So, let's see, let's see if this works. Okay, we do this. So I change this number, and I can set it. I change the number again, right? And I can set it, and I'll change this. I'm not giving it, I'm not giving it all. Okay, can you hear this? Yeah. Okay, so I change the numbers, right? And the music changes. Yeah. And right now I'm using that power for good. But I can also use it for evil. Okay. So if changing the number is actually generated randomly, right? It's a key number generator, right? Up here. But up here, it's actually entirely random, right?  And not that plain, right? What it's actually doing is it's throwing random numbers against a probability matrix, which is what's defined here. If we change the probability matrix, we actually change the drums with the current API. This doesn't have to be this way, but if we want to make it slower, we have to stop and restart. There you go. What did I do? Okay, so it was cool while I lasted. So I'm going to get to the presentation now. Because frankly, I have no idea why I stopped working, and I don't want to find out. Reboot! This is not worth working about.  Oh, I bet you I know. Start Rails. Yes, that would help. Mostly with the same data, I just played at a different speed. So now I'm going to sort of explain the code a little bit and do the whole presentation thing. So here we go. Okay, this is amplifying my voice? Yes. Okay. I mean, it could be louder. I'll shout. Never mind. Okay, so I work for a company called ENTP. I have done about one day's worth of work for them, and I've been working for them for maybe two or three weeks. So my conclusion from this is ENTP is great, right? And that you should fear us, you know, here's some scary stuff because we are elite, et cetera. Okay, so one thing that people talk about a lot, right, is Java versus Ruby or PHP versus Ruby, Perl versus Ruby, Python versus Ruby. I have a definitive final answer to these questions, and I'm going to answer them with code, okay? But first, I'm going to show you pics of a techno party in the city of Los Angeles called Compression, and it starts with a laptop, right? And if you pay close attention, there's a laptop in almost every one of these pictures. And what's interesting is that as programmers, we can say, you know, this is going to be a wicked party. I'm going to bring my laptop, right? This is kind of a new thing for other people to say. But these are people who are saying, this is going to be a wicked party, I'm going to bring my laptop, right? And people who are saying, this is going to be a wicked party because so-and-so is going to bring his laptop. So it's kind of interesting because this laptop-party connection is now a connection that people are making outside nerdland. So that's kind of interesting. So my name is Giles Boquette, not Giles, for those of you who may have said that. And you can actually say it Boquette because that is the correct pronunciation. I'm just so used to the incorrect pronunciation, ironically, that I say it wrong. Anyway, here's me with a laptop, here's me at a party. Okay, so one thing that people talk about on the blog world stuff is, you know, are programmers artists, right? Like some people say a programmer is a type of artist and some people have, you know, like this idea that a programmer is a thing which behaves in a way similar to an artist because we're creative, we make things, right? Kai's Power Tools is extremely old-school visual software. It's like the psychedelic stuff from 1992. He said that the process of like releasing new software with new features and getting people to buy this version, that version was a type of performance art. Zed Shaw, the infamous, referred to a mongrel as something which started as an art project. And, of course, everyone knows this guy, Steve Jobs, who said that real artists ship. The canonical example of this whole like hacker, you know, artist thing is Leonardo da Vinci who was, of course, an artist who also participated in and made contributions to the science of his day, right? And although he was a real artist, he did not ship. This is a hang glider which he designed in the 1500s which people did not build, right? This is a bridge that the Swedish government built, 501 years after Leonardo designed it. And if we judge Leonardo by release early release often, we have to consider him a failure. But he is like one of the most accomplished geniuses of all time. So the column of failure is kind of crazy. We should say it's a failure of his society, right? Because they were unable to leverage that talent that they had. So, you know, he was a hacker and a painter, right? And there was this book, Hackers and Painters, which I, you know, thought was fantastic. I still really like. And the guy who wrote this book said, if you think my book is awesome, wait till you see my programming language. And he said, I'm going to have a kick-ass programming language. It's going to be called ARC. It will change your lives, right? So ARC was announced in 2001 and released in 2008 and did not actually get the reception that Paul Graham expected it to get, right? No one really cared, right? And he was like, I can't believe you Philistines don't appreciate the genius of ARC. And he issued a challenge and he's like, do this better, right? And he did some web app in like five lines, right? And he's like, this is the ARC challenge.  And in my opinion, the definitive defeat came from Jim Wyrick using code he had actually written three years before in 2005. And it leveraged continuations and basically made ARC fail. Or in my opinion, ARC equals fail. So real artists ship. Don't wait seven years if you got something good. Or if you think you have something good. And here's the one site that uses ARC went down. Fail. By which I mean fail, or in other words, fail. So here's water arcing over this guy. The idea of ARC was really cool. I was sold on it until I actually saw the thing, right? So, okay. I created something that I thought like lived up to that, right? And I called it ARCs, right? Or, you know, more accurately, I called it archaeopteryx. But you're free to use the nickname because no one can seem to remember the spelling. For some reason I was just like, I know, I'll give it the most unique spelling possible. It'll be easy to Google. And everybody knows the archaeopteryx because it's the coolest dinosaur. But remember that, I was wrong. Anyway, I don't understand why you guys don't remember the archaeopteryx, but it was a cool dinosaur in my opinion. It's a Ruby MIDI generator. Now MIDI is a language used by synthesizers to talk to computers or to other synthesizers or for computers to talk to computers. It stands for musical instrument digital interface, right? And there is actually a gem out there for creating MIDI files called MIDI Lib. You can gem install it. And I actually used this with more continuations coded by Jim Warrick, which I stole from the Ruby way. This is the first edition. And combined with some stuff that did fractals to make some music, which was cool but too freaking weird, as the label might indicate. And let me just, I got it here. Let me just see if I can play it. Yeah, okay. So when I say it's cool but too freaking weird, you get the idea, right? I mean, it's cool to do, right? But it is too freaking weird. So if you want to, you can, you know, find more info about it here. But, you know, let's face it, it's R2-D2 doing avant-garde electronic music. So, you know, it might be good maybe for some weird ambience stuff, but it doesn't get the job done. So I, before the guys who founded Heroku, founded Heroku, I worked for them for a consultancy they had called BitScribe. And I actually found out the guy, there, Adam Wiggins, actually built a system like Archeopteryx for Burning Man.  And I was like, dude, you have to, like, show me this code. This is amazing. This is the most incredible thing I ever heard of. And he's like, well, I just think of it as something kind of silly, right? It's just, like, fun, right? And like, earlier, I did this presentation to really threaten people that if they referred to Archeopteryx as merely fun, they would be slapped. And, you know, to a certain extent, I wasn't kidding. There was someone called it fun, and I didn't slap him, but I was quite serious about it, because real artists ship, right? So here's some good-looking women. Now, everybody knows and respects, and indeed many of you own the t-shirt for this company, Engine Yard, right? And Engine Yard is known to have received a bunch of money from Venture Capital, right? They're leveraging that for open source, right? Now, this is really interesting, right? This will all be relevant sooner or later, just in case you're wondering. They got their money from a company their initial round, at least, from a company called Benchmark Capital, which has a really good strategy for open source. And these are some of the companies they funded besides Engine Yard, right? And basically, all those companies, they do open source development and make money on technical support. And what Engine Yard is doing is doing open source development and making money on hosting and scaling, right? So the Benchmark Capital approach to open source, they think, and I believe I agree with them, they go with this approach. Open source enriches the ecosystem, right? By making the software available, you make it possible for more people to build stuff with the software. So what you do is you build that market and then you provide services against that market. So it enables you to create markets in a weird sort of magical sense. So I actually am not a fan of Benchmark Capital in the biggest way. Like if you go back to the days of Leonardo, right, there was this system of patronage where a wealthy landed noble would say, you know, here is my artist, I am the artist's patron, right? And if programmers are artists, then this phenomenon where wealthy landed nobles say here is my programmer, I am the programmer's investor, it's kind of a similar thing. And in the boom, which is when I moved to San Francisco and got involved in technology in a serious way, there were a lot of startups and the dominant meme at the time, now maybe this just dates me, maybe it just shows how old I am, but the dominant meme at the time was that, hey, you know, startups, it's an adventure, right? But the weird thing about that is it's an adventure which requires patience, right? Because you get stock options, it takes four years. So just to contextualize this term adventure, right? I come from Chicago, I've like, you know, slid down mountains in the snow when I lived in Santa Fe, been snowed in with blizzards in Chicago. I once fell down a waterfall, I got arrested for not paying speeding tickets. When I was 19, I moved to a bad neighborhood in Chicago because I felt getting good at screenwriting was more important than living somewhere safe. And I actually lived kind of in a ghetto area, and there was a lot of gunfire, and you know, even some on the second row, like that little baby Uzi, I actually heard that many times. So it was kind of scary, I was threatened by gangsters, this guy across the street was beaten up, my brother came to visit me and got shot at, and I've been to like illegal parties in foreign countries, and when I lived in New Mexico, there was frequently bear droppings outside my door, like within 10 feet, and they were fresh. Recently my parents actually, their car window was smashed in by a bear to get the dog food in the car. So my dad, there he is, is going to buy a shotgun, and he already owns a 357 Magnum, which for a while I carried on a daily basis because there was a mountain lion in the forest there. Now, being young, and my parents are old, right, after a while I got tired of being in the wilderness, but I still wanted to come visit them, right, so I would go and I'd be like, hey, you know, aren't I a good son? I'm going to go visit my parents and they're going to have meaning, right?  