tag. We did it for sentiment. Is it like we move the market? That’s not something that came tagged. We had to do some of that. The point is people get fired up over all these complex-sounding so-called AI systems, machine learning systems now that are using neural networks which sounds tech on, smart and complicated. It’s not but there are ways of doing the exact same thing. Computers are vastly faster now. I remember us building racks of pizza box, Sun SPARC servers or Ultra SPARC, whatever they were at that time. When the iPhone came out and performed an entire rack from those days without exaggeration. Computers got faster and we got some better algorithms for doing machine learning and things. You can see the results that can drive cars and stuff now. What gets to me is how people are extrapolating from this. It seems to me like it’s one trick and we’ve got faster at that trick. We’ve been able to apply that one trick to a few more things. People are extrapolating from this that it’s going to somehow magically also be able to do every other trick. It’s dumb. It’s irresponsible but Hollywood is using AI as to do boogeyman for stories about the future. They’re all dystopian and it all goes to shit. It’s a science fiction that doesn’t have a grounding reality in my mind. You’re talking about artificial intelligence in general. He’s pre-circumspect but did you read Superintelligence? Artificial intelligence is always what you don't have yet.Share on X I did not. Superintelligence is a book about this notion of humans creating a machine of any description that’s smarter than humans. Should I read it? It’s important to read because it’s the one that’s setting off guys like Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk, and Bill Gates who have all made comments to the effect that artificial intelligence might be a horrible thing. It is a good book. He’s an intellectual writer but everybody is baking this logical leap that is unreasonable. We’re going to get from artificial narrow intelligence. Even if you look at AlphaZero. They went from being able to play chess to being able to play Go and Chess and Tic Tac Toe or something. I forget what the third game is. The point is AlphaZero is impressive because it ca…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Unboxing the Crypto Toolkit - Ben Laurie Jan 22, 2021
    Show notes