I've come to like shed light on your existence.  Then we throw it on the barbecue, so if you just wait a bit, you can have some barbecue rattlesnake. Would you like some tea, right? During that time, Coyotes tried to kill my dog a psycho through rocks at my dad until I threatened him with a piece and one time I did a 180 on the 101 going downhill backwards in heavy traffic at 80 miles per hour in Hollywood, which is a reasonable way for Lindsay Lohan to drive, but it was not good for me. And when I was 10, I used to we had like a 1.5 story garage and I used to go up on the roof and jump off for fun, right? Now, this basically when it comes to adventure, I'm almost not scared of anything. I mean, really, this is the only exception. I am terrified of hippos, but other than that, it's hard to scare me, right? I'm not averse to adventure. So these venture capital people are like, dude, you should do what I'm doing, right? It's an adventure. And I'm like, okay, tell me about this adventure. Well, what you do is you sit for four years at a desk and I'm like, what is this, these people are weasel brain muppet fuckers, right? Spec fails, right? Expected adventure got desk, you know, and this is why I'm afraid of hippos. Here is a hippo chasing a man and trying to eat him. I forgot why I put that here, but it doesn't matter. Here's a story about a Rubik's Cube, right? There was a manager who, like many managers in a corporation, he sometimes had unscrupulous, evil corporation conversations. And he wanted to distract engineers, right? So what he did, he didn't go into like another room, he didn't get on his cell, he didn't get on I.M. He just kept a Rubik's Cube on his desk, right?  We're gonna, you know, set the servers on fire. Don't worry, the engineer is cool with it. You got a problem? See, he's cool with it, right? So what I hesitate to suggest this, but the possibility exists that some of the cool projects that you get in certain corporations are shiny objects to distract you, which simply keep you there, right?  There's all sorts of people gathered underneath it, right? I get to play with this shiny object. Yay! I get to play with this shiny object. Yay! Oh, you need me to fix something? No problem. Okay, I'm back to this shiny object, right? Because you have to consider the possibility that these people who are telling you that sitting at a desk is an adventure, you have to consider the possibility that they're not fools, right? And if you consider that possibility, the only explanation is that they're liars, right? Because why? Why would they call it an adventure? There are plenty of good reasons to sit at a desk. Why create a mythology around it, right? Well, it goes back to that thing of patronage, right? If you're an artist and you have a patron and it's 1500, your job implicitly is to make the patron look good, right? You'll paint paintings of them and their warts will not appear in the paintings, right? They'll be 20 to 50 pounds lighter, right? They'll be a little bit taller, they'll be a little bit better looking, they'll be wearing more expensive clothes than they really were, right? Your job is to make them look good. Now with venture capital, what they do is they all fund the same projects, right? And then they go to parties and brag about how their programmers doing this are the best ones doing this, right? Again, they're trying to look good, right? And this woman here is essentially wearing programmers, right? These people are her fashion accessory, right?  But, you know, I don't really think these guys aspire to be somebody's fashion accessory, right? In some respects, it's the same system and the only thing that's really changed in 500 years is there's this escape clause, right? Which is that you can have an IPO and if you're extremely lucky, you become an investor yourself, like the YouTube guys, right?  And this is why if you work for Google, they buy you shitloads of toys. It's in their economic interest, right? For you and us to think of ourselves as children, right? Because then they get to say who's your daddy, right? They get to be the daddy, right? If you're children, they're the daddy. They get to say, it's my money. I'm the boss. And this is what happened to Leonardo, right? He had this bridge. He's like, damn it, this bridge will be awesome, right? This hang glider will be awesome. And everyone is like, oh, you know, he went to these patrons, these landed nobles, right? And they're like, Leonardo is having fun, right? Here's a hang glider. People can fly. Oh, that wacky Leonardo is having fun, right? And what we do as people who create things that did not exist before, possibility is a big part of what we do, right? But when your possibility, you know, range that you can work with is constrained by what other people are, you know, aware of, then if they are operating with a much smaller possibility, you kind of screwed. And this is one of the results of that approach, right? Pets.com, $100 million and a sock puppet, right? Fail, right? The stock market graph that, you know, resembles the graph seen prior to the Great Depression. Fail, right? Now I, after the dot com bust, lived in this camper here. Fail, right? You can even see, well you can't really, but there's a zero one indicating the year. I was making $7.50, $7.50, right? And prior to that, maybe three months earlier, I had been making 75, maybe maybe six, I don't know. Six months, I mean. So that sucked. And I was like, fuck, right?  And I went back to school and I was studying art and I was learning to draw. And this is all the stuff that I drew during that time, right? And I was really happy with that. But I was also studying music and I made some records and they did not sell at all. So, you know, fail, fail, fail, right? And this is a really good quote. The only heroic artists are the ones who get paid, right? And I was not one of those artists. I was a starving artist who did not ship. Now it could have been worse, right? I don't know if you realize this, but hippos eat people, right? It could have been worse. I could have been bitten by a hippo. This is not false. I'm just telling you. They eat people. I've seen them eating impalas and gazelles. I'm sorry. It's a little bit of a tangent. But I was just, I was looking on YouTube, okay? And there's this, this caption and you know, you look at hippo videos and it's like, click here. It's beautiful. A hippo saves the life of an impala, right? And the caption says, the hippo sees the crocodile attacking the impala, right? Attempts to save the impala, but tragically the impala dies, okay? Then I watch the video. This is what actually happens. The hippo sees the crocodile attempting to eat the impala. The hippo goes over, the crocodile runs away in fear and the hippo then nudges the impala to shore and then the impala tragically dies as in the caption.  Anyway, so when I think of venture capital, I think of two things. I think of economic instability and sock puppets, okay? And I would call that failure, right? And I would call that a failure of wasted money as well as wasted talent because the reality is if those $200 million had not gone into a technology venture which resulted in nothing more than a sock puppet, it might have gone into some companies that had done something worthwhile, right?  That might have been a better way to fund a technology company.  And this was a very well-received book. It basically said that you should disregard venture capital, build something profitable, don't quit your day job, just do it on the side because web apps are cheap to build, right? They use commodity hardware, they use open-source free software. They're cheap and I very firmly believe this strategy is fantastic because when you do this, it's your money, you're the boss, and the realm of possibility that you operate in is much, much bigger, right? And this is where Basecamp came from, quite famously. It's also how delicious and Dig were made, even Facebook, there's R2D2. MeasureMap was done this way, GitHub sort of, Twitter sort of, you know, cheap is a big win. Engineyard sort of falls into this model as well, right? They weren't built on the side, people were quitting their day jobs but they were profitable from the get-go and that was a goal to be profitable from the get-go. They weren't thinking we're going to get the users and then add the profit, right? And because they were profitable from the get-go, people from Engineyard have told me, right, we have an unprecedented level of freedom from the venture capitalists, right? They let us do what we believe we should do, right? And Ezra told me, like when it happened he said, it's great because they need us, we don't need them. So we get to, you know, have a certain amount of leeway we can actually negotiate and when you're dealing with people who want a huge chunk of your company, it's really good to be able to negotiate and in fact there's a crisis going on in venture capital because internet startups don't need venture capital anymore, right? As startups become cheaper to launch, more and more venture capitalists are finding themselves living down in the cold, right? So cheap is a big win and we all know that that's where Rails came from. Something similar is this project adhesion which you've heard about before today, I'm sure. Jay Phillips, the guy who created it, he said my career is adhesion because basically, you know, this was something he posted on his blog. He created this when he was in college. He went and snuck into a conference he didn't even register for and started presenting it to people and then he presented it to a bunch more people, right? And he got people interested in it and they started using it, right? And what happened was soon he was able to, you know, do adhesion consulting full-time, right? That's actually not what he's doing now but he was operating in a niche market that he created, right? And that's actually the benchmark capital strategy applied at an extremely small level, right? Open source enriches the ecosystem, you build the market, then provide the services, right? My career is adhesion, right? He created the framework and then provided services against it, right? So it might not just be that venture capital is having these problems because they are now too cheap to fund. It could also be that they're too small to see, right? I believe that in a sense Jay Phillips is a successful internet startup, right? And I believe that anyone here can also be a successful internet startup, right? I mean you just follow the same strategy which brings us back to ARX and why it isn't just about fun. Now nobody's actually going to get slapped, right? But if we use our imagination and imagine, you know, somehow like I get lucky enough to say one day my career is Archaeopteryx. Well, part of the way that can happen is I have European citizenship through, you know, my English parents. Here's a guy who's English who allegedly makes 25 grand per night DJing, right? And this is what he DJs on and it looks like a DJ mixer, but it's not. It's actually a custom built MIDI controller because he uses software to DJ and that software gives him new creative possibilities. Archaeopteryx, because it leverages MIDI, can control that software and did control that software last month in Toronto where I actually did a DJ set with it. The downside of all this is that I'm not getting as much sleep as I would like. The upside is that I believe maybe I am in the process of creating a niche market and I've actually spoken to like via email to a very, very big name DJ in the techno niche market who, you know, maybe sort of could become a client who knows. You know, not conclusive but possible. So, you know, the goal is just for it to be profitable, right? But the thing is it doesn't have to be hugely profitable because it wasn't hugely expensive to create in the first place, right? So I don't even need to say my career is Archaeopteryx for this to be a success. If I say my career includes Archaeopteryx, it's a success. Like Chris was saying yesterday with side projects, right? I mean just the things that I've learned from coding it make it a success, right? So, you know, if the best thing that I end up able to say about all this is that my career includes Archaeopteryx, that is not a bad worst case scenario, right? It's pretty good, right? So, you know, my plan includes no IPO, right? All I want to do is make a profit with it somehow. And the way you do that is you provide something superior at an equivalent price point to your competition. So, the long-term goal with Archaeopteryx it includes, you know, probability matrix rhythm generation, which I already have, claustile flexible method redefinition, which I'll explain in a second. Also, user-generated psychedelic visuals where the entire crowd is the user because this is social software. So let me explain the first two parts. The probability matrix rhythm generation and the common-list object system style flexible method redefinition. And these all come from the strengths of Ruby which is incredibly flexible so it allows you to experiment like a mad scientist. And here's another mad scientist. So, the object-oriented programming approach is inspired by the common-list object system but these sides just let you out of date because really it's modeling JavaScript. I mean it's almost exactly the same as the way JavaScript functions work with respect to objects. And that's again because Ruby is incredibly flexible. So, here's how it works. It's basically lambdas, right? Who knows what a lambda is? Okay, so about half, maybe two-thirds, three-fourths, many people. Okay, for those of you who don't a lambda is an object which is made of executable code, right? So it's as if you could take a method and just pass it around anywhere you want, right? But lisp guys are so gung-ho about lambda that they actually put lambda in tattoos on their arms. I mean this is unusual even for a lisp guy but there isn't a lisp guy in the world who doesn't understand the sentiment. Okay, this over-uses lambda to such a degree that the first line of code in the whole library is alias l to lambda because I needed to make it like almost syntactic, right? And if you change it to l you know it's currently a keyword, right? If you change it to l, it's almost like making a syntax. So here's an example of it in action. This is the stuff that I was doing earlier. You've got these drum objects, right? They're created and each of these things is like a Rails options hash, right? You're just saying I got a when, it's a lambda, a number generator, it's a lambda, a next which is a lambda, right? So when, number generator, next. And they go in the drum object and here's the drum object and it starts off, I don't know if this is clear. Is this too small to font? Is this good? No? Okay. Long story short, it says atro-accessor note probabilities when next number generator. So just when it gets the attributes it just throws them in slots, right? And there is a little bit closer up. So you're taking these lambdas and putting them in these slots, right? And then to invoke them, right, you can just use the square brackets, right?  So it's kind of cool, right? You have these different things, you can throw them in there and they, you know, just show up on the object. So the probability matrix basically drum machines you normally see I want to get this on like video for posterity but I need to gesture. Hold on. So these things here indicate beats and there's buttons somewhere where you indicate drums, right? So for each beat you have this list of 16 things, right? So that's a matrix. There's rows and columns. I got to see what's going on in the back channel because I saw somebody smirking. Anyway, I'll get to that.  Fail. Okay. So you're creating a matrix, right? When you use a normal drum machine, right? And the matrix consists of yes or no. So all the probability matrix gives you is the ability to say maybe, right? And maybe is expressed as a floating point value between 0 and 1, right? So here's the probability matrix code which you saw when I was doing the drums, right? And like up there, probability is 36, 1.0 0, 0, 0, 0, 1.0, right? I'm saying it's guaranteed to play on the first beat. Then there's a bunch of beats where it will never play and another beat will always play. And most of these are somewhere between 0 and 1. They're not as absolute as that, right? If you throw random numbers at this, right? And it's a different random number in each case. It generates infinite beats for you continually and they'll always be original. The normal object-oriented programming, right? Going back to that. An object has a method defined in the class, right? With this approach, the object hosts a method and you can redefine it at any time. And that's just because Ruby is awesome. This is something you can normally do in Ruby, right? But most people just don't use the freedom they have and there's a problem everywhere. But the additional advantage, right, is there's another freedom because they're separate objects, right? You can throw them in a queue. Since the methods are lambdas, you can throw them in an array in case you need them later, right? And here's an example of that happening, right? Into the queue goes the lambda and then you assign to the when you run next on the queue. So in terms of design patterns, there's this idea of the strategy pattern where instead of defining how to do something, you say how you will do this is you will run this strategy and that will answer the question of how to do it. So this is what's happening here. This is a strategy pattern. But you know, since you are throwing the when into, you know, a variable based on running another because next is also a strategy, right? Go, hold on. Next is a lambda that takes a queue and returns some element from that queue, right, which is then used to play the beat. It's not just a strategy pattern. It's actually a strategy for choosing which strategy to choose, but it's a meta strategy pattern in three lines of code, which is something really awesome about Ruby. So I actually got some of the idea from that from a book called This Is Your Brain on Music because I like brains and This Is Your Brain on Music talks about patterns and meta patterns. And the example is say you're doing drums for a regular song, right? You got the verse, the chorus and the verse and they got, you know, the same thing in the verse each time, the same drum beat, but you switch to the chorus, right? So you don't want to have to write you know, all the notes because there's repetition, right? But the thing is you might have some variations in the second time you play the verse. So what you really want to be able to do is say this is how we play the verse, but you have the ability to mutate it. And with lambda that's actually very easy because you can just throw these things in the queue and just draw, you can take them out later and by being able to mutate an existing pattern, you have patterns and meta patterns, right? And here's some examples of mutate methods. So another thing that it does is it has a scheduler. A scheduler is actually a meta scheduler because it schedules scheduling, which is kind of cool, I think. You've got this go method which is badly named. First it defines a lambda, right? Generate beats is a lambda. Then it has a ton of code which ends with MIDI timer at and then it gives a time and it says generate beats, right? And that's actually a reference to the lambda. And you're actually inside the lambda when you're making that reference.  So that's another thing that's cool about Ruby. It's kind of like Cthulhu and then it goes beyond sanity. So this meta scheduler schedule scheduling, that actually enables it to run infinitely, right? With very low overhead.  And I actually tested this with a thing that generates ambient music, ran for more than an hour with no issues. And I'm going to test it in a bigger way in a couple weeks at Burning Man where it's going to run continually for seven days. And it also eats the VJ and I know that sounds dirty but what I mean is that it can power video, right? This is actually finished yet but it's going to be really cool and it comes about because of MIDI. MIDI gives you a great deal of leverage, right? And Rain actually was asking me, am I going to do like a C sound adapter? And the answer is no, right? And some people in San Francisco were asking me, am I going to do an OSC adapter? And the answer is no. Somebody at RailsConf asked me if I'm going to do an MSP adapter and the answers were no, no and no. And the reason is that MIDI, I have been using since I was 15, I'm now 34 so I've been using it for 19 years. But the other reason is that MIDI is a lightweight, ubiquitous protocol which has been around for 19 years. And the reason people want these other protocols is because they're smarter, they're more powerful. But that's actually a win for a protocol to be done. JSON beat out things like soap, right? Soap can wash your dishes, right? That's probably why they called it soap, right? Everything but the kitchen sink? No, we've got the kitchen sink. How else would you use the soap? Right? That's all, yeah, anyway. But JSON beats soap because it's lightweight and ubiquitous.  The same thing with HTTP.  