    Hey guys, today we get to hang out with Ben Laurie who is one of my all time favorite geeks. You’re running code right now that Ben wrote. He built ApacheSSL, which is probably like half of the web servers on the internet that are secure running that code. He maintains OpenSSL, which is in everything else. Ben is one of the few folks who’s a true coder and cryptographer. And there are very few people who really understand both sides of that and what it really means to write secure code and how hard that is. So if you’re interested in hacking, if you’re interested in computer security, if you’re just a coder of any description this episode is absolutely for you. Beyond that, our conversation goes deep into the philosophy behind cryptocurrency. Ben has pretty counter views on Bitcoin to all the currency speculators out there. There are super interesting to hear. And if you want to learn about how to think about the crypto toolkit and what’s possible there I highly recommend spending time listening to this episode. I couldn’t be more proud of the chance that I had to pick Ben’s brain for a couple of hours. I’ve known Ben for 20 years. He’s a member of the Shmoo Group, which is nonprofit think tank for computer hackers. He also is on the board of the Apache foundation. He’s a principal engineer at Google and was at DeepMind for awhile as well. Ben developed a program at Google for certificate transparency, which is a really important way of understanding what’s possible using the crypto toolkit to change the way that we provide accountability around data and how it’s handled. I think you’re going to learn a lot. I really hope you enjoy this and definitely reach out with questions for me and for Ben and I’ll try to get to them next time we chat. Pablos: One of the things that is super unique about you, in my estimation, maybe there are 100 people on Earth who both understand cryptography and know how to code. That 100 people is not a lot, especially these days. In some sense, for the first time, we’ve got a lot of interest in the crypto tool kit because of Bitcoin. I want to ask you a bunch of questions about that stuff. Certainly, we both have had an interest in cryptography. Mine goes back many years. Yours is probably even more than that. You have a super deep math background so I’ve always thought of you, of all the people I know, as one who has the deepest understanding practically of what it means to implement this stuff, how hard that is to get it right and how easy it is to get it wrong. We have this situation where because of Bitcoin, people have gotten excited about what they call crypto, but what they mean is currency speculation. Everybody likes to gamble and this has been the most winningest gambling that’s been going on. It seems to me anybody who has any knowledge at all about crypto is tied up making some alternative to Bitcoin or some other blockchain-related project. I’m curious what you think about that stuff. We don’t have to talk about the mechanics of blockchain or Bitcoin. That’s been done to death, but I’m curious what you think of the state of society and the frenzy that we’re in over blockchain. I’m going to try not to jump in with my opinion here. Ben: There are lots of things to say about blockchain, but the first thing to say about blockchain is that I don’t think anybody knows what they mean when they say blockchain. Blockchain is like magic math stuff that’s going to make us all rich. It’s going to equalize society. This is all nonsense, but one of the things I like to say around Bitcoin is that there are two things going on. There’s one incredibly stupid thing and there’s one sensible thing. The incredibly stupid thing is I’m going to take a $100 bill and I’m going to burn it. I’m going to bottle the smoke and you should believe that that bottle is worth $100. There was a second thing going on which is, I’m going to produce this verifiable ledger of stuff. That verifiable ledger has cryptographic certainty of loyalty. Those verifiable ledgers are useful. In fact, what I’ve done for the last years is trying to build a sensible part of the verifiable ledger and that’s what the Certificate Transparency is. I’ve resisted calling it blockchain for a long time because as soon as I say, “I’m doing blockchain,” everyone’s like, “Now, you like Bitcoin.” I don’t like the idea of Bitcoin, but I do like this idea of verifiable ledgers. I think the interesting question is, “What is interesting about verifiable ledgers?” A lot of people are like, “You could take Bitcoin or almost any blockchain project and say, “I got a database and you’ll be doing the same thing.” What’s the difference between a database and a verifiable ledger? The difference is that it’s a thing that not only can you say, “Here is a database of stuff,” but also, “Here are cryptographic proofs that the stuff is in the ledger and the ledger has this appending the property.” You can go back and lie about what it used to say or what it does say. If you ever do, then you get checkable proof that you have lied. Certificate Transparency, in a bit of ancient history. In November 2011, the certification authority, the people who are responsible for issuing certificates for SSL. When you go to Amazon, you get the little padlock that says, “You are in Amazon,” the reason you get padlock is because a certification authority has said, “This public key corresponds to Amazon,” and then the site you connected to proves that it has possession of the private key that corresponds to the public gate. Now, you have a secure connection with Amazon, but you’re relying on that certification authority to get it right and not let some other person claim to be Amazon. In November 2011, it became apparent that the certification authority had issued 500 certificates for websites that they should not have issued certificates for. Those were all of the popular websites, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo! and Facebook. Those were then used by the Iranian government to do manual attacks on civilians. Two things were interesting about that. One is that the attack existed in the wild for two months without anybody knowing it was going on. That was bad in itself. The second thing was that nobody ever knew what the complete list of certificates that they had issued. The aftermath was the certification authority has issued all of these certificates that they shouldn’t have done, what do we do about it? We have no alternative other than to say, “We have to distrust every certificate issued by the certification authority.” As it happens, the Dutch government CA were also issuing all these certificates that the Dutch government used for various things. When we shut them down and distrusted all these certificates, this was bad news if you’re a Dutch. There were a bunch of knock-on things. The three that I happened to know about, whether you could no longer buy or sell cars because you couldn’t register the sale anymore in Holland. The ability to electronically clear customs went away. Bottle imports stalled because you couldn’t play the customs. They also lost the ability to buy and sell electricity on the international markets. This was a mess. The question arises is, “What could we do about that now?” As it happens, we started Certificate Transparency and this is not a story I could tell because the underlying reason for us thinking about this was a secret. Google was making it difficult to see. We had decided internally that if we were going to do this, we should make it transparent. We should publish all the certificates that we issue so the people could check that we had issued them correctly. I proposed that we could not only publish it, but we could do it in an improbable way, so we will use the verifiable ledgers. We could commit the certificates that were issued. We could even close the loop so the brands are checked, that we had committed that there wasn’t the log. We couldn’t issue a certificate that was accepted by a browser that had not been published. The cool thing about publishing it and these verifiable logs was that you could make the claim that if you saw a certificate and you had approved that it was in the log, then you also knew the owner of that domain could see it in the log as well. If it had been incorrectly issued, they would have an opportunity to notice that and they could revoke it. Suddenly, you are not in this position that there could be these things floating around in the wild that you didn’t know whether it was Amazon or Google or not. We’d had this idea for our own CA prior to DigiNotar. When it happened, I went to my bosses at Google and said, “We could do this for every CA.” They were like, “That’s a good idea. Off you go, make it happen?” Several years down the line, we’ve done that and we’ve got all of the CAs to sign up to it. From April 2020, Chrome, IE and Firefox are all going to require that every certificate that they see has to be published in one of these public logs. That’s interesting in itself. If you imagine a world where DigiNotar occurred after we had done that, DigiNotar was hacked and that’s an issue. There were two months between them getting hacked and anyone becoming aware that this had occurred. We would bring that down to one day instead of two months, plus instead of having to shut down the whole CA, we would have a complete list for all those certificates that were issued. We’ll be able to say, “These are all the ones that were bad. We could just blacklist those. The rest will continue to function.” We would not have caused all that chaos, like in the Dutch ecosystem. Another thing that’s interesting is that publishing these logs caused this ecosystem of analysis around certificates that had not occurred before. Even though you could write that in public, you can crawl in that list of people who’ve done it before in the certificate authority observatory, but we haven’t done much with it. It wasn’t until we did CT that people started to go, “We can look at all of these things and find out other stuff that’s going on.” Decentralization is an impossible dream.Share on X Would you characterize this as an alternative, not currency-related use of what we call “blockchain?” Essentially, this is a different application. I like to characterize it as one of the tools in the crypto toolkit because where you and I come from, there’s a whole bunch of them going way back. Now that people are starting to clue in, the blockchain is the first one they heard about, but it’s the last one added to the toolbox and we have so many. What I imagine is that because of the success and in some sense of Bitcoin, it’s attracting a bunch of attention to blockchain, which is then getting people into the crypto toolkit. Hopefully, we’ll get a whole generation of coders out of this who are thinking with these tools and designing and engineering with these tools. They’ll be able to build things that we’ve always imagined would be possible. Since there weren’t very many people around to do it, it was very difficult to design products around those tools. To some extent, yes. One of the interesting things about CT is that it uses tools that were invented a long time ago. There’s nothing new in that toolbox. We’re not using it for what they were originally thought to be useful for. The reason I’m not so sure is that they say much further around this idea of cryptocurrencies and decentralization, which is an impossible dream. People are blinded to the true importance of these things. They are excited about what is effectively nonsense. They’re excited about currency speculation. If you look at Bitcoin or any of these cryptocurrencies, there’s a huge amount of fraud, theft and stuff like that. If you look at the history of money and the history of people doing business with each other, that’s exactly what happened. You started off with where we invented money and then people started to figure out how to rip each other off. People started to go, “We should have some rules around this stuff.” Gradually, we ended up with the restrictive “regime” around what you’re allowed to do money censorship, as people like to call it, which means controlling how you spend money and making sure it’s done in a lawful way. I think 99% of the people who are excited about Bitcoin or this kind of crypto anarchist dream and not about the interesting new prophecies that you can get by using these things in a sensible way. What I think about it is there seems to be a bit of a maturation process that at least we have gone through and probably other people too, who first spent a lot of time thinking about these things on the cypherpunk’s email list in the ‘90s. I feel like we’re living out a lot of what we were discussing and thinking about in those days. Personally, I have a lot of those dreams of decentralization in me. They’re probably tamer now. Why do you think that this is an impossible dream? I published a proof of why decentralized consensus is impossible. If it’s been proven, I would like to know. One of the slippery notions in this is, “What the hell do you mean by decentralized?” I think that the core idea that I can somehow figure out what some unknown group of people has agreed is fundamentally flawed for a reason. This obvious reason is that, if I don’t know who the totality of everyone is, then I don’t know whether I have captured enough of that unknown group of people to know what their decision is. I’ve got to imagine myself being in this position where I’ve captured enough, but there’s somebody else that I don’t know who sees some other portion of that decentralized group that has captured some other idea of what the outcome was. One of us must be wrong. I don’t know that I’m the wrong one or they are the wrong one. Any argument that says there’s some way you can make those two things always converge somehow has to rely on us not being decentralized. I still rely on this to be more distributed and decentralized. That’s all my proof says in a mathematical way. I’ll presume that’s true. The thing I’m curious about is I feel like what was happening at least in my experience back with the cypherpunk days was we believed that we could embody our values in the protocols. We believe that crypto was giving us the tools we needed to do that. Specifically, the values were to ensure that nobody got an asymmetric advantage on the network and to make sure that everybody got an equal level playing field. Not only that’s what TCP IP did, at least compared to other network protocols at the time. Building on that, what we wanted to create and part of the reason for so much of the attention going into cryptocurrency in the late ‘90s was that we knew we needed a way to exchange money, where nobody got an asymmetric advantage on it. When you have a centralized mentor or somebody issuing the currency, then they get that advantage. That was the point of trying to emulate some of the properties of cash, the unanimity. What a lot of the ideas in those days were about around bearer currencies, where we would make it, so whoever held the pile of bits had the money. It’s like holding cash. What we ended up with instead of going from double-entry bookkeeping to single entry, we went to triple-entry, which is what blockchain gives us. We’ve got this currency that nobody controls. It’s not the value that people are getting out of it now, but in the long run, I still imagine and believe that that’s important. Because of these technologies, the crypto toolkit, we’re going to end up with some currency that’s decentralized in a sense online that nobody has an asymmetric advantage on and that’s important. The idea that you can do this purely through protocols is fancy. I think it’s true, but it carries a lot of disadvantages with it. I can take a dollar out of my pocket and give it to you and we’re done. On the other hand, you can lose cash. It can fall out of your pocket…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    The Future of Modern Photography - Steven Sebring Jan 22, 2021
    Show notes

    Steven Sebring is an artist, photographer & inventor. This is a guy who’s invented new technology and advanced the art of photography with the tools that he’s built in a world-class fashion. By his own admission, he is not a technical guy, but when you see what he’s built, you’re going to be blown away. There’s nothing else in the world like it. There’s a lot of work going on to develop new kinds of capture systems for virtual reality that work in 360° environments. Steven came at it from a completely different angle and came up with a completely different solution. He is putting out the most incredible content that works in 3D and in virtual reality on the planet. No one’s paralleled what he’s doing as far as I’ve seen. You really want to understand Steven and his thought process, and that’s really what we’re getting into in this episode. I want you to be able to see how an inventor thinks when they’re trying to solve a problem that they understand. We have a lot of situations in technology where we’re building a solution without really understanding the problem or the user whose going to be interacting with it. So, this is an amazing opportunity to get to know an inventor. I don’t think Steven has ever done a podcast before. He rarely ever talks about what he’s working on. He’s known to industry insiders in fashion. He’s shot a lot of celebrities. He goes way back with Patti Smith. He’s done cool documentaries and film and all kinds of artwork with her. And he’s shot some of the biggest brands on earth and the camera system he built is unlike anything else. So, anyway, I want you to get in here and understand Steven. We talk about his projects for Donna Karan, Ralph Laureen, BMW, and Spin Magazine. He just has all kinds of commercial work that he’s done. He’s also a guy who has worked on art projects, that if you have any interest in art, you’re going to want to learn about his Muybridge interpretation that he’s done. I met Steven a couple of years ago when he was doing this groundbreaking project called LIMINAL with Rodney Mullen. Rodney introduced us and we’ve been friends ever since. I cannot wait for you guys to see this stuff. This episode, you’re going to have to go to the website jetpackforthemind.com to look at the Steven Sebring episode. I’m going to post all kinds of cool stuff that Steven has created. There’s a music videos in there with Jack White. There’s all kinds of film and video projects that they’ve done with the camera system. There’s a lot to explore and I think you guys are going to be really impressed with what’s going on. Pablos: Even though my audience is smart and technical but they know about a lot of different things so I’m not expecting them to know anything in particular. The point here isn’t to dig into the tech stuff too much. What’s much more interesting is you have this amazing, unique career in history trying to advance your tools to support your art. That’s much more interesting than what most nerds are doing. We want to try and pick that apart so people can understand. A lot of what’s holding human back is that symbiosis is missing between the tools in the art, the creation and using technology to enable possibilities. Steven: This is beautiful. I feel honored to be here with Pablos. There is no nerd here. It’s not that you’re a nerd. It’s all the nerds are not able to do what they’re doing. They’re fucking nerds. That’s what they are. Nobody needs a nerd. I could use a few nerds. That’s one thing that could be valuable here. We’re definitely needing a lot of nerds to then obey my command. They thrive when they have some management. You need a dominatrix to tell them what to do all of that. I’m not exaggerating about that. It’s one of the winning strategies we’ve found for some folks with Asperger’s. You get on a dominatrix who tells them what to do at any given moment who can prioritize for that. Who can tell them what to worry about next because they don’t feel they have to worry about everything? It works great because then, they can be productive. In any given moment, they can do the extraordinary thing that they’re good at and the skills that you worry about taking care of the things that they suck at. This notion that somehow the world needs more well-balanced humans, I don’t think I believe it. We have a leader that’s extraordinary. Everybody is trying to find this balance by getting to the center. That’s the yoga strategy. They’re trying to get rid of every sharp edge and get to this center point where everything is perfectly balanced and hang out there. That, to me, is precarious. It’s not resilient. When you look, it’s trying to balance a teeter-totter on that point or trying to balance a pencil on your fingertips and that’s hard to do. If you look at a barbell, the barbell is balanced through extremes amount of weight on one end and the other. There’s nothing in the middle. Barbells are prone to be balanced almost all the time. We’re going a little too far with this balanced human thing. When you work in tech with a bunch of folks who are on the spectrum, you start to get an appreciation for what they’re good at. It’s antagonistic to try to make them balanced like normal people which aren’t what they are built for. It’s not what we need them for. You can find somebody else to do yoga and somebody else to eat organic quinoa and all that stuff. The folks with the ability to concentrate and create something the way a lot of folks with Asperger’s have been able to do, that’s special. That’s interesting. I love your perspectives, Pablos. To think that you fucking come from Alaska. Nothing in Alaska is normal. You grew up in Anchorage? I grew up mostly in Anchorage. I spent about five years in a small town called Soldotna. It was always dark. Do you get a minute of the sun in the winter? You would walk to school in the dark and walk home from school in the dark. We’re meandering but I want to back up. I come from the sport fishing capital of America. Do you like sushi? No. It’s a problem in relationships. Do you like cows? Do you like a good steak? Why do you think the cows are fired emissions that are affecting the climate? If everybody quit eating meat for a year, I hear that we would be in a much better situation. Is that true? Yeah. It’s because the gas is not CO2. It’s methane. Methane is about 26 times as bad as CO2. We got to do something about that. Why can’t they put cows in a big fucking building that’s taking the methane out of the air? That is possible. It’s just that they keep trying to make them fart inside of a building. It might be toxic for them. I would think that the cows would fall over in their cages. They would. It’s nasty stuff. What are you hearing about it? Methane is the exact same thing as natural gas. If you could capture it, put it in cars and you can power the world. Why can’t they capture that? Why can’t they do this? The day of that big photographer is dwindling down because now everybody's a photographer. Share on X There are inventions which try to capture methane from the farts of cows. Whoever does that will make billions. Why haven’t you figured that out? We might have in this conversation the answer. The truth is you could do a lot if you catch that methane because something close to 30% of green gasses is coming from the cow farts. Why can’t they put a suction cup up to their butt? There is a patent on that. It’s expired though. It’s an open-source thing. Anyone could stick a suction cup on the bottom of a cow and collect the methane and sell it into the energy market. I don’t know what you’re doing here taking pictures when you can be rich. I own 1,200 acres in South Dakota with oil on it. I own mineral rights to the land. I can drill tomorrow. I just haven’t drilled. How did you choose South Dakota? I inherited it from my great-great-uncle. Did he want to get it oil? No. He was a sheep farmer. He had cattle and horses of about over 60 or 80 that ran around on his land. I did a book called Bygone Daysof all his found