CouchDB is expected to work because it's lightweight and it can be ubiquitous. And as I say, it was designed in the 80s, right? So it's been around for a very long time. Like this runs it, this runs it, this software runs it, this other software runs it. This is a $20,000 modular synth, I'm sorry, 20,000 pound. So it's like a million dollars. It looks like it was designed by millions, but it wasn't. It takes MIDI. And this is VJ software, which also takes MIDI, right? So all you got to do is feed it some cool visuals and you can automatically modulate those visuals in sync with the music in a very, very wide range of ways. So I don't actually know, this is vaporware, I don't actually know if it's going to power video, that's a question. But another question which people at Burning Man might ask me is who is the DJ or where is the DJ? And I'm actually a robot who likes to sing, right? And it kind of brings back the mad scientist thing, but it kind of turns it on its head because it's so peaceful, right? I'm creating an environment for hippies to chill in, right? The only, you know, the counter argument there is that there's also a great deal of pyromanias involved because I'm going to be setting things on fire. I've actually seen this thing that the head of that snake was about the size of a Honda. Anyway, let's move on. This book is where like actually gets to MIDI comes from. I didn't write that part. And of course it's because these things use MIDI that I'm able to do all of this. Here's a completely gratuitous picture of Kate Beckinsale, wearing a sombrero. To counterbalance that, here's a completely gratuitous picture of George Clooney wearing a top hat. This is a picture I stole from Chris Wonstrasse company, I believe. But I think it's relevant, right? Because it's kind of sci-fi, right? This whole project is kind of insane but if it works, it'll be kind of great and that makes it insanely great. And that brings us back to Steve Jobs, who said Real Art is Ship, but he actually stole that statement from an artist called Andy Warhol, who said at first when he said good business is the best art. And this whole idea, open source enriches the ecosystem, build the market, then provide services, is good business.  We don't need to build failed 2.0. But the truth is, right, I don't want to try and be like some kind of warrior picking a fight, right? Even if we built failed 2.0, it wouldn't be as bad as getting eaten by a hippo.  Especially with wearing a sombrero. Yeah, right, this is insulted injury, right? It's like casually eating people. Why? So, you know, that would be if we had failed 2.0, it would be wasted money, wasted genius, wasted passion, right? And that's really my point, right? And why I make this whole keynotey thing, like, or want to be keynotey thing, right, where I like get up on my high horse, right? Computers are everywhere, right? If you want to ask like what can computers do, the answer is more or less anything, which means what can I build a computer business on anything, right? And that's where we get to the answer versus Ruby, PHP versus Ruby, Perl versus Ruby, or Python versus Ruby. Sorry.  Because it's the wrong question, right? For me personally, the question is music with code or music without code, right? And the answer is with code, right? But it doesn't have to be music, right? It can be anything. I happen to say music because it's a passion. Another passion I have is acting, right? I study acting. I was in a student film.  ENTP is actually working with a client that does interesting things in the field of marketing movies, right? So the question again, movies with code or movies without code, right? And the answer is with code. And here's those iPods again. Something interesting about these iPods, right? They're actually a representation of a horror archetype, which is the tentacle monster. It's something in common with Cthulhu. So this whole question of a programmer is an artist or, you know, a programmer acts as an artist or whatever ridiculous way you want to stretch the metaphor, right? A programmer is an artist if a programmer makes art, right? And again, it's the wrong question, right? Maybe a programmer is not a what but a how, right? I think everybody in here agrees that one of the answers to what is make money is the answer to how is with code, right? I'm also saying that for me the answer to what is make music and the answer to how is with code, right? Or make movies and make movies and how with code, right? What unites the people in this room is not really what, right? It's how, right? And that's why I say that a programmer is not a what but a how, right? And it's really just an answer to that idea that a programmer is an artist. I think that idea is a very self-indulgent, self-deceptive idea.  A programmer is an artist. Oh, that didn't work. So anyway, the answer to how is with code, right? The answer to what is anything, right? So I'm not saying that this is something that everybody else in the room has to do but my approach is, you know, apply programming to your passions, right? Programmers up, VCs down, build something you believe in just because you want it to exist and remember that real artists ship. And that's basically it except my name is Giles Boquette.  Lincoln, oh. Hey everybody. Lincolnous is shareware. 11 days are left in my trial. If you like Lincolnous, please register. Fail. You fail. And I actually was going to register but now I'm going to make sure that key gen works. Anywho, wait, someone got my name here. Oh, okay, cool. Why cats quoted me? I can't believe this. Ladies and gentlemen, Yehuda cats approved of something I said. We've got the kitchen sink. How else would you use the soap? And he made fun of the name. Okay, I'm going to have to get him. Okay, and my name is not called archaeostrich, it's called archaeopteryx. My name is Giles Boquette, I work for ENTP and that's going to take a long time to fade out because I didn't realize I would need a credit sequence but I do. And here it is, they're going to roll, boom. So if you want to find me, I'm on Twitter, Giles Goatboy, I'm on GitHub, Giles Boquette and I'm on Google. Let's put the name Giles, I'll be number 7 on the list. At least, that's where I am now. Related projects are underway from Marcus Prins, Zed Fucking Shaw, Jeremy Voorhis and Ben Blything and a related lightning talk is on the way from Shea Arnett. And now I really am done. Questions? Go ahead. Conference did Jay Phillips sneak into exactly? I think I don't care. No, no, no. It's probably not true. Yeah, it was, it was some kind of telecom conference. It might have been something in Texas with telecom. We knew we had really arrived when people started sneaking into the conference. I think he went, I'm sure he didn't sneak into anything in the Ruby community. Nobody would do that. And the other questions? Nothing. Alright, I'm going to troll the back channel for questions. I want to book on meta patterns. I agree. Uh... Okay, that's it.


We're here at ITU Telecom World 2012 and I'm very pleased to be joined by Patrithia Northland, who is CEO of Satbex. Patrithia, thank you very much for being with us today. Pleasure to be here, Max. I'd like to start off by talking about debates here at ITU Telecom World 2012 have been focusing on the radical changes that they've been to the ICT sector and their implications for the industry and the world in which we live. What for you is the principal opportunity arising from this transformation? For me, Max, all my life I've been building telecommunication networks, building fiber optics, satellites, especially in emerging markets like in Latin America. And one of the things that is very interesting for me that there is a significant leapfrog in technologies adopting, for example, in Latin America today more cellular lines or fixed lines. But that leapfrog of technology is also a leapfrog, I would say, of the human behavior of people because as we see on all our young generation, they already adopt 100 percent the use of internet as a natural way for them to communicate. So that particular transformation is not just on the IP convergence of various services but also in the way culturally that the next generation that will lead this world will communicate. So from my perspective, the opportunity is really in really bridging the gap between the people in this emerging markets that yet don't have a full broadband penetration of high-speed internet, our ability as responsible operator to accelerate that gap by providing with low cost broadband various technologies to reach that goal. And what are the major challenges facing you in implementing this? I see in our world maybe a couple of challenges. First, we would like to continue, I think all of us, for the internet to continue to grow and that means to have the freedom of flow of information throughout all the various broadband networks. On the other hand, and as a balance, we always had to be careful on what we call the cybersecurity. So on one side we wanted to make it and keep it full access to all the people in the world but yet have a delicate balance of having the right policy, perhaps infrastructure, education to the users, whether it's government or private sectors or individuals, to make sure that we sort of sanitize the network. I think the third challenge is our ability to continue to reach to all people with high-speed internet. And when we say high-speed, continue to be higher and higher because of additional content. So the cost of the broadband has to be such that continue to be a way for all of us to communicate. And finally, I think it's very, very important for us to everybody participate in this world of, the new world of knowledge space is to bring best practices from the developed world to all our emerging market countries. There is yet a lot of need to be developed with the, I would say, particularly on the regulatory bodies. There is a lot of education for them to understand, not to have fears, how they can proliferate the internet, how can they motivate competition in various type of services. So I think that is one of the other challenges and yet at the same time a vision for the future that I see in our region of Latin America and certainly in all of the places in the world. And finally, I'd like to ask you, here at ITU Telecom World 2012, it's a very important event in the calendar, but why is it important to you and what key message would you like to deliver to our uniquely influential audience? The Telecom 2012 is incredibly important because allow us to participate on sharing a lot of ideas and create more creativity. So that synergy allows us to keep growing in this world of ICD. One key message that I would like to propose to the international community and to the ITU is our ability to rationalize the frequencies on the satellite space. For example, today we are able to, with new innovation of satellite technology using what we call all electric satellites. We're able to reduce by 50% a satellite program. That means from about $360 million to about $160 million cost. That is very, very important to utilize a satellite for broadband. However, and using KABAN frequencies, multiply that by tenfold. The issue we have today that the KABAN applications are right now about 2,500 applications at the ITU of KABAN satellites. However, only there are 17 under construction. Furthermore, out of all these 2,500 applications, they are in the hands about 75% of them only in 12 countries of the entire ITU community. So the message for all the international community and the ITU is fine ways so we can free up this orbital location to actually execute real satellite projects to facilitate bridging the gap via satellite broadband. Mathew, thank you very much indeed for being with us today. My pleasure. Thank you.