photography and negatives. I remember going there when I was a little kid so I became close to Johnny. He lived in the original sod house that he was born in. It was the first homestead in the area in Dakota. It’s in the North-Western area. It’s incredibly beautiful. He put me in the will to take care of the land and keep the place but I’ve never drilled on it. As soon as I remember, when they were reading the will, people are coming up to me and say, “You can drill. There’s oil here.” I’m like, “Really?” I’ve never done it. It’s still going to be a little late. I should have done that deal with Halliburton sooner. This was your grandfather. Great-great-uncle of mine and I did a book called Bygone Days on him. Did you go to visit him? All the time. I loved it out there. Where were you growing up? I was born in South Dakota, Aberdeen and I have relatives in Sioux Falls and stuff that. My parents moved to Arizona when I was one because there were jobs there. There were nursing and teaching jobs, and it was starting to blossom in Phoenix. I grew up in Mesa which is outside of Phoenix. It’s lonely back there and it was suburbia. I didn’t have much culture when I grew up at all. It was cowboys and a lot of cotton fields. If my parents had $5,000 or $4,000 to buy land out there, they would have been great because now it’s sprawling. Was this in early or mid-’70s or something? I was born in ‘66. In 1967, we were out there and my sister was born. We lived out there. That was my life. Is your uncle the one that got photography in your head? No. It’s bizarre. I was a tennis player. That was my big thing. I was playing lots of tennis. I found a girlfriend of mine and she modeled in Phoenix. I started taking pictures of her and I’m going, “This is cool.” All my family is artists and teachers in the arts. I started taking pictures and I didn’t want to go to college for tennis or anything like that so I never went to college. I graduated from high school. I started a studio. I took pictures in Phoenix. I got over that then I went to Italy. I used to shoot cars and I shot all different things like food and all product stuff. I was into photographing girls. I built a book. I went out to Italy and that’s when I started photographing a lot of models. I came back and I ended up in New York City with this portfolio that I created in Italy and I landed a Ralph Lauren campaign. It was quick and I never went back. Is that the moment that legitimizes your career as a photographer? As a photographer, you start shooting a lot of editorials so you do a lot of magazine work before you get a campaign. You’re building your style and your image shooting editorial. For some reason, I did the Double RL campaign which is cool vintage type stuff. My portfolio was about doc style. I had a style for sure. I also did things instead of putting pictures in a portfolio like a normal portfolio, I’d design cards that folded out with my picture. I designed boxes that people would look at my stuff more design creatively and that showed off to people that I was thinking differently and I nailed that. That’s when I started shooting editorial because once I did the Double RL campaign, I did two of them and that was my launch. I started shooting a lot of male and women celebrities. I started shooting a lot of men’s stuff with L’Uomo Vogue doing stuff for W when W started. It started propelling my career and then I started shooting women. To shoot women’s fashion is a hard thing to get to. It’s the cram of the cram to get the best girls in the world where I could get the best guys in the world. That leads it into shooting women celebrities. I shot a lot of women celebrities for magazines then that propelled me to now. When the crossover was more about the woman’s celebrity than a model on the cover of a magazine or in an editorial because nobody cared about that, that’s when it was easier for me to do because I was shooting a lot at women celebrities. They became that fashion model in a way. I was on a plane once to LA and I was watching this woman. She had Vogues and all these magazines. I was watching this woman flipped through the magazine. When it came to an editorial with the model, she just kept flipping. When it came to an editorial with a celebrity, she stopped and read. I was like, “That’s a big indication that you have to be branded as a person.” We had a lot of experience in the last few years of a celebrity being the driver for everything. Now, we have a multitude of celebrities. For the first time, as far as I can tell in human history, their primary thing is being a celebrity. We used to have some legitimizing career to go with it. If you’re a new model, your mom and dad are celebrities. You’re almost branded immediately. That’s the only thing that people care about now. You see influencers that are branding and they’re doing all these different things. They’re now apparel designers or they have a soft drink. That’s the new thing now to keep up to have a girl come out of the woodwork from someplace. Male America and become a star are very rare anymore because nobody wants to put the work in to brand that. They want it to be already done. You come from this family and now you’re somebody. There are counterexamples like Charli D’Amelio on TikTok who came out of nowhere doing dance moves. Now, she’s the biggest thing on Earth. It’s insane. Every brand wants to link up to that because that’s the fan base and that’s how they sell. It’s a crazy time because that fashion or iconic photographer that shoots big ad campaigns that are fantasy and all this stuff has gone down the tube because nobody wants to pay their fees anymore and somebody can do it on their phone. The day of that big photographer is dwindling down because now everybody is a photographer. In some sense that the tools and skills became democratized because the phone in my pocket is now better than anything, you used in your entire career. You’ve got the same phone on your bike. We all have these tools and it makes everyone think they’re a photographer even if they haven’t done the work to build up the skillset. A lot of those skills are obsoleted. The position we ended up now is what you’re describing where the professional experienced photographer is not being hired for that photo skillset. Not much anymore. Their creativity is also less valuable because you’re competing with such a high noise score. There’s so much noise in how you breakthrough. You see now photographers in the fashion community using Instagram to help promote themselves. The actual photo agent is a difficult time now for them, but there’s only a certain amount of work out there. Now with the pandemic, where are the budgets? You could still be out there and be a cool photographer. It doesn’t mean you’re making money. For me, I’ve always evolved so much because when I was taking pictures, I started getting into film and I was interested in filmmaking. On a job, I met Patti Smith and shooting her for SPIN Magazine. I met her in Detroit and I started falling for her. That’s when I started like, “I want to start filming you.” I started learning. I didn’t go to film school. I bought a camera and started filming her. It wasn’t video. It’s always a movie film. It’s footage like Sally Lloyd. That was an eleven-year project for me for her and I self-financed it. I was taking my still world and getting into the storytelling world. When people heard I was doing this, that’s when people started having me shoot. I used to do more filmmaking. When I did Donna Karan stuff, I did these two short films. It was when the BMW films came out. These are short stories. I was doing that with fashion brands. That propelled me into more shooting fashion and then pulling stills from the cameras and that’s your ad campaign. We were doing that digitally with 2K files and we were finding out that it wasn’t enough for resolutio…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Can Robots be Artists? — Hod Lipson Jan 22, 2021
    Show notes

    Today, I spent some time with Hod Lipson who is a professor at Columbia University. In fact, we recorded this episode right out in front of the university with crying babies going by and kids playing in the park. So it’s a little noisy, but I’ve been inspired by Hod for a long time, because he’s another inventor that worked on 3D printing early on. He is at the forefront of what we’ve been able to do with computers. That’s the kind of thing I’m always really interested in. He was actually inventing 3D printing at the same time I was, a long time ago. We get to have a conversation about that…both of us were probably the two people who worked on inventing 3D printers for food. And Hod has since gone on to do a really cool side project trying to create a robot artist and it’s called Pix18. It’s not like any other creative robot that you’ve seen or heard about. Honestly, this is a difficult thing to get your head around: can a robot be creative? And that’s hard for humans to accept. And so of all the people on earth to have a conversation with about this topic, I probably couldn’t do any better than Hod Lipson. Towards the end of this episode, you’ll see. It’s pretty exciting because Hod manages to really blow my mind. Pablos: You’ve been at Columbia for the last couple of years. You were at Cornell before. For how long, fourteen years? Hod: Yes. It seems like a long time. Why make that change? The change ironically is to be closer to people. I moved to Columbia years ago in part looking for that energy that comes from collision density from the fact that you meet people that are doing all kinds of crazy things. They don’t sound like they’re related to engineering necessarily, fashion, architecture, retail and medicine, you name it. It turns out that once you indirectly get all that energy around you, you start creating new things. That’s part of that. That’s gone a little bit. Hopefully, it will come back. I never had a plan for my career but looking back, I can pretend I had one. The main way that I can frame it is that I always wanted to do new things with computers. I had this big superpower that came from having computers and the whole world hadn’t adopted them yet. You could see it in every business, every industry. As an inventor, I’m looking around for places where the computers hadn’t gone yet and trying to get there first. I remember you gave this talk when you said, “You can put a computer into this microphone, chair and into everything and they could do something they didn’t do before.” You’re here surrounded by people who are trying to be creative in a lot of different areas but they don’t know about the technology. The truth is you’ve inspired me even unknowingly over the years because your projects have exactly been that. You got to some of these things before I did. One of them is in 2008 or 2009, I was working on trying to invent 3D printers to print food. Because I talk a lot more than you, people think I invented that stuff. You did it a decade before me or at least years before me, you were printing food or at least had worked on the idea of chocolate or something. We printed chocolate in 2006 or something like that. You were there even before me. I didn’t know that at that time but that’s what I mean. It sounded crazy when I did it. It must’ve been even crazier when you did it because it still sounds crazy. It sounds less crazy every year. Especially now, suddenly people are saying, “What’s the new future of food?” You can’t go to restaurants as easily. I’m saying, “Let’s marry software and food, as you say.” Take software away where it’s not been before. Food is a big piece of our life. Software is a big piece of our life. Let’s put them together and see what happens. I’ve watched the progression of that one. There are a few robotic restaurants like Spyce in Boston where they’ve worked out automated meal prep using machines. I’ve been thinking it’s one of the most important things for robots to do because the old way is lots of grubby teenagers, lots of ingredients rotting in the back of a restaurant. A huge amount of work to sterilize environments, manage food safety and robots are good at all that stuff. At the time I started working on it, it sounded crazy to everyone but they’ve seen 3D printers and more robots. They spend more of their life in the last decade with computers, smartphones and stuff. They’re more open to it. Now that they don’t want to touch anybody anyway, I think it will be the right time. It’s going to happen in the killer app is synthetic meat which is a thing on its own. For many reasons, people want synthetic meat. 3D printers are perfect for synthetic meat because you can do more than a hamburger patty. You can start making interesting things. One of the problems with meats, in my understanding, having spent a little bit of time with the Memphis meat guys and stuff, meat from a cow has a lot of vasculatures, gristle and all these textures that you’re familiar with and become so used to. The hard part with synthetic meat is texture. With 3D printing, we can start to put that texture. We’re also evolved to be very suspicious of if it doesn’t have it. If you touch something and it doesn’t have the right badness to it, it’s not that kosher. I almost hesitate to bring this up. I know a startup that was working on making lab-grown foie gras. I thought that was a genius place to start because foie gras is premium, low volume and also the ethical issues make people nervous about it. The texture doesn’t matter because it gets blended anyway. It’s the perfect meat to start with. I haven’t checked with those guys in a couple of years but that seems like you start with foie gras. If you can make that in a compelling way, then we can use machines like 3D printers to go and start adding texture to the foie gras. If you want something that’s got a little more of a bite to it, we could work from that ingredient up to New York strip steak. Foie gras can be so esoteric that is not as you say, I have a caviar machine and most people don’t eat caviar. They won’t grab their way to get that. If you make a steak machine, now you’re talking something that half the people want. That’s a little bit of nuance but the bottom line is that these machines, the meat and everything that’s happened with COVID and the environment, although that is taken second to see to everything else, make people suddenly recognize that we should rethink food and that’s a door. That’s an opening for it. Somehow the candy, confectionary, pastries all these other things that we tried to do with food printing didn’t quite take off but this might. That’s my gamble. We’ll see what happens. It’s very difficult to gauge but I’ve had more than a couple of different investment groups since COVID asked me about food tech. It could be time. In your mind, why do you correlate lab-grown meat with the need to automate meal production? Why is that a killer app? It’s a killer app because of what we talked about this is uncanny value. This is a way to make lab-grown meat more compelling. People always asked, “What problems does it solve? What’s the problem with today’s meat preparation? It takes effort, but what’s the problem?” I didn’t even have a good answer for that, but there was this Frankenstein element to it. You’re putting it in a sausage machine and you put in these ingredients then something comes up but when synthetic meat becomes an option, it suddenly legitimizes this whole area of making synthetic food. It’s a legitimizing force. I hadn’t thought that too. That was cool. I eat sausage. How hard could it be to take the lab-grown meat throw in some sausage with other things to make the texture compelling? If you want to make burgers and sausages, sure, but if you want to make anything that has texture. I go back to thinking like, “I got a steak on my plate but the truth is I’m going to use a knife to cut it into little pieces so why not make the little pieces.” There’s a lot of romance around food. It’s very simple because