From Orlando, Florida, it's theCUBE. Covering ServiceNow, Knowledge 17. Brought to you by ServiceNow. We're back, hi everybody. I'm Dave Vellante with Jeff Frick. And we're here live at Knowledge 17. This is our fifth year. Ian Proctor is here. He is the director of consulting at Deloitte. Ian, great to see you. Great to see you guys, too. So we were talking off camera. Jeff and I, we did our first knowledge. We basically said, look, for this to really explode, you need the big consultancies to support this. They're the ones who have the relationship, the deep domain knowledge, the industry expertise. Ian, you've been at this for longer than most. Certainly longer than most of the new team you're met here. So tell us a little bit about sort of your background, a little bit on Deloitte, of course. Well-known firm, but specifically your ServiceNow practice. Yeah, absolutely. So I have a bit of a unique trajectory in terms of working with ServiceNow. Now I started off as a customer. I was working at an airline in Canada by the name of WestJet Airlines. It's Canada's second largest airline. And we were growing very quickly. And we had internal challenges with legacy platforms. And I was actually speaking at a conference and somebody approached me about a new platform that could maybe really help. And so over the course of about 10 months, I grew to understand ServiceNow as a technology, had the chance to meet Fred Luddy and really get an appreciation for the underlying platform. What year was that? That was 2011, I'd say. And so that was, it was a big move back then. And when I took the ServiceNow opportunity to my executive at that time, no one had ever heard of it. And moving outside of your own data center was a bit scary back then. And we did a very successful transition in the early stages. So ServiceNow deployed at a major airline in Canada in that timeframe was kind of a unique story. And I became a reference client and I had a background in consulting. I'd been at Deloitte previously. And I saw the opportunity to take the technology platform of ServiceNow and go back to my consulting roots and the uniqueness of our deep relationships, our focus on business transformation and bring those two together. And so myself and one other key leader in Deloitte by the name of Dan Slokar, him and I essentially began building that practice in 2012. And here we are today, 2017. And it's been a fantastic journey. As a globally network firm, we get to interface with a lot of C-level executives of major corporations across the globe. And they have a unique set of needs. Their global operating models need to be integrated. And so ServiceNow is a platform looking at that as a realization of integration. And so when you look at like the Deloitte expertise in operating models and in really driving true business transformation to generate business value, that's where this synergy has become so strong. And we see a lot more opportunity as does ServiceNow to move into what might be not classically viewed as IT areas and getting into industry vertical specific solutions where Deloitte has a very deep and rich background in understanding what it takes to make that business work. So one of the unique advantages that Deloitte has, obviously as you point out, Ian, is their relationships is, I mean you can count on one hand the number of companies who have that type of presence in the boardroom at the C suite. So my question is, what are you hearing from those customers? I know you're in a lot of different industries, but broadly everybody talks about digital transformation, but what are some of the big themes that they're asking you for help with these days? Yeah, I mean, that's a great question because today's challenges are a lot different than yesterday's challenges. But where Deloitte is uniquely positioned is that we've been on a journey with a lot of these clients for a long time. And they expect us to bring them the best across all many number of domains. While I focus on technology transformation to drive business value, we have a risk practice, we have a financial advisory practice, and so getting tighter integration inside these global organizations to drive out some of that transformative change, like you mentioned it, about the digital transformations. Our view is around re-imagining the digital experience and how that extends into multiple different business units and how, you know, very similar to the messaging that we were seeing over the last couple of days from John and the executive was these organizations can't be viewed as a whole bunch of separate organizations. And this kind of business transformation is something that Deloitte's been helping clients with for a number of years, to drive out process efficiencies, to drive out different ways of delivering. And I think now that we've got the technology platform that enables that, the opportunity to take what we've experienced over the last couple of years and apply it in industries you may not think of like oil and gas, or in the financial services industry, they're desperate for innovation, but they also exist within regulatory frameworks that necessitate a lot of visibility, transparency, auditability. And so when you take that knowledge of like the financial service sector and you pair that with what you can do with service now, that's what our clients are expecting from us. I'm curious, everybody knows, right, financial services is usually on kind of cutting edge of new technology, right, that's their business, they have to stay fast and furious and out on the edge, but are there some industries that people probably don't think of that you've seen as, you know, aggressive adopters with huge ROI in this type of technology? Absolutely. I mean, I'm based in Western Canada. And so there's a large oil and gas footprint in Western Canada, some of the largest Maruti Nationals are headquartered there. And so in the oil and gas segment, there are unique challenges with operating in remote areas. So having to always rely on the classic technologies which bound you to your desk just don't work, right? I mean, when you're in a remote operating site working on an oil well, for example, and you need to notify somebody that the well head has a crack in it. Well, how are you going to do that, right? Are you going to call somebody? Well, you may not have sat reception or the guy is miles away. And so when you think about the unique business challenges in there, an interesting story about that is, you know, we were helping a client in that regard as an IT advisor. So we had ServiceNow on an iPad and we were sitting there using it. And the rig manager looked over and said, Ian, what's that? And I said, oh, this is ServiceNow. We use this to kind of route work to each other and get work done and there's some reporting and here's some dashboards. He said, can I have that? I said, well, absolutely, absolutely. And so, you know, this is one example where these business use cases show up naturally. And then since we've been at this a while, like you mentioned, I've been doing this since 2012, we see these trends and so we can take innovations from one segment, re-imagine them and apply them to a different segment. All right, we got to go, but I'll give you the last word, sort of fast forward to Knowledge 17 here. It's using your experience. What do you see as the big opportunities for you guys going forward? You mentioned going beyond IT. Maybe you could sort of summarize where you're seeing. You wanted to take your clients. Yeah, I think two key messages that I'll close on, it's really re-imagining the digital experience. And that means different things to different people. It's an important conversation to be had to say, what are you trying to drive from a business value standpoint? And then secondly, looking at segments that can benefit from all the lessons learned we've had delivering technology. And the big one there is in the financial services industry, in the core business. And so those two areas are really going to be a game changer for all of us. You need great stuff from somebody who really knows this community. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. Thanks guys, great to see you. I appreciate it. Take care, have a good rest of the show. All right, keep it right there, buddy. We'll be back with our next guest. This is theCUBE, we're live from Knowledge 17. We'll be right back.


Craft presents the Great Gilder's Sleeves! You also bring a mingkrasbee every Thursday night. Percentage week at this time, Harold Carrey as the Great Gilder's Sleeve written by John resembles and Sam Moore, Gilder's Sleeve in just a moment. But first, if you've noticed that family favorites like bibb節 the delicious golden cheese food are sometimes missing from your dealers shelves, remember there's a very good reason Literally millions of pounds of dairy food are being shipped abroad to help supply energy and the important milk nutrients are fighting men need. But dealers will usually have Pabstette in stock. And smart homemakers have learned what a wonderful extender it is for a host of wartime foods. Melted into a smooth cheese sauce, the grand cheddar cheese flavor of Pabstette gives real personality to leftovers of meat and fish and vegetables fixed in dozens of different ways. Pabstette is a tasty filling for the children's sandwiches too and it slices perfectly for serving with dessert or just by itself. Yes, for a delicious nourishing and economical help in preparing meals that'll give family appetites a real lift, ask your dealer for Pabstette in the round flat package. Spelled P-A-B-S-T-E-T-T. Pabstette, only three red ration points for a generous package. Gilder sleeve out in the side lot, surveying his victory garden and wondering whether to pull the weeds now or let them grow a little bigger so they'll be easier to get hold of. It looks as if they grow a little bigger for from the window of the kitchen nearby comes the smell of good things in the oven. Let's follow him in and see what's cooking. P-5-O-F-U-M, I smell something good. What's Birdie making there, Marjorie? Frosting for the Easter cake. Frosting? Yes, sir, and I guess it's about done. Birdie, eh, eh, eh, eh, eh. What is it, Mr. Gilder sleeve?  Oh, no, sir, I'm saving it for Leroy. Leroy can lick the bowl, give it here. Mm-mm, mm-mm, mm-mm. Look, Lord, you're looking cross-eyed. I don't want to miss any of it. I'll go, Birdie.  Yes? Express, sign here. Wait a minute, what is it? Crate, sign here. I didn't order any crate. Name Gilder sleeve? Yes? Sign here. Well, hold the egg beater, and hold it, too. I don't know what I'm signing this for. Yeah, there. All right, one side, bud. Wait a minute. One side, one side. We don't want that great big thing here in the kitchen. Well, where do you want it? Make up your mind. I haven't got all day. Listen, I've got a good mind to report you to your superior. Brother, in two hours I'll report to my draft board. Now, where do you want it? Eh, all right, set it right down here, soldier. Don't you know we got a cake in the oven? That's the kind of service you get these days. What do you suppose is in the crate, Uncle Mord? I don't know, but we'll soon find out. Bertie, do you know where the hammer is? Right there, and the vegetable bin, Mr. Gilder sleeve. Oh, just the place for it, too. Well, let's see now. Careful, Uncle Mord, it might be something breakable. Maybe I can pry the top up. It's always tasted like rabbit food to me. Remind me to ask you, Leroy, where you got the two bucks. Here, bunny, here, bunny, here, bunny, here, bunny. Then they can just stay under there. The mouth, they might get stuck under there. Those are Flemish giants, they grow f... It'll teach them a lesson, then. There he goes. He's shivering. Let me hold him, Leroy. No, let me hold him.  