our brain is evolved to validate that it is of good quality. If you eat something raw that’s a little bit rotten, you are dead. It’s some serious things. Our brain is very sensitive to the meat not looking right, not tasting right, not feeling right and not smelling right. I’ve noticed that there’s something equivalent to Zoom calls. My brain is sensitive to a lot of things that Zoom doesn’t do. I was hanging out with some guys and they said they hired someone who they’d only met on Zoom. When she showed up for the first time, she’s 6’3”. It wasn’t one of the questions they asked her. It’s no problem but it was shocking because everybody looks like they’re the same height on Zoom. People don’t look you in the eye on Zoom, at least until this AI thing. Even though they’re trying, they can’t. It’s how you can look at the camera for a while. It’s hard. I got a teleprompter so I can do it but the other person, unless they have it, they’re not doing it. There are a lot of things like that where we’re figuring out or starting at scale to understand. Another one I learned is the maximum latency that your mind can handle in audio before it starts to freak out and not think this is a real person you’re talking to and we talk over each other was 180 milliseconds. The average Verizon call in the US right now is 350 milliseconds. It’s a regular cell phone call. That’s why calls suck so bad. It’s not like the calls when you were a kid. You could call the United States from Israel and you’d have less latency. It was all analog. Even though there was latency, it wasn’t that bad. Now, an average call is so bad that my brain doesn’t believe the person I’m talking to is real. On Zoom, something like that is happening. Everything is like, “No, you go ahead.” It’s horrible. I don’t understand if you’re right about the uncanny value of meat, then what’s going on with sausage? How come I can eat hot dogs? Maybe Israelis don’t eat hotdogs. I do know how it was to eat the first hotdog. Kids love it. We’ve indoctrinated kids, so it seems normal. I bet if you take somebody who’s never eaten a hot dog. We learn new textures all the time. One of the ways I’ve been defending 3D printers is to say we couldn’t print a steak or French bread but we could print a new and compelling texture. The way I defend that is by pointing to cliff bars, smoothies and things that humans had to learn Fig Newtons. These don’t grow in nature but it was easy for us to adopt them. Doritos, that’s not something that God created. Pasta isn’t created by God. It doesn’t grow out of the ground. We haven’t questioned the psychology of food. I’m sure there’s a lot to discover there. We’ll find somebody else to harass about that. Robotics was the thing to track here. If there was a unifying theme, it’s robotics. I’d say the unifying theme is AI. When do you think you first would have started expressing it that way? I was a Navy Engineer for many years before I did my PhD. In Israel, everybody serves in the Army one way or another. I was an engineer and you think military engineers are making these fancy things but a lot of it is you need to install a microwave in a ship. Engineers will spend years studying all that stuff. They’re working with these kinds of problems. It takes a lot of time. There are no cutting corners. It’s important stuff, but I was thinking a machine can do this. There is an automated way to generate these ideas. I’m not talking about creativity at the level of a patent or discovering something new but all this stuff that we do that’s relatively mundane but it requires generating new ideas. Is there a way to automate that? To me, it’s the root of it. I started with that. When I finished my term, I went to do a PhD and that was the topic I was looking at. I started off with creativity. It was more formulated as design automation. It is the smaller, less exotic version of creativity. You just want to design something automatically. It doesn’t have to be Picasso. You want to be able to say, “I want this thing installed here.” You can go figure out what needs to be done. “I want to park in the middle of town. We had this much space. Go figure out how.” This is a little bit of a design. How do I arrange all the buildings so a maximum people can go through in there’s parking and yet everybody can see the bay? You put these constraints, you hit enter and the machine finds a solution. This is very different than most software tools that are about analysis. You can give them all kinds of things and then you can say, calculate the cost, calculate whatever the sequence of construction, calculate the materials whether it will break or not. That’s analysis but to find a new way of arranging things that solves a problem, that synthesis, that is hard to do for humans and it’s hard to do from computers. That was my goal from the beginning in a very small way. Over time, I’m going for more and bigger goals. This is amazing because what you’re describing is much a fundamental process. We need to be able to automate how we design any situation or thing with a given set of constraints or values. What you’re saying is over time, you’re finding bigger things to apply that too. In some sense, trying to go further with it. You described what you were working on as robotics or automation, I’m guessing when it became reasonable to describe it as AI. Years ago, we didn’t have enough computing horsepower to make any of this AI stuff particularly compelling. Exponential technologies make the rest of history look flat.Share on X Every year, people say that. Back in 2000, people said, “It was different back in ’99.” That’s the nature of exponential technologies. They make the rest of history looked flat and in 2019, it is always far more than anything you’ve seen before. Every single year, everybody thinks this year is different. You’ve done a lot to try and convince people of this and show how these exponential curves play out. I had been paying attention to that and lived through those cycles enough times, I was building a better intuition about how the future plays out on those exponential curves and how our tools develop over those timelines. It may be better because I could invent for the actual technical future instead of the linear projected one that most people would. Do you feel like you’ve built a better instinct for that? I have a little bit of an artificial instinct. I don’t feel it but I know that in ten years, computing power is going to be 1,000 times more in a decade. I don’t feel it but I know that that resource will be so abundant. If something takes 1,000 times more computing power than I have, it’s okay. At this point, it will be easy for you to pick up a one terabyte hard drive and throw it in the trash but, can you feel like in years, we’re going to hold a petabyte hard drive? No. You can’t feel that. I don’t imagine if I have 1,000 cell phones in my pocket which is what I’ll have in ten years, what does it feel like? It feels bulky. What can I do with it? What can you do with it? We have 1,000 cell phones in our pocket compared to ten years, we wouldn’t know what to do with it. A lot of people understand this logically but they don’t understand it intuitively. That’s the nature of it. When I think about this progression of what you’ve described as automated design, I think of it as using these tools to help us make better decisions because design could be designing a park or designing microwave installation in a ship but it could also be designing a better set of policies for a municipality or it could be designing a better Master’s degree program for one of these students here. When you think about those tools, one of the issues that always comes in my mind that people haven’t expressed is using the tools. You described this as you’ve got to set all these parameters. Setting parameters and another way of framing this and you need…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Hot Seat: Pablos Interviewed by Bill Scannell Jan 22, 2021
    Show notes