Look, Mordry, look how he wrinkles up his little nose. Uncle Mord, you're doing it, too. I can't help it. He's making faces at me, the little rascal. You like him, Uncle? Ah, he's as cute as the dickens, Leroy. How did you get him? Where did you get the two seventeen? Oh, I got it. It's a great investment, Uncle, it says in the ad. Boys, make big money raising rabbits. Yeah, well, I wouldn't count on it, my boy. As pets, rabbits may be fine, but... Don't say anything up there, Leroy. I think you're horrible. Mordry, take this rabbit and put him somewhere. I want to get to the bottom of this. I got you. I want this, too, please. Well, give him to Mordry, Bertie. There, now, Flopsy and Mopsy. Come on, we'll find a nice, safe, warm place for you, away from that awful leaf. Yes. Now, young man, why was I not consulted before you bought those rabbits? Well, I wanted to surprise you, Uncle, for Easter. You surprised me, all right. Where'd you get the money? All of it? Of course, all of it. Well, the seventeen I got at Christmas before last. They were very excellent skates when I gave them to you. I thought Santa Claus gave them to me. We won't argue about that, young man. All right. So I traded them with Piggy. Did you tell him the wheel was busted, broken? Well, he doesn't need all the wheels. He just wants to make a push reveal. Nevertheless, that was not a very honest thing to do, Leroy, was it? Well, he swapped it for a spark coil that wouldn't spark. I'm glad to hear you didn't get the best of it. Now, stop beating around the bush and tell me, where did you get those two dollars? Well, you know, the spark coil. You just told me about it. It wouldn't spark. Yeah. So I traded it. Who'd you trade it to? Michael. Mrs. Ransom's little niece? I mean nephew? Well, he wanted it. Uncle kept pestering me for it. Did you tell him it wouldn't work? Did you? Well, gosh, Uncle, you wouldn't want me to give him a spark coil that works. They're dangerous. He might get a shock. He might get us. All right, you charlatan. What did you trade the spark coil for? Come on. What'd you trade it for? Two bucks. That's what we call selling, Leroy. Not trading. And you sold that spark coil under false pretenses with deliberate intent to defraud. Oh, no, I didn't. Uncle honest. Then what was your intention? To get the two bucks. I honestly believe you don't know the simple difference between right and wrong. Yeah, that's all it is, Uncle. I don't know any better. Gosh, if I knew what I'd ever... That's enough. Find a place for those rabbits and see that it's not in my study. I'll take this thing up with your lady. Yeah, sir, I will. I'll find a good place for them. Bertie, I don't know what I'm going to do about that boy. I swear I don't. Oh, now Leroy ain't a bad boy, Mr. Gilles' sleeve. He's just a boy. That's all. Well, he needs something. I don't know what, though. Well, if you ask me, Mr. Gilles' sleeve, what Leroy needs is a mother. Yeah, so I'm afraid you're right, Bertie. There's not much I can do about that. Well, no, I wouldn't say that. Huh? What do you mean? Well, you're young, Mr. Gilles' sleeve. You got your health. You even got a fiancée. And if you don't mind me asking, what are you waiting for? By George, Bertie, that's what I'm going to ask her. And I'm going to ask her right now, too. This time, by George, he's going to give me an answer. I'm not like some people. You can twist them around your little finger. When I... Leroy, when are we going to get married? What did you say? You heard me. Oh, gracious, Rockmont. You're so impetuous. Impetuous. We've been engaged now for four months. What's so impetuous about that? I want to know when we're going to get married. Well, come in, won't you? No, you come out. I'm going to sit down here on the veranda and settle this once and for all. Yes, let's. You know, it's Rockmont, and you are so... I hardly know you when you're like this. Well, it's my other side. Now, let's get down to business. When do we get married? Name the date, Lelima. Well, tell me first, why do you want me to marry you? Well, because... Well, just because. Uh, because what? Because I... Go on, say it, because you what? Well, I think Leroy needs a mother. I didn't say that. Well, I guess I know what you were thinking, and I can give you the answer right now. Now, Lelima, don't fly off the handle. Let's be reasonable about this thing. Rockmont and I am the soul of reason, I assure you. I've thought it all over, and I've decided that we have no business getting married till after the war. After the war? But, Lelima, that may be a long time. Well, you asked me for my decision, and that's it. I'll marry you the day the war is won. That settles it. I demand a second front. Ladies and gentlemen, we're going to interrupt here for just a moment in order to present a very charming and courageous lady who has something to say to you. That she is charming is no secret to her thousands of admirers, and the proof of her courage is her four-month expedition across the Atlantic this past winter to entertain our troops in England, Ireland, Scotland, and North Africa. Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Kaye Francis. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, I ask your attention for one minute. One minute isn't very long, but in this very brief minute that you hear my voice, men are dying for you. Dying on distant battlefields, in strange waters. Men from Nebraska, Illinois, Texas, boys from across the street, boys that you know. Right now, while I speak to you, sixty seconds in a minute, how many times sixty men are dying for you. And as they die, they are remembering home, remembering us, wanting to come home, knowing they never will. Are we worth remembering? Are we worth coming home to? No. Not unless we do all we possibly can to win this war, and our possible all is so little compared to what they give. We are not asked to give, but to lend our dollars to our government, to carry our share of the 13 billion dollars needed in the Second War Loan. Lend your dollars, right now, right this minute, while those men are giving their lives for you. You'll get your dollars back. Thank you, Miss Francis. Now let's get back to Summerfield and the Great Gilder Sleeve. It's Easter morning, and the great man has started the day in a constructive and beneficent mood. He's intending before donning his finery for the Easter parade to build a rabbit hutch, but a brief inspection of the garage shows him that something is missing, namely the rabbits. Leroy, where are your little pets? You mean Mr. and Mrs. Rabbit? Yes, you don't have to be so formal either. Oh, well, they're in a perfectly safe place, Aunt. Where are they? Don't worry about them. You'll have to find those rabbits before we go to church, so get busy. Oh gosh, Aunt, won't you help? Well, that depends. Say, here comes Judge Hooker over by the back fence. Judge Hooker, huh? What's he doing around here? Gilder Sleeve. Oh, Gilder Sleeve. Just stay on the other side of that fence, Hooker. You owe me a fender. You owe me a bumper. You happen to be the owner of two oversized, over-aged gray rabbits. Oh, my goodness. Go get them, Leroy. Those rabbits belong to my nephew, Judge Hooker. See that you don't do anything with injures them. Injures them? Look here, I just caught them finishing up the last head of lettuce in my victory garden. I'm beginning to like those rabbits. But you owe me one dozen heads of lettuce. You owe me a fender, and you can take a dozen heads of lettuce from my victory garden. What are you laughing at, you old nanny goat? Handkerchief for the breast pocket. Need a flower for my buttonhole. Better put on the silk hat just to see how the whole thing looks. There. Hi, George Gilder Sleeve.  Yes, sir. Oh, good idea. I'll come right now. Leroy, I wonder if you could find me a flower somewhere for my buttonhole. OK, what do you want, an Easter lily? No. Leroy, just something small and suitable. Happy Easter. Well, happy Easter to you too, Throckmorton. Oh, that's a beautiful costume, my dear. Everyone will be saying lucky Gilder Sleeve. Oh, now, Throckmorton. But you look simply angelic in your gray trousers and cutaway. Doesn't he, Marjorie? Oh, he always does. He looks all ready for a wedding. Let's not go into that. Come on, I'll do it, everybody. We'll take your picture. Ben's got the camera out there. Well, are you sure there's time, Audrey? Uncle and I are going to church. Oh, we all are. Of course, Leroy. Come on. Happy Easter. Oh, thanks, my boy. The same to you, Ben. Now, where do you want us to stand? Oh, right there inside the lily. It'll be all right. Oh, fine. I'll put some lily in my buttonhole. And just stand anywhere, really. There isn't too much trouble. Now, if you could just smile, please. How's this? I got you. That one ought to be fine. Now, who's going to take our picture? I'll do it, Marge. Yeah, I'll do it. Oh, I take better pictures than anyone in the family. He has been lucky. All right, Leroy. Where shall I stand, Marge? Well, right beside me. Here? Well, that's where I am already. Can't you get a little closer? Oh, I guess so. I am looking at her. Oh, gosh, right here in front of everybody? Why not? Well, all right. Say, this is quite comfortable. Yes, they do, Leroy. They just look like an Easter magazine cover-declared. Yes, so do you, Leroy. Cut it! Thank you, Leroy. Yeah, much obliged. Gee, I never enjoyed having my picture taken before. Glad we decided to walk, Leroy. It is nice. Yes, sir. Good morning, Dr. Pettibald. Happy Easter. Good morning, doctor. He goes to a different church. I know. Here comes old Mrs. Carrington. Don't tell me she's walking to church. Yeah, but you stop for a long conversation. Oh, good morning, Mrs. Carrington. Oh, happy Easter to you. Happy Easter to you, Mr. Gildesley. Happy Easter, Mrs. Carrington. And what a lovely shawl you're wearing. Thank you, Mrs. Ransom. I'm glad you had the sense not to call it a fascinator. Yes. You're looking awfully well, Mrs. Carrington. Did you have a good winter? Pretty cold, pretty cold. Yes, but now it's spring. What do you hear from your grandson? Is he still with the... They made him a vice president this year, and next year they're going to raise a salary. Well, he's coming along nicely. I'm afraid we'll all be late for church. Oh, we must all hurry, but I'm glad to see you young people still dress up for Easter. You'll make a very handsome couple. Oh, now, Mrs. Carrington. I haven't had a chance to congratulate you formally. When is the wedding to be? Well, it depends a little on the war. Oh, we're only young ones. Well, goodbye, Mrs. Ransom. Goodbye, Mr. Gildesley. Goodbye. Goodbye, Mrs. Carrington. She's a wonderful old lady. I always enjoy seeing her. She makes me feel so young. Come on, Throckmullet, let's rock. Run! Leela, hey, wait! There's nothing like the feeling when you've been to church on Easter. Of course, I always feel like a new man at the church, but on Easter I feel even happier. I feel the same way, Throckmullet. I don't know what it is, the Easter hymns or something. When the collection basket came around this morning, I put in twice as much as I could. Oh, really? Yeah, I see the plan that much in the first place, though. Oh, here comes Peavey. Happy Easter, Peavey. Happy Easter, Mr. Peavey. Well, I enjoy this Easter to you, Mrs. Ransom, and to you too, Mr. Gildesley. Just coming from church, Mr. Peavey? Yes, I am, Mrs. Ransom. Mrs. Peavey and I attended the services together, and then I went by the shop to get this little surprise for her. Uh, surprise, eh? What is it? A begonia. I've given her a potted begonia every Easter since we've been married. Uh, listen, Peavey, if you've given her a begonia every Easter, she couldn't possibly be surprised when you walk in with this one. I don't know. I wouldn't say that. But you've already given her 20 or 30 begonias for Easter? 31. I know because Mrs. Peavey saves the pots. Yes. Uh, that's nice. Yes. And when I give her this one, I know just exactly what she'll say. What, Mr. Peavey? She'll say, Richard Peavey, don't you know it's wicked to be extravagant? Yes. But that's not extravagant, Richard. No, I know that, Mr. Gildesley. So, Mrs. Peavey, that's just her little way of acting surprised. I think it's a very sweet way too. I do myself. Anyhow, she always says it, and then she gives me my surprise. Oh, you get a surprise too, huh? What's your surprise, Peavey? A box of crystallized ginger. Crystallized? Crystallized ginger? That's pretty strong stuff, isn't it? Yes, but I've got a taste for it. Yes. And is that your surprise every year, Mr. Peavey? Every year. It's a wonder you don't faint from excitement. I don't faint, Mr. Gildesley, but I give it a pretty good imitation. Yes. Good enough to fool Mrs. Peavey. Well, I wouldn't say that. Yes. But when you folks have been married, as long as I have you, you know that our kind of surprise is more fun than a real one. Yes, you may be right. Well, so long, Peavey. Happy Easter to you and Mrs. Peavey. Well, the same to you and Mrs. Fransom, good day. Throckmonton? Yes, Lila? Was there any war news today? Well, apparently the Allied forces made substantial gains in El Milang reason. Throckmonton? Yes, Lila? Isn't it wonderful that Mr. and Mrs. Peavey are so happy after all these years? I guess so. Of course he's rather a strange fellow. Throckmonton? Yes? We're neither of us getting any younger, are we? Of course not, Lila. Throckmonton? What is it, Lila? How would you like to come to my house this evening for chicken fricassee? There'll just be the two of us. Chicken fricassee? Oh, brother, I'll be there. That was a wonderful dinner, Lila. I'm glad you liked it, darling. Maybe I overindulged a little. Oh, I didn't notice. That's because I didn't overindulge any more than usual. You were so cute sitting at the head of my table serving my dinner and all. It looked natural somehow. I guess I'll smoke a cigar. You know something, Throckmonton. I've been nervous in this house the last few days. What on earth is there to be nervous about? Oh, nothing in particular. Sometimes I think I hear strange noises in the night. But, you know, with you here, I don't feel nervous a bit. Fine, fine, fine. But when you're not here, I do feel nervous. And maybe you ought to see Dr. Pettibone. Get some vitamins. Oh, fish. What did you say, Lila? Nothing. Throckmonton, I've been thinking. Yes, Lila? Maybe Leroy shouldn't wait till after the war to have a mother. Oh, huh? Lila, will you? What do you mean, Throckmonton? Could you marry me before the war is over? Well, for Leroy's sake, I might consider. How about next week?  