    This is an unusual episode where my old buddy Bill Scannell actually interviews me. Mostly this is a way for people who don’t know me very well to get a sense of who I am and how I think and where I come from. A lot of it’s really about my philosophy and what informs that. Bill does a lot to try and tie that back to how I grew up in Alaska, which may or may not be as relevant as it seems. We don’t really talk too much about projects I’ve worked on, this is just a conversation between friends about, you know, the background, behind a lot of a lot of what I’ve worked on and the things that matter to me, so I hope you really like it. Bill Scannell is actually one of the most interesting people I know. I met him probably almost 20 years ago at at Cypherpunks meetings. Bill was a spook in the Cold War. He was stationed in Army Intelligence in Eastern Europe doing surveillance and then after that, ended up becoming a war zone journalist and has lived through like seven civil wars with bullets flying over his head. He has got a lot of interesting stories. Most of the interesting stories I know about a living human are about Bill. We don’t get into that too much here. These days Bill is a global strategist. A hacker with a Rolodex. Want to launch a data haven? Spin-up an international press center in 3 weeks? Get a hacker out of jail? Get the Russian mob off your back? Stop a government surveillance program? How about negotiate with a foreign power over a seasteading misunderstanding? Bill’s your man. There’s a reason why he is on so many people’s speed dial. It turns out he’s actually really good at interviewing people and I think you’re gonna like the way this came out. So hopefully you enjoy it. Pablos: Bill Scannell, I am glad we finally get to do this. Bill: When we became best friends many years ago, I remembered you looked at me, stared into my soul and you said, “How far are you willing to go?” Let me ask you that question. What did you think I meant by that? How consequent I was with my ideas. It went into a long discussion about my view of the world, but people are way more interested in your view than mine. You thought I was asking because I was trying to antagonize you to go further. I was probably asking scared about how far you were willing to go. I’m not sure we had the same impression about that question. I don’t think it’s that meaningful of a question for me because I’m not sacrificing much. My life is good. My worst-case scenario is not that bad and I’m making choices about what to do with my time and attention. It was different than what most people would choose. I don’t think the right question because I don’t know how far I’m willing to go. I’m trying to discover how far I can go. That’s the difference. I’m not goal-oriented like a lot of people are where they’re like, “I’ve got to achieve this or that.” I feel like if I had ever set goals, I would have set them too low and I’ve been able to accomplish a lot more by constantly trying to discover what’s possible. That’s how I think about it. For people to understand Pablos, the most important thing for them to know about you is that you’re an Alaskan. Do you think that’s the most important? I do because there is something about the cold. There’s something about having to ask someone as a small child whether it’s nighttime or daytime. I was born there, but I think I was an aberration to Alaskans. It depends on what you count. It is an unusual place and the more perspective I get on the world, the more unique and special I think it was. I’m like the first generation to be born and raised in Alaska. There were lots of native Alaskans there and some people from the gold rush and stuff who were there before me. There was such a low population that in some sense it’s true, the first big generation of Alaskans was mine. In some sense, everybody who was there when I was born moved there from somewhere to get away from something or somebody. It was a harsh environment and not inviting. It is so remote that being in Hawaii would have been closer to the world, even though it’s not technically an island. Those people were a unique class of Americans. They were very independent. You had to work hard just to survive in Alaska and you had to get along with a lot of other strange people. It did have a big effect on me. My world view is different. Having left Alaska, what I tend to find is dramatically less self-reliance in the US. I’ve learned to appreciate those things over time, even though I think Alaskans might disown me. I don’t feel representative of the people that are there. There is no such thing as a representative of Alaska. People are all different and weird in their own way. There’s an interesting connection for me having chosen to move to Alaska and raise my children there because of meeting people like you, Lance Ahern and others. There’s this quiet solitude rock light thing inside them that lets them drive forward. I’m going to call it technological positivity. It’s a weird thing to have gotten there because it is not a technology center of any description. The economy there largely has been driven by the oil industry. They’re adopting technology in pragmatic ways, but even that is removed from society because it’s more than 1,000 miles away from where the people are. My dad and everyone’s dad worked in the oil and largely they would commute to the North Slope. That means your dad, once a week, flies for three hours to the North Slope, spends the week there working, and then flies home and stays home for a week. That’s normal up there. Even though you have a sense that your dad works in the oil, you don’t get to see it. I’ve never been to the North Slope. I’ve never gone to see the work environment. It’s not like a tourist destination, but I have a deep sense of it from growing up there. I got a lot of value out of that self-reliance, the general feeling that you could do anything. My parents raised me to believe I could do whatever I wanted. They didn’t try to steer me in some direction. What I’m trying to get at are two things. One is this technological optimism because without technology, it is impossible to have anything more than a basic existence living and out in Alaska. The second thing is that in your early high school days, you learned that the difference between near and far was three milliseconds. I guess I always presumed that what happened to me is that probably the most unique thing. I got an Apple ][+. It is one of the first computers you could have at a home in 1979 or 1980. I had my first home computer when was 9 or 10 years old. No one else had any real interest in it and I was able to play with it. It was this bottomless pit of intrigue for me. I learned a lot from it because it was fascinating, but there was no one around who knew more than me for a thousand miles in any direction. I had to learn the hard way and try everything. I feel like I learned about a computer in a unique way because of that but I got enough of a taste from it to always be able to see that it could be useful and it would someday be faster and have more memory. I didn’t understand Moore’s law at the time, but I knew that more memory would be a big help and eventually we would be able to do that. I didn’t know how much more memory, how soon, how fast or what the cost curve would look like, but I could see that someday it will be faster. Someday would have more memory and it will be useful. I would try to convince everyone of this because I felt like I had the superpower that I could use to do cool things for humans and almost nobody was convinced. I’ve said this a lot of times, the easiest way to understand is I had the Apple II and I also had a skateboard. I probably got more trouble at school for wasting time on the computer than the skateboard because people did not know that this was a thing. Computers were mythical, skateboards were real. It was a strange thing to be a 10, 11, 12, 13-year-old kid in Alaska evangelizing the power of computers and failing largely. This is where the Alaska part comes in because I lived in Alaska for many years and I watched people and people have to make do. Look at what people can do with duct tape and a couple of cardboard boxes. They hack things together to make it work because they have a job to do whether it be harvesting fish or keeping themselves warm, whatever it takes, and here you are as a kid with your duct tape, skateboard and your Apple II. I grew up on duct tape and WD-40. Between those two things, you can make anything happen. You got that experience since you lived there much more. In my mind, Alaska looks tamer now because we didn’t have delivery services or you couldn’t order stuff on your phone. You had to go foraging, even if it was to the store. You had to bundle up with all your snow gear and go to the store. It probably wasn’t even open. It could be noon and it would still be dark out going to the store and back. It’s a unique thing. I feel like I got a lot out of it, but probably to get to the bottom of what you’re getting at, what you would call technology optimism came from always being able to see how this computer could be used in ways that it wasn’t being used and it could make things better and more efficient, faster, and cheaper. It was easy for me to see it, but difficult for everyone else to see it that there was a big gap there. It made me feel like I was living in the future a little bit so I got hooked on that. In some sense, that’s what I have been doing. My entire career is building a greater toolkit of technologies that I could understand and wheeled on one side and then building a greater collection of problems that I could understand and articulate on the other side, and as an inventor in the middle of trying to map them together. You call it living in the future. I think of it like a fish does not know he swims in water, but you know how to swim in the water. Maybe, it was not clear that I do. Yet, you do. You have this weird ability to see beyond the horizon and this is relentless optimism with technology and what technology can bring. It’s not fatalistic or deterministic. You have a positive view. I was probably in my late twenties before I even knew what the word optimist was or conversely pessimist. I didn’t even have a reason to know those words. Even now, the reason that optimist resonates is because of the way I am. I’m always talking about what’s possible, but I think of myself as a possibilist. There’s a difference because partly optimists have been disparaged a little bit because they often seem like they’re unreasonably bullish about everything, which isn’t the case. I don’t think that things are going to get better, but I believe they could get better. What hangs in the balance is our decision making and our ability to apply ourselves to make things better. In my life, what I’ve experienced and seen is technology is bringing us the tools to make things better. We’ve done an extraordinary job in my life of applying technology to go after the problems that need to be solved. By no means, are we anywhere close to being done? We’re still at the beginning. There is much potential and every day our toolkit grows because of the invention. Every day we get more and more technologies. Each one of those is an opportunity to ask ourselves whether this changes anything humans have ever done. That’s the fundamental process I’m in, which is to try to learn about new scientific discoveries and technologies, even do products. Ask yourself with each one, “Could I use this to improve a problem from the giant pile of problems?” That’s what I’m doing. Is that the difference between an engineer and a hacker where you’re not out to solve a problem but you’re out to seek possibilities? It’s the difference between an engineer and an inventor. A good engineer is trying to know their field and apply it often with best practices in mind and they’ve learned an entire engineering discipline that helps them to do that. I’m a shitty coder. I learned to code by reverse engineering 6502 assembly language on the Apple II. Software development and software engineering weren’t a thing yet. I didn’t go to college. They have a whole system down for writing software that I don’t know. You probably don’t want me writing code on your enterprise software project because that’s engineering. We have trained engineers who can do a good job of that. I’m probably not that guy because I didn’t train to do that. An inventor is trying to do the mappings the first time. This is often poorly understood and poorly appreciated because it’s extraordinarily difficult to do something the first time. It’s almost miraculous sometimes. Figuring out something for the first time ever is hard, rare, and special. I’m not saying that I’m good at it. I’m saying that it should be celebrated more than it is. In rare cases, we managed to do that. Most of the time, the inventor immediately gets steamrolled by an entrepreneur who takes it and then does it the first 1,000, 10,000 or 1 million times. They’re the ones who managed to get the value of extraction. They’re the ones who get celebrated. They’re the ones we invest in. We’re missing out on how special it is to do something for the first time. We have cases like that when we celebrated musicians sometimes like Beethoven discovered those pieces for the first time. Four hundred years later, we’re still playing them. In art, we sometimes get it right, but you can’t name a lot of inventors. People can name Thomas Edison and Einstein. That’s a similar thing. That’s a scientific discovery. Scientists’ job is to discover scientific research is to discover how things work in the world for the first time and that’s amazing. That is why we give them Nobel Prizes and why we celebrate them when they do discover something important. That’s incredibly difficult, hard, long work, and you may spend careers on it without ever discovering anything, but an inventor is different. Also, they’re words that have been degraded. To call someone a visionary is not a job title. Inventor isn’t. I’m the only one who has a business card that says, “Inventor.” There are people who say they are influencers. How can you be an influencer? It’s like being a hand model, but probably a hand model is an actual real thing. You are a visionary. Millions of people have watched you speak either in person or on YouTube. People have paid good money to either hear you speak in person or illegally download the recording. Every day, our toolkit grows because of invention. Every day, we get more and more technologies.Share on X With the job title, in the US, I get called a futurist. I would probably never say I’m a futurist, that’s sort of something people call you. In Europe, they call me a futurologist, which sounds cooler. That’s another thing where there’s an entire discipline of futurism, which I don’t know anything about. They have pie charts and graphs and the whole system down. They can go into your company and tell you about the future I don’t know. That’s not what I do. A futurist is probably a bad term for me because it overlaps something that I don’t even know about. Envisionary, as you said, that’s not a useful title but without the title, if you go back to possibilist, I’m trying to show with people the way I described technology tools, inventions, new technologies, and new scientific discoveries. On the other side, you get this pile of problems. People need to understand the technologies and they need to be demystified in a way that doesn’t sound like scary, magical stuff. An easy way to understand it is people are terrified of AI because largely Hollywood needs a boogeyman. AI is the new scary thing so they use AI as a catch-all for computers are magical and therefore scary and probably want to turn you into paper clips. That’s the prevailing narrative around computers. Technology is the new sc…

    Full show notes at the publisher

    Previous 1 11 12 13

    Related Podcasts

    Reply All

    1

    Reply All Games & Hobbies
    Inside VR & AR

    2

    Inside VR & AR Gadgets
    Note to Self

    3

    Note to Self News
    BrainStuff

    4

    BrainStuff Natural Sciences
    This Week in Tech (Audio)

    5

    This Week in Tech (Audio) News
    Hands-On Tech (Audio)

    6

    Hands-On Tech (Audio) Technology
    footer-logo

    Contact Us

    Toll Free: 844-670-7747

    Links

    • Home
    • Top Charts
    • Networks
    • Apps
    • Independents Podcasts
    • Podcast Advertising
    • Podcast News
    • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Analytics & Insights

    Stay Connected

      Privacy, Terms of Use & Our Code of Ethics Protecting Content Creators Copyrights