Well, June's a nice month for wedding. Yes, it is. June 1st. Well, I think we might say the first week in June.  Really, honey? Sure. Why, everybody ought to be married. It's a law of nature. Two by two. Male and female. A girl for every boy in the world. Hey, young! What do you think? Leroy, what? Mr. Owens. Hmm. To get together, or if they can't do that, at least to get in touch with one another. And so this Easter, we have the Kraft family bringing you the greetings of our sponsor through its president, Mr. J. L. Kraft. Mr. Kraft. I'm glad of this opportunity to bring Easter greetings to Kraft men and women everywhere and to the families of our boys and girls who are now in the service of their country. When we think of Easter, we naturally think of the resurrection. The two words are eternally linked together. In every Christian land today, the celebration of Easter will bring its age-old message of hope to a war-darkened world. The fact of the resurrection and the faith which it symbolizes have never been so significant to so many nations and to so many peoples in the world's history. In itself, the word resurrection is one of the most beautiful in our language. It means bringing back to life the conquest of death, the return of hope. At this springtime of the year, all nature tells the story of resurrection. We read its meaning in the budding trees and in the miracle of nature's reawakening to vibrant life. There is still another significance to the word resurrection to bring back to memory that which was forgotten or lost. And it is upon this meaning of resurrection that I have been reflecting on this Easter Sunday. While our boys are away fighting for freedom around the world, enduring hardships, loneliness, wariness, we on the home front have a high responsibility toward them. While they are absent, our virtues grow in their binds and our shortcomings are forgotten. Let us so live our lives that their ideals will not be shattered when they return. Let us make them as proud of us as we are proud of them. And so it seems particularly fitting to me that each of us at this Easter time should resurrect and strengthen our faith in God and in the ideals of our forefathers. That faith and those ideals on which this nation was founded and by which it grew strong and great. As youngsters, our mothers taught us to say when we pray, now I lay me down to sleep. I pray thee, Lord, my soul to keep. I have just had a letter from one of our own boys in North Africa in which he says that eight men of his group kneel at their bunks every night and speak this prayer as they go to sleep. It means something to them. It means something to us as children. Let us then, as we think of these simple prayers, resurrect the trusting faith of our childhood and approach God understandingly. Let us resurrect and renew our strength in the God-given pioneer virtues. Let us at home in our daily lives have the courage, the strength and the fortitude of those who fight for freedom that we and our children and they and their children may live in peace. They are counting on us, depending on us, to maintain their ideals of home and family until they join us again. And in this we cannot fail them.


Let me first introduce myself. I am in Siddharth. You might know me from twitter at SiddharthTV if you don't then if you follow me I post all sorts of graphic stuff but I don't know what's open source but using any of my open source stuff pops up high and I get super excited. And I also do these YouTube things that I try to teach what I have done so if you want to look at really short videos of nice snippets then you can go to this thing now. And lastly I do this new thing which is called frontend army. It's like a workshop series thing so if your team does we have stuff for senior developers to help you out. It's like a mentor for a higher company. I go to frontend but army is my main address. Cool. I love that this company Auth0 they make authentication stuff. The part you do care about is view is real and view is a lot of real. And I want to talk about Auth frontend workflow which is basically broken. And I see this in context of Auth0 but it's like I think you will find this talk today. A lot of problems that we have are kind of common problems. The best part is why do I say our frontend is broken. So the first symptom that our frontend is broken is the quantity. So to give you an example the top thing is what the designer designed and the bottom thing is what the developer quit. So it looks kind of the same but you see the designer has this like two blue icons. They sit inside the input box and the developers are like ah they get a margin I don't want to do that.  The other thing is that designer comes up with this like nice walk out and like animation goes over and the response they usually get is in nobody but that. I have product managers and there is this docql thing that everyone keeps talking about so I have other things to do.  The second symptom that your frontend consists of. And this is something which is kind of very weird. So we have multiple products and inside every product we have this thingy that's on the top right. You have your name you click and it's a drop down. So these are three of them of course different. They kind of look the same but they're not really like they have the same shadow in everything but they're slightly different right. So for example in the first one your view profile thing is on the bottom and there's like a flag thing on the top it's like a region switcher or the second one. I don't know what you're thinking on my name you'll do. Maybe it will go to profile and you'll get to what. I really like this one because it's like log on. But these are things that users have to learn and it's like inconsistent. It's a bit fun to keep track. And this is like a very weird focus that every designer has proficiency inside their sketchbook. So all of these are symptoms. They're not necessarily the problems. They're symptoms of the problem. And the real problem lies in communication. So this is the communication between designers and developers and collaboration. And all of this rises from this one common set of handouts. There's a wretched concept of handouts. How many of you are familiar with handouts? You do handouts in your company right. Just two people. So let me try to explain what handouts are. Your designer gets like a requirement I think. And then he goes into a heap of handouts and he comes back with these fancy designs. And then he's like, this is what you're going to make. And then the developers handouts and then this is the problem. And then the curator says, does that sound familiar? So this is kind of the example of what your designer comes back with. It's like nicely designed screens with like, they lay it out perfectly. They use nice purple colors. And that's what's trending right now. And the developers are looking at it like, what is this export? What color is this? Is this accessible? And how many pixels is this? Which screen comes after? Which screen? This looks pretty, but what do I do? So that's how to admit that our tools have come along with it. There's tools like Zeflin, designer, sorry developers. They hover over it and tell you this button is 14 pixels or 12 pixels or something like that. So they just talk to you and say, this thing has been made. They comment on the thing and say, this is, please change this and then collaboration. But these tools still revolve around the same idea of handouts. It's still revolving around the same thing. And it's just enough computing. What's this situation? So Twitter tried to come up with a solution in 2011, the Putzla. And they basically made every website in the world look the same. So like any self-respecting front-end team, we tried to create a Putzla for one. And that's what you do. So we had to use all of these buttons around the states of the buttons. You have different states with different colors. You have icons that you have. And this is kind of what it looks like. You can add a text. This is how you get it out. You go to the documentation, you copy the class. You say, this is a button, but it defaults. I'm using an icon, which for some reason is italics, even though it's not a direct app. But I think it's eye-in-eye, so we could use it. Anyway, so you put an icon, you say, I want a button icon. And this is the icon I want. And then I say success with things. Now designers do a user research, right? Which is for name for the last five people and all of them are new. And they said, we're going to move icons to the right now because that's more accessible or that converts more or something. And then they say, this is what we should do. So they change the style, they change the CSS. But that doesn't really solve the problem because everywhere you use this icon, you also have to go and switch this. The icon cannot be switched. You have to change it and the icon has to come second and the text has to come first. So it's very close to what it wants to be, but it doesn't really do the job. So this is what's known as a leaky abstraction, right? It tries to abstract how the design is required. It does a very bad job and most of the implementation details still come with the user. It's a surprise that we have components other than abstraction, right? So we have components. We have components. And so instead of this, you can say things like this. You can say import a button from the library and then you say button like a package. And after this, when they ask five people to change it, you don't really have to care. Because your implementation detail doesn't really solve your usage of this thing. It doesn't really know about the implementation detail. This is not a leaky abstraction. We are components of the right abstraction for designing the left. And this has given rise to this actually which we call design systems, which I haven't talked about enough. So I'm not going to explain what it is. But other than this one definition that I really like. So this is a design system. Design systems are a set of shared and integrated principles and patterns that define the overall design. The key words are overall design and product. So when you look at Airbnb's logo, you know it's effectively. When you see a Facebook light button on the wall, you know how to write Facebook under it. It's the design and the build kind of speech for that. So it has all of these things that Tejas was going to talk about. And don't get me wrong. Components are still a part of it. That's the kind of part that I want to focus on. So let's get into the technical stuff. So to build it. So this is kind of how you can use the new builds in the common way. Say you have space vision, right? So instead of using any of it as the value of spacing you want, it's a good idea to kind of leave them out with the multiples of a unit. So for example over here, the unit is 8. And then you have extra small which is 8 pixels and then small is 16 pixels. And then I run out of names as extra, extra large is 8 into 7. The names matter less over here. What matters more is the common language. So when you ask the designer what should be the margin, you don't say 32 pixels, right? You don't say 70 pixels down there. You say let's use medium spacing over here. That's what we use for all section margins, right? That's like an easy way of communicating. The other thing that also perhaps let me say that, right? You can do the same with color. You start with a base color, for example let's talk about gray. You have one gray color and then you have five shades over it, right? You can have multiple shades. Atlassian's design system uses 16 shades for the Atlassian. But we kind of found that five shades are more than enough for us. So we do this with every color. We say this is the base color, this is the dark, dark color. And you see, we have dark objects. So now, okay, when you say what should be the color of the button, you're not saying let's use sky blue, let's use turquoise green. You're saying let's use blue light, let's use light blue, right? And then you don't have to look at the sky blue or what I do. Colors.blue.light, and it means the same thing for everyone. You're not talking experts, you're not talking pixels, you're talking variables, right? So the conversation is easy. And the other part, which is like a hidden point that I really like, is that it steals the creativity from your designers a little bit, right? They can't start from a blank canvas, they start with this palette and they can only choose the right colors for them. So that kind of limits your design. It just makes it consistent. The next part is you can also be in branded. For example, over here we have some conventions, like success. If you use the success button, the background is colors.green.light, and the foreground text on it is supposedly colors.light. Same thing goes with the question. You have disruptive button, like a beneath button, the background is colors.light, got base, and the foreground is colors.light. So here again, where you say I have a beneath button, what colors should I use? You say I'm going to use the disruptive button, and you get a set of colors to use. So again, you're not even talking about which shade of light, darker, extra dark, you're just saying I'm going to use the disruptive button because that's what it's for. Good. So the good part about this, like creating them as a host of objects is that you can directly use them in the react. So this is like the policy as a j-ship, you can kill it. I like CSS as well, it's nice. But what we also do with this is another project, so it's our script, you also export the SAS variables and XML files for our Android tools. So you can actually just take this and export it for everyone, even if you're not using the app components in your native Android code, at least you're using the same product, the same guidance. The next product, this is like the big part, this is component-oriented. And this is like a long work by a smart one. The important part is, when you're creating components for a design system, it's important to prioritize API sensitivity over any specific information needed. So like the layman transition for this is it should look good when people use it. Internally, you can do whatever you want. So, and this is kind of what I've actually spent a lot of time. So for example, this is our API. If you want icon, you say icon, the icon name is an elephant, and the size is 20. Then you say button, I want the primary button, and then the icon of copy. So this is kind of in that, when you're designing as you can be at a button here, the conversation like, can we have a primary button here with a copy on it? And this is kind of what you're also typing in here. So the more your code looks like the conversation at the app, the easier your entire is, the more intuitive it will be. Similarly, switches, what do switches do? They toggle, right? This could have one change, one press, etc. But because you have to support multiple devices, the component now is toggle. You say, on toggle, then you can ask for a component. Good. Do you have a code like compound components? So compound components are this nest component inside a parent component. So because components are tasks and objects, you can actually just attach things inside it. For example, when you create a tab, you can say, and then inside it, you can say tabs.tab. The syntax looks a little weird, but the good part of this is, you only import tabs at once. You don't have to say import tab and tab. There's more tabs. Similarly, if you create a form, you don't have to say import form, text-in-form, text-in-form, text-in-form. We just import form, and then the rest of the things come as chosen. The other abstractions we didn't go ahead with, when you say form.text-in-form, you're not actually just creating a text-inform. You're getting an output. We also pass label, which is nice. I'll come to the examples for this. How we add a text-in-form, or a text-in-form, using a label. The core idea is, if I should look nicely used, it should be included. Internally, you can do whatever you want. How many people dare to write documentation for their own purpose? That's more than I expected. Good. Documentation is the problem. If I create a button and you're documented, you can't search and stack over and find that I've worked with. If I don't document it, it literally doesn't address my name. Documentation is the most poor part. If it's not documented, it might as well be. So, these are the nice things when you book in Skywriters, as you already could draw it when you just started. When you go to go to an isolated complex, you add Skywriters before creating towards creating a list library, a library of content. We ended up creating a custom mesh of this thing. I'll show you that. Yeah, so we call our designing. Design is the most worse. Let's see. The next important part is that design decisions are big into the system. And now I'm getting, putting this update in my site. You can't just create anything. Anyway, so here's an example. When you say you want a page header, you're not saying I want an X1, X2. You don't really care.  And the design detail that this is the size, that is big deal. And that's what we actually do. When you say actions, these are the actions that my editor has. You say this is my primary action, this is my secondary action. Now, what's the color of the primary and versus the secondary? You don't care. That's big into the system. Are they left line or the right line? Does the primary come left? Secondary come left. You don't care. The designers have spent their time and you don't really have to care because they changed internally. It's in the implementation detail what it did there. So here's like a form which has three fields and then it has a primary action. And let me just try to show the code part of the problem as well. Sample page, 4,000 slides. They have a switch, and then you have action, and the action is this. You have to give it on the handle because these are the nice things you have to care about. All of these are aligned. These are design decisions. The label could be left aligned but you don't care about. You shouldn't have to care about. So let them do it. The switch is all fancy, large and all those nice things. It has an accessibility thing being in. This is a feature that actually has some input. But what happens when I click on accessibility things are already being into the system and designers won't have to care about it. Everything is already accessible to a certain extent. Same thing goes for the button. It's aligned with these input things and not the left thing. Obviously you don't care about it. I'm going to form. This is the user input I want. This is the project part of it. Confident over third. Language on the left. Which means you can't really do labels on the left because you don't have space and you say label on top and label changes. I can copy this on the box and paste it in my phone. This thing should change to top, right? So these are the kind of things. These are design decisions that are abstracted and they create an extra top. It's not backward breaking. And it's the new file and the new file is what you have. And don't forget it. It's not going through the design so first the designer has to sit and sketch the tools in the end to make it similar. It's just time wasted. So the idea here is that people have already created nice tools like LVD, we have a Gatsk etchup, we have a HDM etchup. This one is good for native. That one plays nicer with that stuff. The thing to care about is components are simpler than sketch. So when you say I want a button from the box and sketch as I release something like insert from Cosmos library what button from Cosmos? So that kind of thing is the source of the code and it generates, you make sure that things are all the same. When the designer wants to start a new project they basically just update their sketch library and they put in six months flexibility, so that condition is not a way with that. But it's very useful to ask do we really need this extra variation of the same component? And the thing is most of the time the it's not because it was it was new, it exists because even did not know that this came so they created this kind of how it was called as code. So always try to go for consistency. The second is build up fractions but shift all the building blocks. So I showed you page header I showed you form how these layout things are done. I used to give that thing basic keywords people wanted like a bigger header around it and then you click on delete it and say are you sure you want to delete it and you say okay fine so it's a very custom bearish case.  Many of my other teams that rely on this system it's very easy for them to say this is not an assistance to the block we'll be under the king building. So the idea is we build all the abstraction but you also shift all the building blocks that they can use the form label so border color dimensions not this property and then make the one thing and the good part is if they make it you can always bring it back into the system and promote it as a library component. Third thing is adoption is the only method so they are all the fancy components that you want but if it's not good to use if it doesn't work out for your developers then you have to build it yourself there's no right and wrong thing that they use. So optimize for usage optimize for whatever actual use cases are where your developers are interesting thing interesting example I have there is I really wanted to use portals I think they're really good so I went ahead and used portals from the access team but turned out the app that wanted to adopt the system as a reactivity so I could have said reactivity is more reactivity is the new hardship so you should upgrade but that is adding more hurdles to the users so what we did is use portals so you can use like a polyphase which adds a little bit to the site but they could use it in the things like adoption optimize for adoption not for port, utility and all those so the last thing I want to talk about is that I hope that folks are convinced that designs are cool you can use them or something it works many times like how do you go on Monday to your boss and say you need to do design systems and the suits in this slide are nice so the first thing you need to do is show people what's wrong so when you talk about design systems you say design systems and the views etc. but most people don't really have that like unless they're working on the same thing every day they might not have that visibility for example a product manager was really happy with the product until we showed that three different drop down things like what you want this product is good like yeah this is not good we should fix this right and then we should destructive button that will say this is right this is big is that what you want and let's just look back when did we bring this so people might not know what's wrong unless we do this but my manager the designer actually did this is our landscape and we want to talk about design purpose actually we're not so let's fix it so show people what's wrong speak their language right if you go to the CEO and say usability is good and then we don't have to do this and you want to mask a crop and then abstraction it's not going to say sound wise but you should this feature 40% time creating presentation components and 60% time creating logic this 40% time every 1000 we can actually just put like 3 number team that does this 40 and then everyone else will have to but this can make you think one is that 40% of the team gets fired and they save money what luckily happen in our case is those 40% people will go go differently when they start the new product I don't make business things I don't make folks product managers like CEOs and you say usability and nerds but in the app they don't really care right so crop their language the third thing is build support from the developer so before you do any of these two things go to your fellow developers and talk to them about usability and they care about this they get excited about it the easiest way of seeing this is saying clip card did this would be hard numbers why is this a good question so then we all have this ego so you build support from the developer this is the new hot thing this is the way you do it and you have the support from the development layer and then when you start speaking they go back to their team like one day engineering managers like these kids are talking about design systems I don't think there is a problem and then all the developers instantly it becomes like they instantly it becomes like a consensus thing and then the manager probably missed this this was there all along and yeah I guess that's all the problems I have so I'm Siddharth Gettner it should follow me this is the it's all open source so you should look at the API it shouldn't record the code oh yeah ok